US Elections 2016

[ShadySands]

Makes sense considering the "inevitable candidate" isn't drawing as much enthusiasm which also makes sense because if they are inevitable then why bother 

 

On the flip side, I also don't have a lot of faith in the Dems carrying the general election but it's still early and a lot can happen. It's not very scientific but about a quarter of the ~120 people in my precinct expressed no desire to support Clinton in the general election. Most of those were young people who were only involved in the process at all because of Sanders but I was surprised that we also had a few disgruntled Republicans who switched sides like Anakin. But again this is just in my neck of the woods so I dunno if and even doubt that those trends hold up nationwide

 

PS anyways I hope that we switch to a straight up primary vote because that caucus took hours with people speaking their piece and trying to sway others to their sides. In the end, the 4 not committed (or something similar to that) people went to Clinton and they had to change because they didn't meet the minimum threshold but nobody else changed their votes. There are some ballot measures to make the caucuses open, maybe that's a start

[Leferd]

 

 

I'm not sure I buy that the democratic turnout reflects on the general election. You are still coming off 8 years of democratic leadership, meaning there isn't a terrible amount of panic about where the country is going on that side. It will be a different scenario when you get to the general election.

I was more referring to Republican turnout, they have now eagerness and desire to change leadership, like democrats had in 2008. So in general election democrats need to rise movement that gets people to vote, where GOP (Trump) has already one behind him. So republicans have fever for change where democrats feel content to current situation, and those who aren't content how things are run have higher likelihood to vote. Getting people vote somebody just to block somebody else is often more difficult task than continue snowball effect that Trump for example seems to have created (as he just don't win republican primaries but draw new people to vote).

The problem is, though Trump has managed to garner the most votes, a clear majority of Republican voters detest the guy. This isn't even counting moderates and democrats who certainly won't vote for him in November.

 

Clinton may very well double down and select Elizabeth Warren as her running mate to rally the liberal base and not count on disaffected mainstream Republicans.

Edited March 2, 2016 by Leferd

[Rostere]

Dislike of Iran could be xenophobia/ jingoism or probably most accurately, bigotry, but Iranian is not a race or ethnicity so it can't be racist.

 

Tomato, meet potato.

 

 

Persian, Azeri, Arab, Kurd and Arab are the main ethnicities in Iran.

 

Ergo, being a racist towards Iranians would mean having racial prejudice towards Persians, Azeris, Arabs and Kurds. I don't get it, there is no law of nature saying that you can't be racist towards several groups at once, right?

 

Really, there is also no scientific notion of "race" (lexicon says races are "major divisions of humankind, having distinct physical characteristics" which is pretty much 100% subjective) so the entire concept of a racist is also not well-defined at all. A racist might be a person who is prejudiced against a group of people whom he/she considers a race, or a person who is prejudiced against a group of people whom any outside observer considers a race. I use the term interchangeably with "xenophobe" because the notion of race is hazy enough that nobody thinks seriously about the definition.

[ShadySands]

And Carson is dropping out-ish

Edited March 2, 2016 by ShadySands

[Leferd]

And Carson is dropping out-ish

Had to scroll further down...

 

Carson: 350/1

[Raithe]

Going for the cheap shots once again...

 

[Bryy]

 

I pray every day Trump will win.

 

I would say that Trump, Kasich and Sanders would be ideal winners. Cruz and Rubio are decent choices and Clinton is probably worse.

 

Trump promises to destroy USA's ability to compete on global market to ensure USA's safety against illegal immigrants from Mexico and Muslims. I predict that his presidency would boost European economy greatly, even if UK closes it borders and exits EU.

 

Trump would destroy everything the USA has been progressive towards.

 

That's not to say he even believes in his own campaign bull****, but the man is a chimp vying to play with a loaded gun. He has absolutely no experience in politics or holding any kind of office and I doubt that he's going to be that easy to coach.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Every incumbent Republican Congressman that was challenged in the Texas primary won, very depressing. Business interests have a complete lock on Congress, it wouldn't even be worth voting if not for the presidential election.

[Calax]

I'm just going to throw this out there. The recent narrative I've been hearing within the media and the republican party is the fear that if Trump catches the nomination, many of the more moderate voters would swap sides because they don't want a racist bigot as their world leader. As it stand's I don't believe half the stuff people say Clinton is "guilty" of simply because there's been nothing that's actually happened. 

 

Prior to the Iowa caucuses three weeks ago, they were saying "She'll be indited very soon by the FBI over Emails/Benghazi!". And not just the Yahoo's like WoD, but the former senate majority leaders. And yet "very soon" has passed and we're still listening to "rumors" that there's going to be an indictment. But never from the actual law enforcement agencies involved, only in those directly interested in removing her from the race and/or hurting her popularity.

 

And Raithe, I would have to ask, if Jackie Kennedy was running for president, would you post that same image with JFK's face?

Edited March 3, 2016 by Calax

[Tigranes]

 

 

 And not just the Yahoo's like WoD, but the former senate majority leaders.

 

The latter is more likely to be a troll than the former, these days...

 

I'm quite sure Trump will win. GOP was far too late and far too divided in organising itself to attack Trump seriously, when they should have organised their richest donors and heaviest weights to assassinate his character a long time ago. The only remaining option, especially now after tuesday results, is to basically game the system, prevent his 51% and then have delegates pick - a move that would be almost as scandalous as a Trump nomination itself (not because it's new but because it's so blatant).

[Calax]

 

 And not just the Yahoo's like WoD, but the former senate majority leaders.

 

The latter is more likely to be a troll than the former, these days...

 

I'm quite sure Trump will win. GOP was far too late and far too divided in organising itself to attack Trump seriously, when they should have organised their richest donors and heaviest weights to assassinate his character a long time ago. The only remaining option, especially now after tuesday results, is to basically game the system, prevent his 51% and then have delegates pick - a move that would be almost as scandalous as a Trump nomination itself (not because it's new but because it's so blatant).

 

Which is why it's been suggested that the GOP might add the Superdelegates the Democrats have built into their system to ensure the party has a bit more control over the entire thing.

[Leferd]

Nate Silver's take:

 

The simplest test of Trump’s mandate (or lack thereof) would be if every other candidate dropped out and Trump were matched up with Rubio or Cruz one-on-one. However, Tuesday’s results made that less likely. The dilemma is that while Cruz has done better so far, winning more states (including three on Tuesday), votes and delegates than Rubio, there’s reason to think Rubio will do better going forward. In contrast to Cruz, who has benefited from a calendar full of states with lots of evangelical voters, Rubio’s best states are probably ahead of him and he has higher favorability ratings than Cruz.

 

As a result, we’ve increasingly seen the campaigns, especially Rubio’s and Kasich’s, talk about winning at a contested convention in Cleveland. I’m of a few minds about this. First, the fact that the other campaigns are resorting to drawing up plans for a contested convention has to count as a pretty good sign for Trump. Second, the talk may be premature. As the calendar turns toward states with more aggressive (sometimes winner-take-all) delegate rules — particularly Florida and Ohio on March 15 — it will become easier to rack up a delegate majority even with plurality support. That probably works to Trump’s benefit, although it also means that Cruz or Rubio could rack up quite a few delegates if they “get hot” later on during the campaign.

 

But the possibility of a contested convention is part of why the notion of a “mandate” is important. If (for instance) Trump has won 37 of 50 states and 49.9 percent of delegates going into the convention, then technically Republicans might be able to deny him the nomination. For that matter, technically they’d be able to deny Trump the nomination even if he had a delegate majority by changing the rules at the last minute. But the cure might be worse than the disease. It could look as though Republican elites were overriding their voters’ popular will (because, uh, that’s pretty much what they’d be doing). It might even be a casus belli for Trumpism. Even if some Republicans thought it was essential to prevent Trump from winning the presidency, there could be better means to accomplish that, especially by forming a conservative third-party ticket.

 

By contrast, if Trump didn’t have that seeming mandate — if he were far short of a delegate majority, if he were still unable to secure more than 34 percent of the vote as we got deeper into the calendar, if he’d started to lose quite a few major states (even if not always to the same opponent) in April and beyond — it would be less risky to deny him the nomination.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             All of this is speculative, and unavoidably so, because we haven’t had a contested convention since the modern primary era began in 1972. My point is simply that anti-Trump Republicans ought to look for ways to test their voters’ resolve to back Trump. They could develop better anti-Trump advertising campaigns, which have received shockingly little financial backing so far. Even if they can’t push Trump’s opponents out of the race, they can push back against a media-driven coronation of Trump or a premature consolidation around him. They ought to make Trump fight like hell for the nomination through all 50 states. But if he seems to have earned it, they probably shouldn’t count on taking it away from him.

