Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 30, 2016, 05:36:27 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Election 2016 predictions are now open!.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 605
76  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will Hillary '16 be more similar to Gore '00 or Kerry '04? on: May 09, 2016, 11:39:27 pm
FDR '40 or '44
77  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: I am ready to make a Vice Presidential call..... on: May 09, 2016, 08:59:43 pm
78  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Ann Coulter: Trump could crush the EC with slight increase in white vote in MW on: May 08, 2016, 06:56:48 pm
He didn't get a majority so that's literally impossible to know.   

So it's impossible to know whether George H. W. Bush would have won reelection without Perot?

Yes? I've seen good arguments from both sides on that one.
79  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will Hillary reach 55% in the upcoming general election against Trump? on: May 08, 2016, 11:04:20 am
No. She'll probably get 55% of the votes that are cast for either her or Trump though.

The bigger victory it looks like she'll have, the more Sandernistas will protest vote for Stein or whoever.
80  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: FiveThirtyEight Demographic Calculator Revisited: Can you make Trump win? on: May 07, 2016, 11:01:16 pm
I'm amazed you made Mississippi flip.

It's gunna happen.

It's not going to happen. Mississippi's white population is the best suited for Trump of any state's white population. (Maybe 2nd to WV.)

It will be relatively close though thanks to the demographic mix. For having such a strong Republican reputation, we were Romney's 17th best state.
81  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump slams Clinton for "disgraceful" treatment of husband's mistresses on: May 07, 2016, 07:10:01 pm
I would love to see Hillary address this head on, open up, and show vulnerability while discussing the pain she felt as a result of what her husband did. Probably a sh-tty thing to relive, but Trump needs to be careful that he doesn't give Hillary an opportunity to humanize herself. I think a lot of people would cut Hillary some slack for hating on her husband's mistresses.

She should hate her husband. Not the women, who did nothing wrong.

Take it from someone whose mother is currently going through a similar situation: There's a lot of hate to go around when you are so completely betrayed, and, again, I think people would cut Hillary some slack for having an appropriately emotional response to the situation, as well as to all those involved. Trump shouldn't go there.

You're probably right, and I probably shouldn't worry.  But the fact that there is probably enough evidence in the Juanita Broaddrick case to get Clinton expelled from most universities today gives me pause that part of the left could revolt over this.

Is there really? The impression I've gotten from articles I've read is that it's pretty widely believed that Clinton and Braddock were having a long-term consensual affair and Braddock made the whole thing up because her husband found out and got mad.

It really wouldn't look good for Hillary to point all this out (not only would she be talking about yet another affair of her husband's, but the optics of saying a rape accuser is lying aren't going to come across well, even if she is), but if Braddock starts campaigning with Trump or whatever, I guess she'll have to.
82  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: NO ONE Could've predicted this outcome TM (Gloating Thread) on: May 07, 2016, 06:55:19 pm
Aren't you the one who kept insisting that Hillary's "investigation" was a really big deal?

No, like Sprouts Farmer said, Beet is the Clinton supporter who constantly thinks Clinton is doomed.

...

I never said Mikado was any of those things.


Sure enough, the Mikado WAS the one I was thinking about, although to be fair, after rereading the posts, it's not really that bad. Plenty of people here banging the drum much harder.

Hillary won't be indicted, or forced from the race, or lose the race because of this email nothing. The end.

Quote from: Proverbs 27:1
Boast not thyself of to morrow; for thou knowest not what a day may bring forth.

Sepp Blatter thought he was untouchable a few months ago and look what happened. FBI investigations are serious affairs.

30% is way too high a chance for an indictment, and I'm someone who takes this investigation seriously. Maybe cut that to 10%, and add on a ~2% chance for freak plane crash/health problem between now and the start of the primaries. I'd give Clinton about a 7 in 8 chance of getting the nomination.

A potential case of Gross Negligence under the Espionage Act of 1917 is a rather big deal indeed...carries up to 10 years imprisonment.

We know this already. NBC themselves ran a piece confirming this like two weeks ago.

For those who haven't been following, this is some serious business and just from what's already been publicly released the FBI would have a strong case against Clinton. It's really up to the discretion of the FBI Director as to whether this goes anywhere, though.
83  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Hillary's "Dangerous Donald" nickname already backfiring on: May 07, 2016, 04:28:02 pm
Dumb-ald is a pretty good one. Maybe she can get him to blow up at her at a debate and throw a punch or something by only calling him that.

(And yes, that would make his supporters love him anymore but should clinch the election for her.)
84  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump slams Clinton for "disgraceful" treatment of husband's mistresses on: May 07, 2016, 04:20:56 pm
I would love to see Hillary address this head on, open up, and show vulnerability while discussing the pain she felt as a result of what her husband did. Probably a sh-tty thing to relive, but Trump needs to be careful that he doesn't give Hillary an opportunity to humanize herself. I think a lot of people would cut Hillary some slack for hating on her husband's mistresses.

She should hate her husband. Not the women, who did nothing wrong.

Since when is carrying on a long-term affair with a man you know to be married "nothing wrong?"

Obviously Bill's sins were worse, but let's not pretend these women were innocent.
85  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: NO ONE Could've predicted this outcome TM (Gloating Thread) on: May 07, 2016, 04:19:24 pm
Aren't you the one who kept insisting that Hillary's "investigation" was a really big deal?

That kinda negates you sharing a common prediction that Trump would do well, doesn't it?
86  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Of the states that haven't voted Democratic since 1964... on: May 07, 2016, 04:17:02 pm
North Dakota was the only one of these people thought Obama had an outside shot of winning in 2008.
87  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Would you be angry at hillary clinton if she lost the general election? on: May 05, 2016, 11:08:21 pm
Probably, although it would depend on the exact circumstances of the loss.
88  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: CNN releases first battleground map for Clinton vs. Trump on: May 05, 2016, 12:39:53 pm
NH could be 20% libertarian votes, making it very much a swing state.

No, it would be something like Hillary 50, Trump 30, Johnson 20 in that case. Democrats aren't going to vote Libertarian in large numbers.
89  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: What % of Libertarian vote will prevent Hillary and Trump from 270? on: May 05, 2016, 12:38:42 pm
It will help her, because the Libertarian candidate would disproportionately draw from Republican/Trump voters. If Gary Johnson gets 5% of the vote, Hillary landslides. If he gets 15%, she wins over 500 Electoral Votes, etc.
90  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If People are SERIOUS about #NeverTrump . . . on: May 04, 2016, 09:37:34 pm
Any state that would select Cruz over Clinton would also select Trump over Clinton (except maybe Utah), so I don't see what difference this could possibly make.

Maybe if you "nominated" Kasich in Ohio, Collins in Maine, Ayotte in New Hampshire, Sandoval in Nevada, etc., you could keep Hillary under 270.

The point of this is to throw some states from Trump to whoever so that no one gets to 270, and the House can pick the real conservative.

Putting Cruz on the ballot in a bunch of states that Trump would have won too doesn't make it anymore likely to send the election to the House. You'll have to target states that Hillary is going to win, but could theoretically lose against a hometown hero, like the 4 I mentioned.
91  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If People are SERIOUS about #NeverTrump . . . on: May 04, 2016, 09:25:05 pm
Any state that would select Cruz over Clinton would also select Trump over Clinton (except maybe Utah), so I don't see what difference this could possibly make.

Maybe if you "nominated" Kasich in Ohio, Collins in Maine, Ayotte in New Hampshire, Sandoval in Nevada, etc., you could keep Hillary under 270.
92  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Who will be Trump's running mate? on: May 04, 2016, 08:14:23 pm
Marsha Blackburn
93  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: It’s Donald Trump’s Party Now on: May 04, 2016, 07:51:43 pm
The senior Republicans have to fall into line now.



Wrong color lightsaber.
94  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Are educated/upscale whites going to vote for Hillary? on: May 04, 2016, 03:32:47 pm
These people?



How can they not vote for Hillary?

Those 4 people voted Hillary in the primaries and would vote her in November regardless of the Republican nominee
95  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Democrats Must Win 30 Seats to Take the House on: May 04, 2016, 11:49:22 am
An unpopular Hillary Presidency will only make this worse after redistricting.

A popular Hillary Presidency will make this better after redistricting.
96  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: #NeverTrump GOP endorsements (Sasse,Whitman,Romney,Baker, Beck,Kristol,Ridge...) on: May 04, 2016, 11:47:30 am
WaPo has a lengthy roundup of some of the Trump-as-presumptive-nominee reaction from prominent #NeverTrump conservative writers and bloggers:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2016/05/04/daily-202-after-trump-s-indiana-romp-anti-trump-republicans-consider-their-options-including-voting-for-hillary-clinton/572926d8981b92a22d51233f/

Meanwhile, we’ve gone into another dimension at Redstate, with blog posts at the staunchly conservative website now including such titles as “Republicans Should Confirm Merrick Garland ASAP”:

http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2016/05/04/republicans-confirm-merrick-garland-asap./

Quote
Republicans must know that there is absolutely no chance that we will win the White House in 2016 now. They must also know that we are likely to lose the Senate as well. So the choices, essentially, are to confirm Garland and have another bite at the apple in a decade, or watch as President Clinton nominates someone who is radically more leftist and 10-15 years younger, and we are in no position to stop it.

In fact, if I were the Republicans, my main concern right now would be that Barack Obama would withdraw Garland’s nomination today. The fact that Merrick Garland still exists as an option right now is a gift that should not be squandered.

The calculus has changed – confirm Merrick Garland before it is too late.


If Obama did withdraw Garland, could the Senate confirm him anyway and claim the president can't withdraw nominees? Could we have another long court battle on our hands?
97  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Did anyone notice that Sanders beat Clinton in Indiana? on: May 04, 2016, 11:43:03 am
It's about as meaningful as Hillary winning some primaries late 8 years ago.
98  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Free Trade on: May 04, 2016, 11:38:07 am
Free trade all the way, assuming there's no cheating and both countries have reasonable environmental standards.
99  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: What effect will Trump's anti-vaxxer beliefs have on the election? on: May 04, 2016, 07:56:21 am
There's still a good number of stupid people and celebrities who believe in and spread this nonsense around, so it won't be devastating to him. It pales in comparison to most everything else he's said and done.

I'm not so sure about that. There is currently a measles outbreak (!) in Memphis thanks to unvaccinated children going on right now -- these parents may not have based their horrible decisions exclusively on Trump's "advice," but Trump has endorsed the anti-vaccine movement in Twitter and during one of the debates.

It's one thing to say mean things about Muslims/Mexicans/women/etc., it's another thing to be indirectly culpable (though not nearly as much so as the parents) in the preventable deaths of children, which are assured to happen if they haven't already.

The thing is, anti-vax hysteria cuts across party lines, so I doubt Clinton herself will try to make an issue out of this, when Trump presents enough other targets that are more clearcut electoral winners for her.  I think criticism of Trump on vaccinations is more likely to come from outside agents, so we'll have to see how much media attention such people get.

No, it really doesn't. In all these states that have been debating "vaccine rights" lately, whether it's going from crazy to sane like CA, or from sane to crazy like MS almost did, it's been almost entirely down party lines, or at least all of the Democrats and a few Republicans on the sane side.

I don't deny that there are probably a few liberal anti-vaxxers out there, but they're probably Sanders/Never Hillary types if they're not Greens or Peace & Freedom Party types.


ETA: PPP has asked the question, and sure enough, Republicans are more likely to be anti-vaxxers. And these numbers were done several years ago, so the gap is probably a lot wider now that Trump is explicitly telling his supporters not to vaccinate.
100  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: What effect will Trump's anti-vaxxer beliefs have on the election? on: May 03, 2016, 11:56:29 pm
There's still a good number of stupid people and celebrities who believe in and spread this nonsense around, so it won't be devastating to him. It pales in comparison to most everything else he's said and done.

I'm not so sure about that. There is currently a measles outbreak (!) in Memphis thanks to unvaccinated children going on right now -- these parents may not have based their horrible decisions exclusively on Trump's "advice," but Trump has endorsed the anti-vaccine movement in Twitter and during one of the debates.

It's one thing to say mean things about Muslims/Mexicans/women/etc., it's another thing to be indirectly culpable (though not nearly as much so as the parents) in the preventable deaths of children, which are assured to happen if they haven't already.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 605


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines