This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

2016 Presidential Election

1910121415109

Comments

  • Mildly annoyed about Sanders Supporters. Sanders himself is fine, but getting a little miffed at things like "Sanders is under a media blackout!" when the same people are posting multiple articles from major outlets about Sanders on the fucking daily.
  • I Like Sanders a lot, but his supporters remind me of Ron Paul supporters sometimes.
  • Cremlian said:

    I Like Sanders a lot, but his supporters remind me of Ron Paul supporters sometimes.

    Deeply politically motivated but extremely ignorant of law, political history, or basic socialization?
  • Churba said:

    Mildly annoyed about Sanders Supporters. Sanders himself is fine, but getting a little miffed at things like "Sanders is under a media blackout!" when the same people are posting multiple articles from major outlets about Sanders on the fucking daily.

    My favorite is when the major outlets are saying that Sanders is under a media blackout.
  • edited August 2015
    Greg said:

    Churba said:

    Mildly annoyed about Sanders Supporters. Sanders himself is fine, but getting a little miffed at things like "Sanders is under a media blackout!" when the same people are posting multiple articles from major outlets about Sanders on the fucking daily.

    My favorite is when the major outlets are saying that Sanders is under a media blackout.
    I did see one from huffpo yesterday, in the opinion section. Do you not, I don't know, turn around in your chair and holler to the newsroom "Hey, anyone covering sanders?" just to make sure?

    Post edited by Churba on
  • That's hilarious Churba, someone should make that a comic.
  • Nutz4Prez
  • I've come to the conclusion that Donald Trump isn't nuts or crazy. He's actually deviously brilliant. He knows that the Republicans who are most likely to vote in the primaries are batshit insane, so he, being quite the salesman, is selling himself by saying the batshit insane things that GOP primary voters want to hear.

    Of course, what happens if he were to get he nomination is one thing. Getting elected president if he is nominated is another. The question is would he actually follow through on the batshit insane things he claimed he was for to get the nomination, or would he steer more towards the center to appeal to mainstream voters?
  • I've come to the conclusion that Donald Trump isn't nuts or crazy. He's actually deviously brilliant. He knows that the Republicans who are most likely to vote in the primaries are batshit insane, so he, being quite the salesman, is selling himself by saying the batshit insane things that GOP primary voters want to hear.

    Of course, what happens if he were to get he nomination is one thing. Getting elected president if he is nominated is another. The question is would he actually follow through on the batshit insane things he claimed he was for to get the nomination, or would he steer more towards the center to appeal to mainstream voters?

    I think that what we are seeing is that Republican voters want the hardline, purest candidate, to the point that they would vote 3rd party if they felt there was someone legit running to the left of the GOP candidate. This leads me to think they almost have to keep up the crazy in the general for fear of a Trump/Paul/whoever running as an Independent.
  • Deez Nuts is an actual person. I withdraw any direct or implied endorsements of Nuts I have made.
  • I've come to the conclusion that Donald Trump isn't nuts or crazy. He's actually deviously brilliant. He knows that the Republicans who are most likely to vote in the primaries are batshit insane, so he, being quite the salesman, is selling himself by saying the batshit insane things that GOP primary voters want to hear.

    Of course, what happens if he were to get he nomination is one thing. Getting elected president if he is nominated is another. The question is would he actually follow through on the batshit insane things he claimed he was for to get the nomination, or would he steer more towards the center to appeal to mainstream voters?

    I believe he's getting pockets of ironic voters, who want to support him "for the lulz" because he's acting efficiently as a professional troll and demonstrating how much of a show that politics is. All those votes for "Deez Nuts" already prove where certain people's views lie.