 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/after-super-tuesday-can-republicans-still-take-the-nomination-away-from-trump/

 

CANDIDATE CUMULATIVE POPULAR VOTE
Donald Trump 34.2%
Ted Cruz 28.1
Marco Rubio 21.7
John Kasich 6.6
Ben Carson 5.8
Jeb Bush 1.7
Chris Christie 0.4

[Guard Dog]

If any candidate fails to get the minimum number of delegates in the GOP they go to a brokered convention. Trump will be put down then but it will be a dumpster fire and stink to high heaven. Whomever the nominee is, I hope it doesn't happen that way.

 

This whole elections is just awful. In my lifetime I can't remember a time we were forced to choose from a more repugnant and despicable pool of candidates. Except maybe 2012. 2008 wasn't so hot either. Come to that 2004 was pretty bad. And 2000? Don't even get me started. Two choices and both were wrong. To paraphrase Andy Warhol sooner or later everything descends into parody.

Edited March 3, 2016 by Guard Dog

[Hurlshort]

Mitt Romney looks great compared to this, honestly.  This is definitely the craziest primary I remember.  

[Namutree]

Mitt Romney looks great compared to this, honestly.  This is definitely the craziest primary I remember.  

At least Trump doesn't support TPP. That alone makes him better than Romney.

[Guard Dog]

 

Mitt Romney looks great compared to this, honestly.  This is definitely the craziest primary I remember.  

At least Trump doesn't support TPP. That alone makes him better than Romney.

 

Agreed

[Bartimaeus]

I'm just going to throw this out there. The recent narrative I've been hearing within the media and the republican party is the fear that if Trump catches the nomination, many of the more moderate voters would swap sides because they don't want a racist bigot as their world leader. As it stand's I don't believe half the stuff people say Clinton is "guilty" of simply because there's been nothing that's actually happened. 

 

Prior to the Iowa caucuses three weeks ago, they were saying "She'll be indited very soon by the FBI over Emails/Benghazi!". And not just the Yahoo's like WoD, but the former senate majority leaders. And yet "very soon" has passed and we're still listening to "rumors" that there's going to be an indictment. But never from the actual law enforcement agencies involved, only in those directly interested in removing her from the race and/or hurting her popularity.

 

And Raithe, I would have to ask, if Jackie Kennedy was running for president, would you post that same image with JFK's face?

Interestingly, one of Clinton's staffers (who apparently helped set up the email server) was just given immunity by the DoJ today to talk to them - exactly in relation to what, it is not yet clear, but it is an interesting development, nonetheless.

Edited March 3, 2016 by Bartimaeus

[GhostofAnakin]

Donald Trump makes following this election actually fun.  Although I shudder to think what might happen if he actually ends up becoming the president.  His finger will be on that big red button constantly.

[ShadySands]

He also released his health care plan

[Namutree]

Donald Trump makes following this election actually fun.  Although I shudder to think what might happen if he actually ends up becoming the president.  His finger will be on that big red button constantly.

Bernie Sanders is the only candidate (among the two parties) less hawkish than Trump (that I know of). Hillary would be far more inclined to start a massive, pointless, and extremely costly war for absolutely no reason.

Edited March 3, 2016 by Namutree

[Meshugger]

 

Donald Trump makes following this election actually fun.  Although I shudder to think what might happen if he actually ends up becoming the president.  His finger will be on that big red button constantly.

Bernie Sanders is the only candidate (among the two parties) less hawkish than Trump (that I know of). Hillary would be far more inclined to start a massive, pointless, and extremely costly war for absolutely no reason.

 

 

While GWB had that boyish "imma just going show those bad kids that what they are doing is wrong!" kind of vibe going for him for justifying his military actions, Hillary uses the military as a debraved extension of power. Case in the same youtube link as before:

 

 

Just based on my amateur knowledge in psychology.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Just based on my amateur knowledge in psychology.

 

By which you mean "absolutely no knowledge at all", surely  

[Hiro Protagonist]

[Gorgon]

I pity the republicans. I guess we were all expecting the joker candidates to be replaced by more centrist candidates capable of appealing to a larger group of people. Sanders is 'out' and Trump... won ?. How can they not give him the nomination now.

 

We don't really know what he's going to do as president. I don't think he does himself, he just wants to get to fly around in air force one. 

[Malcador]

While GWB had that boyish "imma just going show those bad kids that what they are doing is wrong!" kind of vibe going for him for justifying his military actions, Hillary uses the military as a debraved extension of power. Case in the same youtube link as before:

Don't think she has authority over the military enough to 'use' it. At least she probably won't surround herself with devils like GWB did with Clark, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld.