Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 27, 2016, 08:57:28 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Be sure to enable your "Ultimate Profile" for even more goodies on your profile page!

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 660
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump just picked up a very fitting and appropriate endorsement on: Today at 03:22:22 pm
I wish we'd stop with this.  Every year, all the white supremacists, christian extremists and neo-nazis are going to endorse the Republican nominee, and all the far-left radicals, communists, and black supremacists will endorse the Democratic nominee.

Lmao, how many "black supremacists" do you think there are in the Democratic party?  Are you one of those people that thinks BLM is a black supremacy movement?
2  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: What does Hillary need to do in order to appeal to more white males? on: Today at 03:20:33 pm
She needs to a pick a white male VP in order to defeat Trump.

Lol.  No.  For example, if she picked Elizabeth Warren, it would easily placate the reservations of most Sanders supporters, and prevent many of them from sitting out the election or voting third party.

How do you think this works?  Women didn't vote for McCain just because he picked Sarah Palin as his running mate.
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: What does Hillary need to do in order to appeal to more white males? on: Today at 03:09:43 pm
The question is flawed; indeed, if Hillary Clinton spends this election trying to improve her favorabilities, she will not succeed.  The only strategy that she should employ is to absolutely destroy Donald Trump's stature.  This is a "who do you hate more?" election and Clinton's campaign should not waste any time pretending otherwise.
4  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Bernie says 'Game on' to debate with Trump. on: Today at 02:55:22 pm
Get ready for President Trump at this point thanks to Bernie Sanders and the media.

Yes, yes, assuming Trump can pull off the unlikely event of a victory against Hillary Clinton, it would be anyone's fault but hers, correct?
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Bernie says 'Game on' to debate with Trump. on: May 26, 2016, 06:40:06 pm
It's not so much that Trump is smart. It's that the citizens of this country are naive to the point that I can't find the words to do justice to describe how naive they are.

I think we all understand that the best way to raise "$10 or $15 million for women's health" and then some is to elect a Democratic president and a Democratic congress.

Donald Trump's biggest downfall will be underestimating the intelligence of the American people!
6  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Bernie says 'Game on' to debate with Trump. on: May 26, 2016, 06:28:20 pm
Trump is playing a masterful game here .   Its a media campaign.

My friend, Trump is not playing a masterful game, he is playing YOU - and the American people.

His record speaks for itself:

Quote
A veterans’ advocacy group weighed in on the Washington Post’s Saturday revelation that GOP candidate Donald Trump did not, as he claimed, raise $6 million for veterans at a January fundraiser.

According to the Post, Trump skipped out on a GOP debate in January and instead held a fundraiser for veterans. Afterward, Trump had boasted about the event’s success, saying “We just cracked $6 million, right? Six million.”

Actually, Trump only raised about 75 percent of that, with the total coming in at about $4.5 million,  his campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, admitted.

...

The Post still found, by way of interviews with various charities, $3.1 million in donations.

...

“Donald Trump promised $6 million to veterans,” Soltz wrote. “Now he needs to deliver, by personally forking over the millions of dollars he said he raised, but didn’t. It won’t make up for his lies, but may make him think twice about letting his mouth write checks that no one can cash.”
7  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Bernie says 'Game on' to debate with Trump. on: May 26, 2016, 06:13:50 pm
He has no obligation to debate a loser.

That's really his mistake for initially agreeing to it and then backing down, then, isn't it?
I'm not confident making any sort of judgement on which strategy was superior before we see the outcome.

Here is what's happening:
One candidate wants to have a debate.
Another candidate is about to establish a pattern of debate evasion using fraudulent tactics.

Even if this doesn't bear fruit for Sanders, Trump's strategy has been exposed.  He is going to do this again in the general election, because he's also afraid to debate Hillary Clinton.
8  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Bernie says 'Game on' to debate with Trump. on: May 26, 2016, 06:10:29 pm
He has no obligation to debate a loser.

