|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
 Posted: Thu May 05, 2016 2:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't buy the electoral lock argument. Somewhere in this thread, I posted the exact number of votes that Romney needed in 2012 to flip the Electoral College. It was quite small.
Also, it would be wise to consider that Trump may be sui generis. Will we see the same voting patterns when the GOP candidate is an anti-establishment renegade who openly plays to the worst features of human nature? And will we see the same voting patterns for someone as lovable as HRC? Stay tuned.
Edit: I found the number: 333,908 in four states. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Thu May 05, 2016 3:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tark the Shark wrote: | | In order for real change, it will have to be an outsider. |
In order for real change, you need more than the presidency. We need to remember this. Bernie Sanders could not have enacted any of the items on his domestic agenda. It takes the support of Congress and possibly the courts.
This is one of the reasons why many of us are frustrated with the Sanderistas. It isn't that you shouldn't advocate that sort of change just because people say it can't be done. It's that you're wasting your time if your movement is focused solely on the presidency. You need to take this to the voters in ever congressional district, every Senate race, and every state and local legislative race. Even though I oppose many of Sanders' proposals, I'd have a lot more respect for the movement if it was really a movement, and not just a glorified infomercial. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Thu May 05, 2016 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ChefLinda wrote: | | Just wanted to point out that I called this back in September (8 months ago). Do I win a Tostada? |
No, you win a Trump Steak. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Thu May 05, 2016 3:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hoop_Knowledge wrote: | | No, Obama's message was one that was positive, and hopeful (unlike Trump's), and he was a major change from the previous administration. |
Do not underestimate the extent to which Trump's message is hopeful. It is easy to miss this, because we focus on the outrageous stuff. However, Trump's speech the other night was all about how he is going to fix everything, put everyone back to work, and make the world treat us fairly. We may laugh at the lack of specifics, but the message is hopeful.
And Trump would definitely be a major change from the previous administration. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wilt
LG Contributor
Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 13731
|
| Posted: Thu May 05, 2016 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | Hoop_Knowledge wrote: | | No, Obama's message was one that was positive, and hopeful (unlike Trump's), and he was a major change from the previous administration. |
Do not underestimate the extent to which Trump's message is hopeful. It is easy to miss this, because we focus on the outrageous stuff. However, Trump's speech the other night was all about how he is going to fix everything, put everyone back to work, and make the world treat us fairly. |
So you're saying the people who say they are sick of politics, sick of the establishment, sick of broken promises, and want to vote for someone who tells it like it is, are actually voting for a pure politician who is telling them what they want to hear and tells it like it isn't?
Which reminds me of what a reporter said on TV the other day, "This election confirms that Americans really love politicians. They say they don't, but they really do."
_________________
¡Hala Madrid! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kikanga
Retired Number
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29377
Location: La La Land
|
| Posted: Thu May 05, 2016 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: |
I don't buy the electoral lock argument. Somewhere in this thread, I posted the exact number of votes that Romney needed in 2012 to flip the Electoral College. It was quite small.
Also, it would be wise to consider that Trump may be sui generis. Will we see the same voting patterns when the GOP candidate is an anti-establishment renegade who openly plays to the worst features of human nature? And will we see the same voting patterns for someone as lovable as HRC? Stay tuned.
Edit: I found the number: 333,908 in four states. |
Now when you say "flip" do you mean. The amount of people who had to go from voting Barack to voting Romney?
Or the amount of Barack voters that just needed to stay home and not vote at all?
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Thu May 05, 2016 3:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The number of additional votes that he needed. It is the Electoral College that would flip. It could be Obama voters staying home, too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Thu May 05, 2016 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wilt wrote: | | So you're saying the people who say they are sick of politics, sick of the establishment, sick of broken promises, and want to vote for someone who tells it like it is, are actually voting for a pure politician who is telling them what they want to hear and tells it like it isn't? |
No, that isn't what I said. Your point has validity, though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
phayze one
Star Player
Joined: 17 Dec 2008
Posts: 5389
|
| Posted: Thu May 05, 2016 4:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | VTECkilla wrote: | | Trump will hire the best advisors to lead and direct him... |
No offense, but this sounds like something Trump would say. |
"They're gonna be great, you're gonna love 'em. The best advisors with the best advice, all my advisors are great." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wilt
LG Contributor
Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 13731
|
| Posted: Thu May 05, 2016 4:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | The number of additional votes that he needed. It is the Electoral College that would flip. It could be Obama voters staying home, too. |
But that's not realistic. Picking 4 swing states where Obama won by small margins and assuming Romney would have overperformed there while performing normally in all other states doesn't make sense. If Romney had won those 4 states, Obama would have underperformed in other places, which would have resulted in way more than 300,000 people staying at home. Yes, it's an election of 50 different state elections, but it's also a national election with national trends in demographics. You're essentially talking about a scenario in which Obama would have still won the popular vote by more than 4 million votes, while losing the election by the smallest of margins in the Electoral College.
_________________
¡Hala Madrid! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
999
Franchise Player
Joined: 19 Oct 2006
Posts: 20267
|
| Posted: Thu May 05, 2016 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lakersken80 wrote: | | 999 wrote: | | If trump somehow wins the presidential election this will prove that the country is more sexist than it is racist |
No, it just proves how unlikeable HRC is compared to Trump.
Whats hilarious is that we didn't even have to look at Republicans for examples of this. Just look at the groundswell of movement for Bernie when he was an unknown. Some of the ammo they've used against her is surprising when you consider what their politics are. We already knew the right didn't hide their disdain against her. What we've come to see over the past couple of months is the far left supporters of the Democratic Party voice their anger against her that we haven't seen before. |
for many Hilary comes off as a not a likeable person or even a politician like Barack and Bill. she is what she is. and Im afraid the right will take that and completely attack her to no end where she wouldn't know how to counter those attacks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raijin
Star Player
Joined: 08 Feb 2009
Posts: 6576
|
| Posted: Thu May 05, 2016 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| phayze one wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | VTECkilla wrote: | | Trump will hire the best advisors to lead and direct him... |
No offense, but this sounds like something Trump would say. |
"They're gonna be great, you're gonna love 'em. The best advisors with the best advice, all my advisors are great." |
His advisors, Clinton's advisors it doesn't really matter. They're all going to be angling for a way to enrich themselves at our expense.
_________________
"It was tough," Kobe Bryant said. "But when it got really tough for me, I just checked myself in." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Thu May 05, 2016 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wilt wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | The number of additional votes that he needed. It is the Electoral College that would flip. It could be Obama voters staying home, too. |
But that's not realistic. Picking 4 swing states where Obama won by small margins and assuming Romney would have overperformed there while performing normally in all other states doesn't make sense. If Romney had won those 4 states, Obama would have underperformed in other places, which would have resulted in way more than 300,000 people staying at home. Yes, it's an election of 50 different state elections, but it's also a national election with national trends in demographics. You're essentially talking about a scenario in which Obama would have still won the popular vote by more than 4 million votes, while losing the election by the smallest of margins in the Electoral College. |
You're missing the point of the exercise and getting caught up in the minutiae of the numbers. We're talking about 2016 election and the notion that none of the Obama states could flip to Trump. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Reflexx
Franchise Player
Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 11163
|
| Posted: Thu May 05, 2016 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| angrypuppy wrote: | | ocho wrote: | https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/728297587418247168
I give up. |
I feel compelled to defend The Donald.
Did you know his wife was an immigrant? |
He likes white immigrants. That's why he brought in a bunch of foreign workers for his fancy resort even though American workers applied for the jobs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wilt
LG Contributor
Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 13731
|
| Posted: Thu May 05, 2016 5:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | Wilt wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | The number of additional votes that he needed. It is the Electoral College that would flip. It could be Obama voters staying home, too. |
But that's not realistic. Picking 4 swing states where Obama won by small margins and assuming Romney would have overperformed there while performing normally in all other states doesn't make sense. If Romney had won those 4 states, Obama would have underperformed in other places, which would have resulted in way more than 300,000 people staying at home. Yes, it's an election of 50 different state elections, but it's also a national election with national trends in demographics. You're essentially talking about a scenario in which Obama would have still won the popular vote by more than 4 million votes, while losing the election by the smallest of margins in the Electoral College. |
You're missing the point of the exercise and getting caught up in the minutiae of the numbers. We're talking about 2016 election and the notion that none of the Obama states could flip to Trump. |
The number you cited is misleading. It ignores a lot of things in order to downplay the enormity of Obama's victory and to reinforce your long-term goal here of dismissing the role of demographics in national elections. Yes, Trump can win the election. And if he won, it's more likely that he wins many swing states, instead of just a minimal number to get to 270 electoral votes. And if he loses the overall election, it's unlikely that he only wins Pennsylvania, or only wins Michigan, or only wins Ohio, while losing all other swing states.
_________________
¡Hala Madrid! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Thu May 05, 2016 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Wilt wrote: | | The number you cited is misleading. It ignores a lot of things in order to downplay the enormity of Obama's victory and to reinforce your long-term goal here of dismissing the role of demographics in national elections. Yes, Trump can win the election. And if he won, it's more likely that he wins many swing states, instead of just a minimal number to get to 270 electoral votes. And if he loses the overall election, it's unlikely that he only wins Pennsylvania, or only wins Michigan, or only wins Ohio, while losing all other swing states. |
You seem intent on missing the point. If you want to respond to what we're talking about, go for it. If you want to knock down a strawman argument that no one is making, I'm not going to waste my time on you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wilt
LG Contributor
Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 13731
|
| Posted: Thu May 05, 2016 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | You seem intent on missing the point. If you want to respond to what we're talking about, go for it. If you want to knock down a strawman argument that no one is making, I'm not going to waste my time on you. |
You can accuse me all you want of arguing a strawman, but you threw out a number (which, when googled, first appears on Breitbart and was later cited by RedState, TeaPartyNation, and Free Republic, all for the purpose of dismissing that Obama had a mandate in 2012) that doesn't tell us anything of significance about the 2012 election or the 2016 election in order to make a stupid point that doesn't reflect reality. I'm calling your "exercise" for what it is, pointless. But you're right, we don't want to waste more of your precious time.
_________________
¡Hala Madrid! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Fri May 06, 2016 5:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
This kills me. Trump thinks he can negotiate with creditors over our national debt like the United States is one of his struggling real estate ventures:
| Quote: | One day after assuring Americans he is not running for president “to make things unstable for the country,” the presumptive Republican nominee, Donald J. Trump, said in a television interview Thursday that he might seek to reduce the national debt by persuading creditors to accept something less than full payment.
Asked whether the United States needed to pay its debts in full, or whether he could negotiate a partial repayment, Mr. Trump told the cable network CNBC, “I would borrow, knowing that if the economy crashed, you could make a deal.”
He added, “And if the economy was good, it was good. So, therefore, you can’t lose.” |
New York Times
Well, at least he's honest. He doesn't have some crackpot theory for how jacking up government spending or cutting taxes will stimulate the economy. He's just going to borrow a bunch of money, then cut a deal with the creditors if the deal goes sour.
As a fiscal conservative, this makes me want to scream. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Fri May 06, 2016 5:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
More evidence of the mirror-image phenomenon and polarization:
| Quote: | The poll asked likely voters about the primary motivation driving their support of either Trump or Clinton heading into the general election on Nov. 8.
About 47 percent of Trump supporters said they backed him primarily because they don’t want Clinton to win. Another 43 percent said their primary motivation was a liking for Trump’s political positions, while 6 percent said they liked him personally.
Similar responses prevailed among Clinton supporters.
About 46 percent said they would vote for her mostly because they don’t want to see a Trump presidency, while 40 percent said they agreed with her political positions, and 11 percent said they liked her personally.
|
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-poll_us_572c5399e4b0bc9cb046564a
Edit: Incidentally, the poll (Ipsos/Reuters) shows HRC leading Trump 45-36.
Last edited by Aeneas Hunter on Fri May 06, 2016 5:18 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
angrypuppy
Retired Number
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 32762
|
| Posted: Fri May 06, 2016 5:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Reflexx wrote: | | angrypuppy wrote: | | ocho wrote: | https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/728297587418247168
I give up. |
I feel compelled to defend The Donald.
Did you know his wife was an immigrant? |
He likes white immigrants. That's why he brought in a bunch of foreign workers for his fancy resort even though American workers applied for the jobs. |
No way. Are you implying that Trump is somehow racist? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
angrypuppy
Retired Number
Joined: 13 Apr 2001
Posts: 32762
|
| Posted: Fri May 06, 2016 5:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | Hoop_Knowledge wrote: | | No, Obama's message was one that was positive, and hopeful (unlike Trump's), and he was a major change from the previous administration. |
Do not underestimate the extent to which Trump's message is hopeful. It is easy to miss this, because we focus on the outrageous stuff. However, Trump's speech the other night was all about how he is going to fix everything, put everyone back to work, and make the world treat us fairly. We may laugh at the lack of specifics, but the message is hopeful.
And Trump would definitely be a major change from the previous administration. |
Trump alone can't do this, once you apply the Bernie Bros. test. In Trump's case, the main obstacle is that he has managed to distance himself from both the Democrats and the Republican elite. His few allies will be vastly outnumbered. To enable an outsider agenda, he would need something akin to "the coattails of Ronald Reagan" election of 1980, whereby he sweeps to a landslide for the entire GOP, all the while intimidating the opposition in both houses. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Fri May 06, 2016 5:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| angrypuppy wrote: | | Trump alone can't do this, once you apply the Bernie Bros. test. In Trump's case, the main obstacle is that he has managed to distance himself from both the Democrats and the Republican elite. His few allies will be vastly outnumbered. To enable an outsider agenda, he would need something akin to "the coattails of Ronald Reagan" election of 1980, whereby he sweeps to a landslide for the entire GOP, all the while intimidating the opposition in both houses. |
Trump can't do what? What is his outsider agenda?
That's the difference. Sanders had a more or less specific agenda that would have needed support in Congress, the courts, and possibly state and local governments.
Trump has no agenda that goes beyond "We're going to fix things." Well, at least not far beyond that. Trump is going to sit down with Putin and China, and everything will be great. After all, a Chinese bank has an office in Trump Tower! Trump is going to take care of ISIS, so we won't need to worry with that. Trump is going to do something to companies to move offshore, so that will stop happening. America will be great again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kikanga
Retired Number
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29377
Location: La La Land
|
| Posted: Fri May 06, 2016 7:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
Such Party unity. It's inspiring. 
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/05/politics/paul-ryan-donald-trump-republican-resistance/index.html
| Quote: | House Speaker Paul Ryan said he's "just not ready" to support Trump
CNN reached out to 16 Republican elected officials, leaders and major fundraisers associated with former Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush and former Vice President Dick Cheney. Speaking on background, none of them said they were planning to go to this summer's Republican convention.
2012 GOP nominee Mitt Romney declared he'd skip the convention, joining at least three prior Republican nominees -- John McCain and both Presidents Bush -- in declining to attend the event.
Erickson, the conservative blogger, told CNN -- without naming them -- that members of Congress have joined influential Republican members of the #NeverTrump movement in seeking out a candidate.
"Planning is continuing for a third party," he said. "I don't necessarily read this as Ryan endorsing a third party, but it gives motivation to people who want a third party to continue down that track. I have had several congressmen reach out to me to encourage a third party because they are worried about turnout in (November) because they want an alternative to Trump." |
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better” |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakersken80
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Posts: 38803
|
| Posted: Fri May 06, 2016 8:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kikanga wrote: | Such Party unity. It's inspiring.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/05/politics/paul-ryan-donald-trump-republican-resistance/index.html
| Quote: | House Speaker Paul Ryan said he's "just not ready" to support Trump
CNN reached out to 16 Republican elected officials, leaders and major fundraisers associated with former Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush and former Vice President Dick Cheney. Speaking on background, none of them said they were planning to go to this summer's Republican convention.
2012 GOP nominee Mitt Romney declared he'd skip the convention, joining at least three prior Republican nominees -- John McCain and both Presidents Bush -- in declining to attend the event.
Erickson, the conservative blogger, told CNN -- without naming them -- that members of Congress have joined influential Republican members of the #NeverTrump movement in seeking out a candidate.
"Planning is continuing for a third party," he said. "I don't necessarily read this as Ryan endorsing a third party, but it gives motivation to people who want a third party to continue down that track. I have had several congressmen reach out to me to encourage a third party because they are worried about turnout in (November) because they want an alternative to Trump." |
|
Nobody who wants a career in politics will associate their name with him. Because in the general elections, when everyone with no party affiliations can vote, they are pretty much going to cast a protest vote against him. He is almost universally unliked among Hispanics, and considering women are the majority in this country, and has high unfavorability ratings among them, there isn't enough angry folks who lean convservative to put him over the top. If Trump fails in his bid for the president he can always go back to his career in real estate.If these politicians associate with him and he loses badly they will end up being collateral damage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wilt
LG Contributor
Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 13731
|
| Posted: Fri May 06, 2016 8:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Momentum (if you can call it that) is building behind a Ben Sasse third-party run. If you're asking, "Who the heck is Ben Sasse?", you're not the only one. He's a young senator from Nebraska, who is apparently very conservative without a Ted Cruz-esque face and creepiness factor. I saw him once on TV a few months ago, arguing passionately against Trump. This would be one way to save the Senate, since it would bring many establishment and conservative Republicans to vote, instead of skipping the election, at least in theory. People like Bill Kristol are behind this idea.
I think what Paul Ryan is doing is smart. He doesn't have to go out of his way to appeal to Trump. Trump needs Ryan more than Ryan needs Trump, if Trump wants anything passed in Congress. And Ryan's seat is safe, so he doesn't have to worry about some primary challenge in the future. But most of them will end up supporting Trump eventually. Because that's the word many of them use these days. They "support" him but don't "endorse" him.
_________________
¡Hala Madrid!
Last edited by Wilt on Fri May 06, 2016 8:42 am; edited 4 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