    Even as he plays the system, he'd still run the country into the ground because of his nature. He basically destroyed the United States Football League to insult the NFL for the compensation of a 3 dollar check, despite the fact it could have had a really successful history by settling into the spring season.
  • Of course, being good at selling yourself as a professional troll doesn't mean you'd be good as president. Even if what he's doing is mostly an act, it still doesn't mean that his true nature would be competent as president.
  • A lot of the people I speak to about Trump say they like him because he "Speaks his mind and tells it like it is.". You can all make your own conclusions of the legitimacy of this.
  • If pollsters ask me, I'm telling them that I fully support Deez Nuts. And Trump.
  • I can't support Deez Nuts horrible position.

    Dem Balls 2016.
  • Bernie Sanders is really the only candidate I actually like. Hillary is acceptable, but I'd rather not perpetuate dynastic presidencies.

    Trump actually for real scares me. It scares me more that there are so many people who agree with him.
  • Bernie Sanders is really the only candidate I actually like. Hillary is acceptable, but I'd rather not perpetuate dynastic presidencies.

    Trump actually for real scares me. It scares me more that there are so many people who agree with him.

    I generally agree with you, Pete, I just don't know if I would qualify Hillary as a "dynastic presidency." The Bushs, sure they're a Dynastic Presidency no question. If Hillary were to get elected and in 20+ years Chelsea were to run for president, I would call that a Dynastic Presidency.

    In Hillary's case, I don't think the fact that she was married to Bill and was a First Lady necessarily makes her dynastic though. I mean if you just look at her resume by itself, forgetting and excluding the fact that she was First Lady, she definitely has the merits and credentials to run on her own. NY Senator, Secretary of State... definitely has the qualifications to run.

    JEB Bush on the other hand, besides being a mediocre governor from Florida, what else does he have going for him other than his last name? That's a Dynastic Presidency.

  • A Clinton presidency would be basically identical to the Clinton presidency. They had a lot of influence over eachother then, and do now.

    That era was far from the worst POTUS era in American history.
  • I'm still skeptical of Bernie's chances in the general election if the republicans actually don't run a completely crazy candidate.
  • Cremlian said:

    I'm still skeptical of Bernie's chances in the general election if the republicans actually don't run a completely crazy candidate.

    Obama won. The people voting next year are mostly the same people who voted four years ago. Of course that's minus some dead people, plus some young people. Who voted for Obama that wouldn't vote for Bernie?
  • Apreche said:

    Cremlian said:

    I'm still skeptical of Bernie's chances in the general election if the republicans actually don't run a completely crazy candidate.

    Obama won. The people voting next year are mostly the same people who voted four years ago. Of course that's minus some dead people, plus some young people. Who voted for Obama that wouldn't vote for Bernie?
    Undecided swing voters in the only states that matter (Ohio, Florida).

  • Rym said:

    Apreche said:

    Cremlian said:

    I'm still skeptical of Bernie's chances in the general election if the republicans actually don't run a completely crazy candidate.

    Obama won. The people voting next year are mostly the same people who voted four years ago. Of course that's minus some dead people, plus some young people. Who voted for Obama that wouldn't vote for Bernie?
    Undecided swing voters in the only states that matter (Ohio, Florida).

    Who ARE these people? Is there really someone out there who is planning to vote, but doesn't have an opinion? That is actually going to pay attention to the campaigns and can be swayed? I can't imagine what such a person is like. Is it the old lady who forgets she already bought a piano, and can be convinced to buy another one?
  • RymRym
    edited August 2015
    Apreche said:

    Who ARE these people? Is there really someone out there who is planning to vote, but doesn't have an opinion? That is actually going to pay attention to the campaigns and can be swayed? I can't imagine what such a person is like. Is it the old lady who forgets she already bought a piano, and can be convinced to buy another one?

    If anyone could answer that question, they'd be a billionaire.

    I suspect a good percentage of them are LIVs.

    Maybe people who don't understand the government or political system that well, confuse "right" and "left" as political labels, don't realize that the GOP is the Republicans, don't know the names of all the candidates, vote because someone they know keeps bothering them to, etc...

    They only matter in states that are already split 50/50, but I'll bet they exist everywhere. I'd also bet they in effect vote randomly.

    Post edited by Rym on
  • While that person exists. I don't think there are enough to make a difference. I think what matters is not changing people's minds, but simply the turnout. There are some number of people in a state who will vote for A and another number that will vote for B. But how many of each actually show up to vote?
  • Apreche said:

    While that person exists. I don't think there are enough to make a difference. I think what matters is not changing people's minds, but simply the turnout. There are some number of people in a state who will vote for A and another number that will vote for B. But how many of each actually show up to vote?

    Turnout is why Democrats win leap year elections and Republicans tend to win all the other ones. Old people show up every year: everyone else only bothers when the presidency is up.

    Bad weather hurts the conservative vote.

  • A lot of the Democrats core groups just won't show up if they are not engaged directly.
  • edited August 2015
    Apreche said:

    Cremlian said:

    I'm still skeptical of Bernie's chances in the general election if the republicans actually don't run a completely crazy candidate.

    Obama won. The people voting next year are mostly the same people who voted four years ago. Of course that's minus some dead people, plus some young people. Who voted for Obama that wouldn't vote for Bernie?
    You realize we were in an economic downturn rivaled only by the great depression, we were having tons of issues in Iraq, a president with around a 30% approval rating, a rival that didn't excite the base and made some crazy political moves (Palin, suspending his campaign), and a "first" black president leading to extreme minority turn out." Not to mention the fact that it's rare for the same party to win the presidency 3 times in a row even on a good year.

    lets look at the negatives for Bernie Sanders, He's a self proclaimed Socialist (and not even registered as a Democrat), He comes from a state that has about 600k people, is 95% white (and affluent) and college educated and North eastern. Will probably be met with a general meh from some of the core centrist democratic groups. Did I mention he's old and not just old but looks old.... If the republicans put forward a Marco Rubio it's going to be messy. He's going to drive away a lot of traditionally D money sources if he says anything too "socialist". Again tough for the same party to win 3 times in a row.

    Positives for Bernie, he has an interesting and dynamic message compared to most, he runs on the issues and not mud slinging and he's likable in that disgruntled uncle sort of way. He's independent for realz. Current President is in the high or mid 40's approval which is extremely good for a second term. A lot of Blue state senate races will be up for election.


    Biggest thing going for the Democrats is the republicans are almost universally jokes.

    Post edited by Cremlian on
  • Bernie Sanders is really the only candidate I actually like. Hillary is acceptable, but I'd rather not perpetuate dynastic presidencies.

    Trump actually for real scares me. It scares me more that there are so many people who agree with him.

    I generally agree with you, Pete, I just don't know if I would qualify Hillary as a "dynastic presidency." The Bushs, sure they're a Dynastic Presidency no question. If Hillary were to get elected and in 20+ years Chelsea were to run for president, I would call that a Dynastic Presidency.

    In Hillary's case, I don't think the fact that she was married to Bill and was a First Lady necessarily makes her dynastic though. I mean if you just look at her resume by itself, forgetting and excluding the fact that she was First Lady, she definitely has the merits and credentials to run on her own. NY Senator, Secretary of State... definitely has the qualifications to run.

    JEB Bush on the other hand, besides being a mediocre governor from Florida, what else does he have going for him other than his last name? That's a Dynastic Presidency.

    That's fair. She is a fairly well-qualified candidate in and of herself - I just don't see how she's all that different from the Democratic gestalt, and the prospect of having a candidate that is actually liberal (i.e. Sanders) is distracting me from her qualifications.

    I generally worry about Bernie's electability, and I could see going with the more moderate Democratic option.

    I wonder if the grassroots support for Sanders will translate to midterm elections. That's where the real money is. We might not be able to get a Sanders as president, but if enough people are inclined that way, we might shift the congressional balance.

  • I suspect Sanders supporters will vanish into the mist the second he's not the nominee, and will never be heard from again.
Sign In or Register to comment.