That's really his mistake for initially agreeing to it and then backing down, then, isn't it?
9  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Bernie says 'Game on' to debate with Trump. on: May 26, 2016, 06:06:22 pm
Trump is only doing this to suck up media coverage and move away from the planted Vince Foster smear.  Hes not going to debate Bernie Sanders the socialist. 

Yes, he is a fraud and a coward who knows that it's easier to lie about raising money than to actually have a debate.
10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump to soften stance on Muslims - says Paul Manafort on: May 26, 2016, 06:00:47 pm
This is a start, but he seems entirely uninterested in softening his "stance" toward Latinos, which is what's really costing him the election right now.

The question is, will any of this make a difference? He didn't just slightly tick them off. They are literally protesting/rioting at his events now. There is no way I can see him winning back Muslims or Hispanics.

No doubt, but to be sure, this sort of triangulation is designed not to court those voters but rather white Republicans who are uncomfortable voting for a racist.  Although, looking at the polling, there don't seem to be really be that many of them.
11  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Bernie says 'Game on' to debate with Trump. on: May 26, 2016, 05:44:51 pm
Donald Trump supposedly 'raised money for vets' to dodge a debate in January.  Remember how that turned out?
12  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump bashes Susana Martinez in New Mexico stop on: May 25, 2016, 07:16:36 pm
Of the NeverTrump crowd, she's probably the best candidate for an actual R->I or R->D party switch this year.  It's personal for her.

She should switch. Republican party has left her.

Are we really at the point where the vindictive, petty, mean-spirited Susana Martinez is somehow a good applicant for the Democratic party?

Dude, your candidate appointed Cornel-effing-West in the committee that will write the party's platform.
Just sayin'... 

Was that intended to be some sort of demonstration of how anti-abortion, pro-gun, anti-worker, anti-tax, pro-death penalty, corrupt Susana Martinez belongs in the Democratic party, or were you just bringing up irrelevant nonsense because you can't help but get a word in every single discussion even when nobody wants to converse with you?
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump bashes Susana Martinez in New Mexico stop on: May 25, 2016, 06:40:20 pm
Of the NeverTrump crowd, she's probably the best candidate for an actual R->I or R->D party switch this year.  It's personal for her.

She should switch. Republican party has left her.

Are we really at the point where the vindictive, petty, mean-spirited Susana Martinez is somehow a good applicant for the Democratic party?
14  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Who do you side with in the Trump/Warren spat? on: May 25, 2016, 06:37:37 pm
Elizabeth Warren.  It's too bad that she isn't the presumptive nominee.  Would be great to see her give Trump a real electoral thrashing!
15  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: May 2016 Support vs Opposition Poll on: May 25, 2016, 06:31:30 pm
This really is the worst pair of major party candidates since WW2, hands down.

I'm inclined to agree, although 1992 would have been pretty demoralizing too.
16  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: May 2016 Support vs Opposition Poll on: May 24, 2016, 07:38:07 pm
Polls of a similar nature used to be allowed in the 2016 presidential board, presumably because of their extreme relevance.  (example | another example | literally the exact same poll from March)  So, while I don't wish to pretend that it's some kind of severe miscarriage of justice for the poll to be moved, it does strike me as rather pointless moderator meddling.  Nothing better to do?
17  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Washington Primary results thread (both parties; “polls close” at 11pm ET) on: May 24, 2016, 07:25:18 pm
You have to be a registered voter to get sent a ballot without requesting one, though right?, and 80% of Washington state's voters are registered (which btw is pretty impressive), which would favor Hillary, unlike the caucus-system, which has same day registration.

Erm... if you're suggesting that Sanders will do worse in the primary than the caucus, then, sure.  But to say that Clinton is 'favored' among registered voters would suggest that she'll win this primary... and frankly, I'd be shocked.

After all, there are plenty of 'soft' Sanders supporters who didn't make it to the caucus.
18  General Politics / Individual Politics / May 2016 Support vs Opposition Poll on: May 24, 2016, 07:22:14 pm
Let's see where we stand at this point in the election.
19  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Washington Primary results thread (both parties; “polls close” at 11pm ET) on: May 24, 2016, 06:30:51 pm
The people voting in beauty contest primaries are voting not for the beauty contest but to vote in other local primary races.  We all know, unfortunately, the younger Sanders crowd is less likely to vote in those races and are therefore underrepresented despite the turnout being higher.

AFAIK, there aren't any local primary races today. Given the nature of how the ballot is set up, I don't see how there could be any.

Ah, that's right.  That wasn't the case in Nebraska, and I maintain that 1) what I said is generally correct for beauty contests and 2) the sample is still obviously unrepresentative and though bigger undersamples sanders supporters

I don't think that many regular people necessarily know or care that it's a only beauty contest. They just get the ballot in the mail, so they vote.

The people who get the ballot in the mail are disproportionately likely to be Clinton supporters

Lol.  The entire state votes by mail.

So every single adult washington state resident regardless of party registration gets sent one ballot to their home address giving them an option to vote democrat or republican and mail it back in?

Every registered voter gets sent a ballot, yes.  There is no party registration.*

*When I registered in 08 you could write in a party if you wanted to do so, so I put 'Democratic party.'  But when you receive the primary ballot, you declare then and there whether you are voting in the Dem or GOP primary.
20  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Washington Primary results thread (both parties; “polls close” at 11pm ET) on: May 24, 2016, 06:28:11 pm
The people voting in beauty contest primaries are voting not for the beauty contest but to vote in other local primary races.  We all know, unfortunately, the younger Sanders crowd is less likely to vote in those races and are therefore underrepresented despite the turnout being higher.

AFAIK, there aren't any local primary races today. Given the nature of how the ballot is set up, I don't see how there could be any.

Ah, that's right.  That wasn't the case in Nebraska, and I maintain that 1) what I said is generally correct for beauty contests and 2) the sample is still obviously unrepresentative and though bigger undersamples sanders supporters

I don't think that many regular people necessarily know or care that it's a only beauty contest. They just get the ballot in the mail, so they vote.

The people who get the ballot in the mail are disproportionately likely to be Clinton supporters

Lol.  The entire state votes by mail.
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Your reaction if Sanders says this after DC? on: May 24, 2016, 06:26:42 pm
It would not be entirely unexpected and would confirm my emerging opinion of Sanders. It will not at all change my views about anything else happening.

Are you going to walk this back when Sanders endorses Clinton, or is it just in what I'm guessing is a long list of hysterical predictions that never came into fruition?
22  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: we ain't done this one in a bit, POLYGAMY! on: May 23, 2016, 10:55:55 pm
I don't have a problem with polyamorous relationships.  My solution to preventing the sort of polygynous structures that oppress women and children in fundamentalist religious sects is to ensure that all members of a plural marriage are indeed married to each other, rather than one man marrying everyone else.  The fundamentalists tend to have a homophobic streak and would likely continue not to register the true nature of their relationships with government authorities, regardless of what happens with laws against polygamy.

Of course, this is a rather simplistic argument, but it suitably quells my main concern with legal polygamy, which has always been a historical one of oppression rather than any moral judgement on polyamory itself.
23  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: What are your reasons for voting for Hillary? on: May 23, 2016, 10:47:12 pm
Two reasons:
1. The Supreme Court
2. Stop Donald Trump

Do I wish there were a more compelling case?  Obviously; but there it is.  The alternative isn't worth the risk.
24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: May 24 Washington state prediction thread on: May 22, 2016, 10:02:55 pm
There is a write-in option.

Really?  There wasn't on my ballot.
25  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Could Arkansas be a battleground state? on: May 21, 2016, 07:56:17 pm
Trump will do very well in Arkansas.  Clinton can keep him under 60% but I wouldn't predict more than that.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 660


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines