Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 01, 2015, 03:01:17 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 110
151  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Could Hillary be chilled from running? on: August 22, 2014, 12:23:22 pm
2016 is going to be a boring by the numbers predictable election. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. It's sad to say because we all want something to care about, but 2016 is going to put us to sleep.

The Republican primary will be a fun spectacle even if it has nothing to do with who the next president is.
152  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 2016 Republican Nomination Poll - August 2014 on: August 20, 2014, 07:14:06 pm
Why did Bush collapse in this poll this month? Do I get the credit? What happened besides my post in the July thread arguing he had problems?

If so, let me train my sights on Rand Paul's chances this time.

Cruz is better positioned than Paul to end up the strongest insurgent candidate. The Ron Paul libertarians who will likely support Rand, despite Rand's departures from libertarianism, are an enthusiastic but small group of Republicans, smaller than the overlapping subset of the GOP: very conservative Republicans, who will likely find much more they dislike about Paul than Cruz.

It's true that the establishment would open a dam of money to stop Cruz but that's just as true of Paul. Whether it will work against either is an open question.

Regardless, both Cruz and Paul are among the likeliest Republicans to run and should both still rank ahead of people like Walker and Bush who are still solid maybes to run.

Also, why not remove these people from the poll?
Jon Huntsman   
Peter King   
Scott Brown       
Donald Trump       
Condi Rice       
Steve King       
Sarah Palin       
Brian Sandoval
Kelly Ayotte       
Mary Fallin       
Nikki Haley       
Sam Brownback   
Tim Pawlenty
Joe Scarborough       
Jeff Sessions       
Carly Fiorina
Any one of these potential candidates could run and win the nomination. It's a wide open GOP field.

No, it's wide open because there are 10-15 people who might run and could win. But everyone on that list has done nothing to suggest they'd run and/or has no chance in a primary.

As for Rand Paul, you can win with a lot of the base or a lot of the establishment suspicious of you, but both seems very tough to pull off.
153  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If Hillary is the Democrat nominee, who might her VP be? Does it really matter? on: August 20, 2014, 06:24:48 pm
Possible nominees
- Mark Warner
- Martin Heinrich
- Sherrod Brown
- Julian Castro
- Steve Beshear
- Martin O'Malley
- Tim Kaine

All bring something different to the table but does it really matter?
I don't think the VP nominee will really matter unless he/she is a terrible campaigner or is Palin-esque.

But of those choices...
-Warner was sued for sexually harassing his female employee
-Julian Castro in inexperienced
-Steve Beshear, while good, is old and not progressive enough for today's base
-Martin O'Malley is boring and has no vision
-Tim Kaine is just off, I don't trust him

What? When did this happen?

It didn't.

Warner, like Kaine or Gary Locke, is a safe pick. She'll probably go safe in a close race. If her lead is as big as it now is, she can pick a woman (like Murray or Klobuchar) and she'll still win.

VP doesn't matter much.
154  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Rank the top five most likely people to be elected POTUS in November 2016 on: August 20, 2014, 01:03:30 pm
Hillary is 10 times as likely as anyone else to be elected president:

She's almost 100% to be the Democratic nominee.
No Republican is much higher than 10% to be the nominee.
The Democratic nominee is about 60% to win the general.
155  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: NC-PPP: Clinton leads all Republicans on: August 20, 2014, 12:40:45 pm
Huckabee won't even run, much less be the nominee, so...dominating!

I don't think anyone knows what Huckabee will do. Or Bush. Or Walker given the uncertainty of his re-election. And all would have a huge affect on the primaries. That's why this cycle is so hard to predict at this point, and probably will still be even once the field settles. Even Paul who looks certain to run might have to cut things short if his senate seat is at risk. And even Christie might find donors are scared off of him and skip a run.

The margin of error is 3.4%, which means we don't know who is the preferred candidate between Clinton and Huckabee, while Bush and Paul are arguably in a dead heat with her at this point.

in North Carolina.
156  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: FiveThirtyEight: "The Rand Paul Will Win Over Young Voters Myth" on: August 19, 2014, 08:20:37 pm
Rand Paul will do exactly as well against Hillary Clinton as his father did against Barack Obama.
Poll consistently equal with her if not better?

I'm not sure. I don't bother paying attention to how either Paul would do in a general.


Then why even say anything?

Everyone seemed to be implying we'll eventually find out how Paul will do in a general election, so I thought it was worth pointing out no, we never will.
157  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: FiveThirtyEight: "The Rand Paul Will Win Over Young Voters Myth" on: August 19, 2014, 07:26:56 pm
Rand Paul will do exactly as well against Hillary Clinton as his father did against Barack Obama.
Poll consistently equal with her if not better?

I'm not sure. I don't bother paying attention to how either Paul would do in a general.
158  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: FiveThirtyEight: "The Rand Paul Will Win Over Young Voters Myth" on: August 19, 2014, 07:14:16 pm
Rand Paul will do exactly as well against Hillary Clinton as his father did against Barack Obama.
159  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Some GOP evangelicals feel left out, without a standard-bearer on: August 18, 2014, 11:31:52 am
There are about 15 somewhat likely Republican 2016 candidates. I can't think of a single one who has not been pandering to evangelicals.
But if one of them isn't a white evangelical himself, it doesn't count.


(According to them)

Most aren't...

Most are evangelical or, like Ryan and Santorum, Catholic but sound indistinguishable when talking about social issues. The article doesn't support the idea evangelical voters care about race.
160  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Some GOP evangelicals feel left out, without a standard-bearer on: August 18, 2014, 03:21:48 am
There are about 15 somewhat likely Republican 2016 candidates. I can't think of a single one who has not been pandering to evangelicals.
161  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If Pence runs, how would you rate his chances at winning the GOP nomination? on: August 18, 2014, 01:51:30 am
60% is ridiculous.

Hard to predict who runs but Cruz and Perry both seem likely to run and likely to interfere with Pence getting traction. Not to mention Huckabee, Walker or Ryan if 1 or 2 of those run. Plus others comparable to Pence in name recogniton and likely appeal to donors have a shot of momentum. Not far-fetched that he could grab an Iowa or South Carolina win but with likely obstacles I don't think he's better than 10% to win if you start with the assumption he's running. Not sure anyone is though. Bush? Huckabee?
162  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Hillary is an unrestrained warmonger on: August 17, 2014, 01:26:01 am
It appears the Democrat Party has moved into socialite type territory.

Well, if you're going to throw a Democrat party, who better than a socialite to organize it?

If Democrats are the socialite party now, that's one more way Rand Paul is bucking GOP orthodoxy.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/elections/2014/08/12/rand-paul-family-commitment/13972009/
163  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Rand Paul writes TIME op-ed on Ferguson MO/police militarization on: August 16, 2014, 05:53:46 pm
I liked it and this is great, but it's also derailing his nomination chances. A twitter search for Rand #tcot will show you how much the totally-not-racist-at-alls consider him a pandering running-to-the-left opportunist now.

Running to the left got McCain through the primaries (as running to the not-as-extreme right did for Romney.)

McCain didn't run to the left. And unlike Rand Paul will, he didn't have John McCain campaigning against him. Hard to dismiss Rand Paul's chances outright but there's also not a lot of reason to think he'll get very far.
164  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Found the last time FiveThirtyEight ran a simulation with Clinton as Dem nomine on: August 16, 2014, 03:12:25 pm
This was right as or after the primary ended. There was a lot of resentment between their supporters. (Remember PUMAs?) That's reflected in these maps but it was never going to last after Obama and Hillary inevitably made up. Obama wouldn't have won 365 electoral votes without the financial collapse but he still was always going to do way better than this map. Also, totally irrelevant for 2016.
165  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Rick Perry indicted on abuse of power on: August 16, 2014, 03:01:30 pm
I don't believe this one will be particularly harmful. The belief that the following prosecutor should resign after her arrest for drunk driving does not seem controversial.

I'll take you one further: this will end up helping Perry. What he did isn't just uncontroversial, it'll be applauded, especially by Republican primary voters. Perry can legitimately claim to be unfairly targeted by liberals for the kind of executive behavior they like. And it all would have gone completely unnoticed but for this indictment. This is the DA's oops.
166  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Found the last time FiveThirtyEight ran a simulation with Clinton as Dem nomine on: August 14, 2014, 12:44:51 pm
That looks like it would have been the point where Hillary had her highest unfavorables among Democrats which would have kept her down to 300 electoral votes.
167  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Nate Silver: Hillary does not have a problem on her left on: August 14, 2014, 12:24:19 pm
Warren accepted a request to sign an ostensibly private letter to Hillary encouraging her to run. That's not an endorsement really. Warren probably guessed it was likely to leak to the public but if anything that diminishes it since it's a good bet she just didn't want to invite a media frenzy. (Same with Klobuchar) When asked about Hillary, Warren is generally positive (as is Bernie Sanders) but largely dodges. I'd find Warren endorsing Hillary in a primary more surprising than Warren running herself.
168  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Nate Silver: Hillary does not have a problem on her left on: August 14, 2014, 10:54:26 am
She has a problem with the left. Luckily for her the left is split to all hell (I'd like to see everyone get behind Sanders or Schweitzer myself), and the last progressive upstart is totally behind her.

Warren isn't totally behind Clinton. If she doesn't run herself, I doubt she'd endorse Hillary in a primary against Sanders. (Most likely she wouldn't endorse at all.) If Hillary's the nominee, obviously Warren will endorse or campaign for her.
169  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Threat from Hillary's Left on: August 12, 2014, 09:53:32 pm
Warren or Feingold but given Hillary's huge polling lead, Feingold is more likely to run for his old seat, Warren is more likely to just let Sanders run.

Schweitzer's recent comments have hurt himself, but he may be able to redeem himself.

His gun views are also a big problem in a D primary, as he has admitted.
170  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Do you think Hillary made a good decision criticizing Obama's foreign policy? on: August 12, 2014, 04:52:08 pm
I think people are blowing it out of proportion. If you actually read the interview, she gave a few differences between herself and Obama, but her views were a lot more nuanced than "OBAMA IS A DOVE WIMP WHO HATES AMERICA I AM HAWK HERE ME ROAR". With the way the media and Atlas are reacting you'd think she pulled a Dick Cheney and called Obama a failure.
Icespear, I'm reading the NYT article on her comments, and my god some of these "democrats" are off their rocker.

Common phrases in the comments section:

1) "Hillary stabbed Obama in the back"
2) "She lost my vote"
3) "Neocon"
4) "Warren"

Yeah, those are our party's versions of the Tea Party. The ones who want to nominate Warren/Sanders/etc. fail to see how terribly they would do in the general election, even against a right-wing nutter like Perry or Cruz. Fact of the matter is that the United States is already involved in foreign affairs and have taken it upon ourselves to be "the world's policeman." To just completely abscond from our duties would send the wrong signal to the rest of the world that we no longer care what happens outside our borders, and the U.S. has stakes and interests in pretty much every country around the world.

Based on what though? In the 2008 primary, Hillary's surrogates if not Hillary herself were saying Obama was a huge risk to lose the general election.

I think it's a poor decision, because she's leaving room on her anti-interventionist flank for a potential Republican or Democrat challenge, and Americans are not in favor of more intervention. That being said, people who think Warren is the right challenge for Hillary are totally wrong, because Warren is a cold warrior too.

What's that assessment based on? Warren's problem is more that she's inexperienced in foreign affairs. The same can't be said for Feingold.

The reason this was a bit dumb politically is evident in Axelrod's brushback pitch. The suggestion that we should have armed secular Syrian rebels won't hurt her but blaming Obama's or anyone else's poor judgment for creating a dangerous vacuum in Iraq opens her up to obvious attacks. She's revealed some political blindness this summer, but still not enough for me to think her losing the nomination is likely.
171  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Do you think Hillary made a good decision criticizing Obama's foreign policy? on: August 12, 2014, 12:37:32 pm
It is absolutely crazy to me that some democrats are upset with her comments. Why are they trying to sabotage a very intelligent political calculation on the part of Mrs. Clinton?

Because they're not worried about her losing, they're worried about her winning and implementing a foreign policy they hate.
172  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Who is the most likely person to run for the Dem. nomination besides Clinton? on: August 11, 2014, 10:43:08 pm
Sanders, Schweitzer and O'Malley all sound like they have some willingness to run even knowing they'd lose. And each with their own reason.. Sanders wants to promote his issues and pull Hillary to the left, Schweitzer probably wants to set up a media career and O'Malley would be running for VP. (I bet he wouldn't attack her at all in a primary.) Because Schweitzer's wife is openly opposed to his running, I'd call Sanders and O'Malley 1-2.

173  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Hillary is an unrestrained warmonger on: August 11, 2014, 10:17:09 am
Trying to train, arm secular factions of the Syrian rebels in a civil war that was already breaking out doesn't really make someone an "unrestrained warmonger". Not sure it would have been effective and neither is Hillary, as she admits. Can't see anything in here causing her political problems either.
174  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Remember in 2008 when Hillary won CA, TX, FL, NY, PA, OH, MI & NJ and still lost on: August 10, 2014, 08:23:24 pm
Good times.

 Don't see how that can happen again though

Yeah it's really good in a democracy where the candidate who receives the most votes still loses.

Obama won the most votes without Michigan, where he wasn't on the ballot since he didn't break the DNC rules.

He OPTED to take his name off the ballot and he still received delegates, so your argument is moot. Hey, my name wasn't on the ballot in Michigan, either. Why didn't I receive some delegates? The DNC just assumed that all the "uncommitted" votes cast in Michigan were for Obama and so he got some delegates because of that. It's not really a democracy if all 50 states, DC, and the territories did not get a say. And yes, I would say the same if it had been Idaho, Illinois, or Georgia that had "violated" the DNC "rules." You shouldn't punish the voters because of their state leaders' mistakes.

Hey, don't be mad at the DNC for announcing they would strip Michigan and Florida of their delegates. If they hadn't done that, Obama stays on the Michigan ballot and wins the primary popular vote nationally.

Good times.

 Don't see how that can happen again though

Yeah it's really good in a democracy where the candidate who receives the most votes still loses.

That was a travesty. What was done to Michigan and Florida were a travesty. Pure voter disenfranchisement

They were given delegates in the end. Iowa and New Hampshire probably can't be stripped of their arbitrary privilege unless the parties do it together.

More importantly, what does any of this have to do with 2016? Besides GOP leadership obviously wishing they could restrict their nominating process to the OP's list of all blue states (except Texas).
175  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Hillary is an unrestrained warmonger on: August 10, 2014, 07:50:48 pm
Hillary also defended Netanyahu.

Quote
If I were the prime minister of Israel, youre damn right I would expect to have control over security, because even if Im dealing with [Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud] Abbas, who is 79 years old, and other members of Fatah, who are enjoying a better lifestyle and making money on all kinds of things, that does not protect Israel from the influx of Hamas or cross-border attacks from anywhere else. With Syria and Iraq, it is all one big threat. So Netanyahu could not do this in good conscience, she said.
The comments are by far the opposite what President Obama has said about Netanyahu. In some ways, Bibi is too strong [and] in some ways Abu Mazen is too weak to bring them together and make the kinds of bold decisions that Sadat or Begin or Rabin were willing to make, Obama said during an interview with the NY times Thomans Friedman over the weekend.. Its going to require leadership among both the Palestinians and the Israelis to look beyond tomorrow. And thats the hardest thing for politicians to do is to take the long view on things.

http://jpupdates.com/2014/08/10/hillary-clinton-critics-israels-gaza-op-uncalled-unfair/

Criticizing someone as being too old to be president is probably not a good avenue for her to go down.

I don't think her point is that he's too old to be president. It's that in the near future he'll be out of power soon.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 110


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines