Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 27, 2016, 08:51:42 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Election 2016 predictions are now open!.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 64 65 66 67 68 [69] 70 71 72 73 74 ... 343
1701  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Republican Bayou/Cauci Saturday election results thread (first results @3pm ET?) on: March 05, 2016, 03:28:41 pm
Honestly, Maine was always seen as the safest trump state tonight, with a Cruz victory in Kansas likely and Kentucky and Louisiana as longshots for the Cruz campaign (which I think they still are, unfortunately). It's hard to say which would be more favorable, since LA is better geographically (notably the border with LA was one of Cruz's strongest areas of Texas) while KY is a caucus, and he's always showed strength in caucuses.
1702  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Republican Bayou/Cauci Saturday election results thread (first results @3pm ET?) on: March 05, 2016, 03:08:29 pm
Looks like trump is collapsing among his New England base. Sad!
1703  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: So much for the Rubio-Cruz alliance on: March 05, 2016, 02:33:32 pm
The establishment will support trump before Cruz

Nah. There was some thought of this happening because of Vichy types in IA, but it's been decisively disproven since then. The establishment prefers real American patriot Ted Cruz.

Quote from: Mitt Romney date=March 3, 2016
If the other candidates can find some common ground, I believe we can nominate a person who can win the general election and who will represent the values and policies of conservatism. Given the current delegate selection process, that means that Id vote for...Ted Cruz or whichever one of the other two contenders has the best chance of beating Mr. trump in a given state.

Anyway, I suspect that the point of the Cruz effort in FL is to deny trump votes that would always vote for trump over Rubio but might consider Cruz otherwise. It's been demonstrated that Cruz is stronger in southern rural areas than Rubio; having a targeted effort in the state could really hurt the trump effort in the state.
1704  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: What is Cruz's realistic ceiling? on: March 04, 2016, 10:44:00 pm
Cruz is no further right of the median in this country than candidates that have been elected in the past. His ceiling is probably slightly lower than a "typical" GOP ceiling; he might be a tad weaker in the Great Lakes states. So, 2004 plus PA, minus NM. A more typical Republican ceiling might also include NH and WI.
1705  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Do you believe in death penalty being a deterrent? on: March 04, 2016, 10:38:01 pm
No but I support it for other reasons.

This. Feels sickening to quote you two.

Because killing people feels so good?

No. Because prisons should be a place for rehabilitation, not for terrible criminals to live meaningless, terrible lives paid for by the government (or even worse companies, in some places); and because I believe the just penalty for certain premeditated murders, and crimes when the lives of a large number of people are intentionally ruined, is death.
1706  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Romney SLAMS Trump; first excerpts from speech on: March 04, 2016, 07:27:45 pm
Frankly, while this a pretty forceful speech, I don't see how the establishment former nominee slamming Trump necessarily hurts him. Maybe it does, but I don't really think it will.

The attacks are working; Trump isn't getting the delegates he needs to win the nomination outright, which is the bottom line.

Anyone to insults George W. Bush over 9/11 while praising Putin isn't winning the GOP nomination. That would be like Margaret Thatcher winning the Labour Party nomination.

You're delusional.

You're not capable of math. March 15 could very well be trump's last chance to turn this race around.

Trump will be your nominee. I'm sorry.

Pretty sure Gary Johnson will be my nominee; my avatar is what TV Tropes might call an Artifact. I've just come to the 2016 subforum in order to correct a frightening epidemic of mathematical illiteracy.
1707  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 2016 Primary/Caucus Results by County on: March 04, 2016, 07:26:24 pm
Fantastic work, Griffin! It's appreciated, & keep it up!
1708  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: The Secret Trump Voters: the silent majority speaks out on: March 04, 2016, 07:24:52 pm
I wonder if the guy supporting trump solely because he opposes HB1 visas changed his mind after last night. Most likely.

I believe the depth and breadth of Trump voters is much larger than folks realize. There's a reason why it's called a "secret ballot" - nobody need know who you vote for, so like the article points out, people in demographic groups that normally would side with Clinton are rethinking their options, and for a variety of reasons.

The actual elections, in which trump consistently underperforms, occasionally by double-digits, do not agree with you.

You can't possibly be serious. The caucuses are obvious and fully expected, but Trump performs right in line with his poll numbers in all seriously polled primaries. I liked the trump shtick, but now you are delving into stupidity.

Off the top of my head, trump significantly underperformed expectations in Vermont, Virginia, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Texas, all of which were primaries (along with every caucus so far conducted, except for some reason Nevada). That's roughly half of all contests that have occurred to date, with trump performing pretty much in line with polling expectations in the other half. Underperforming in half of all contests and never overperforming is a pretty consistent pattern to my mind.

And thank you for your compliment of my trump shtick. I highly encourage the Silent (but rapidly Awakening) Majority of trump's opponents to adopt it.

In that case, you're comparing to unrealistic ironic supporter fantasies than to real polling. Morning Consult's heat map effectively in line with VT. Trolls like Torie believed Trump wouldn't win Arkansas because THE POLLS. I'm pretty sure he hit his Virginia numbers exactly, Rubio just outperformed.

I'm not sure I took a close look at Oklahoma before hand. If there were any polls he underperformed, I'd chalk it up to it being a closed primary which forced many of his voters to go to Sanders instead.

I was mostly looking at the numbers by margin, since that's more typically how polls are judged. Cruz was supposed to win Texas by 9; he won by 17. trump was supposed to win Virginia by 15; he won by 2. trump was supposed to win Oklahoma by 11; he lost by 6. trump was supposed to win Vermont by 15; he lost by 2. trump did do a bit better than the averages in Alabama and Massachusetts, where he overperformed by 4, but that pales in comparison to his failings.

If you look at the percents he receives, though, they're usually more accurate. But standing alone the percentage a candidate receives doesn't tell us very much about the result. 35% in a 2-candidate race and 35% in a 4-candidate race are very different performances, for instance.

trump also underperformed the expectations of betting markets; he was supposed to win every state but Texas, I believe, a feat which he didn't even come close to.
1709  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump reverses position on torture, killing terrorists' families on: March 04, 2016, 07:17:05 pm
I like how the anti-TRUMP trolls are trying to paint this as a bad thing.  Also love the Sandernistaesque idea that politicians should never change their views lol

We're not saying it's a bad thing

Speak for yourself, I'm saying it's a bad thing. Politicians should not flip-flop on the issues they are most closely associated with when the direction the wind blows from changes.

We're not saying it's a bad thing, this is a good thing if he is sincere about actually giving up an extreme-right position on an issue like this and moving into sensible territory. But on the other hand it makes him look like a flip-flopper much like Romney.

I don't really understand how being a "flip-flopper" is a bad thing.  I prefer my politicians to be responsive to the wishes of the general population and willing to admit when they are wrong.

On the extreme off-chance that trump is elected, you'll find out exactly why flip-flopping is a bad thing.

Step by step Trump will drop the extreme positions he took in the primary. Backing off from deporting all undocumented is coming. Same thing with the Muslim ban. 

Romney was mocked for the "Etch-A-Sketch" reset, but he never really did pivot and what pivoting he did, he did very late.  By the California primary Trump will be well on his way to transitioning to Mr. Moderate. Will general election voters buy it? That remains to be seen.

trump has not yet won the nomination, and many of the votes he has won so far he won through bloodthirstiness. This will demotivate his primary supporters -- and at a time in mid-March when the nominating contest is in full swing and he desperately needs them.

The GOP delegate races passes the halfway point in less than 2 weeks. It enters the fourth quarter in mid April with the last set of delegates dominated by 'blue' states like NY, PA, CT, DE, MD, RI, WA, OR, NM...and last but very much not least, CA.  His transition away from the dark side will mostly take place during this period so he can go into the con as a 'uniter'...this will be even more important if it is a contested con as he has to convince delegates he can compete in the general.

Republican voters in these states are still very conservative, however. (Note that polling from early January showed Cruz winning California, and we know trump has never overperformed in any primary poling). trump could do well in the Northeastern ones, but those are mostly proportional states, and we know those are bad for him. Trying to pivot will cost him vital delegates and make it likelier for us to take him to Cleveland. 
1710  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: The GOP Convention & You. on: March 04, 2016, 06:39:19 pm
Well, I happen to live not far outside of Cleveland. A friend of mine with some connections to the state party is trying to get the two of us access into the Quicken Loans Arena so we can watch the inevitable clusterfuсk and heckle some politicians in person, but I don't know how realistic that idea is. In principle, though, the Q seats more than 20,000 people, and not all of them can be delegates and politicians, so I'm hopeful.
1711  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: MI: PPP - Trump 42 Cruz 20 Kasich 18 Rubio 14 on: March 04, 2016, 06:14:54 pm
This isn't a bad poll for trump by any means, since the hope that one of his opponents will fall under the threshold is maintained and no opponent is breaking out to possibly challenge for state wins elsewhere, but unless undecideds behave very weirdly here it looks like all three will make it, resulting in a majority of delegates going to anti-trump campaigns, putting him further away from the nomination.
1712  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump reverses position on torture, killing terrorists' families on: March 04, 2016, 06:11:32 pm
Step by step Trump will drop the extreme positions he took in the primary. Backing off from deporting all undocumented is coming. Same thing with the Muslim ban. 

Romney was mocked for the "Etch-A-Sketch" reset, but he never really did pivot and what pivoting he did, he did very late.  By the California primary Trump will be well on his way to transitioning to Mr. Moderate. Will general election voters buy it? That remains to be seen.

trump has not yet won the nomination, and many of the votes he has won so far he won through bloodthirstiness. This will demotivate his primary supporters -- and at a time in mid-March when the nominating contest is in full swing and he desperately needs them.
1713  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: The Secret Trump Voters: the silent majority speaks out on: March 04, 2016, 06:09:29 pm
I wonder if the guy supporting trump solely because he opposes HB1 visas changed his mind after last night. Most likely.

I believe the depth and breadth of Trump voters is much larger than folks realize. There's a reason why it's called a "secret ballot" - nobody need know who you vote for, so like the article points out, people in demographic groups that normally would side with Clinton are rethinking their options, and for a variety of reasons.

The actual elections, in which trump consistently underperforms, occasionally by double-digits, do not agree with you.

You can't possibly be serious. The caucuses are obvious and fully expected, but Trump performs right in line with his poll numbers in all seriously polled primaries. I liked the trump shtick, but now you are delving into stupidity.

Off the top of my head, trump significantly underperformed expectations in Vermont, Virginia, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Texas, all of which were primaries (along with every caucus so far conducted, except for some reason Nevada). That's roughly half of all contests that have occurred to date, with trump performing pretty much in line with polling expectations in the other half. Underperforming in half of all contests and never overperforming is a pretty consistent pattern to my mind.

And thank you for your compliment of my trump shtick. I highly encourage the Silent (but rapidly Awakening) Majority of trump's opponents to adopt it.
1714  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Gawker - leaked voicemails show Trump in bed with liberal media on: March 04, 2016, 05:49:06 pm
These were all the way from 2012 so this is a non-issue.

So? The anti-trump powers that be will make it an issue. We run this country.
1715  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump reverses position on torture, killing terrorists' families on: March 04, 2016, 05:31:42 pm
What's hilarious is that not only does trump have no policies, he clearly has no idea what's made his campaign remotely successful. He just repeats whatever the voices in his head that predominate at a given moment are saying.
1716  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: First state where Trump gets Majority? on: March 04, 2016, 05:24:43 pm
Well, if he ever clears the 50%-delegate threshold, he'll get a majority of the voters in the next reasonably pro-trump state after that. If that doesn't happen, I think he's exhausted his best opportunities already (MA, AL), but some chance does exist in Mississippi.
1717  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: LA-University of New Orleans: Trump+12 on: March 04, 2016, 05:22:29 pm
Rubio and Kasich plunging as the voters of Louisiana and across the country heed Romney's call to vote strategically. Still uncertain whether it'll be enough in this state, though.

I'm so embarrassed that you think that.

Lolz. Do you think Rubio and Kasich are going to do well in Louisiana and crush their competition? Do you not notice the decline in their standing compared with other LA polling? Do you think Mitt Romney's speech was targeted at trump voters? Of course it wasn't, the man's not stupid. He knows he inflamed them more with that speech, but now that it's been conclusively demonstrated that they're a minority of the party it doesn't matter.

The speech was targeted at people who are loyalist enough to the establishment that they continue to support Rubio/Kasich -- which is to say, Mitt Romney fans. He told them, in no uncertain terms, to vote strategically, and in Louisiana that means for Cruz. (Of course, it hasn't been just Romney doing this; over the past week, there's been a pretty great movement from the anti-trump crowd onto the strategic-voting bandwagon, which the candidates have clearly been abetting. It wouldn't be effective if it were just Romney, but he's an effective symbol for these people).

The question is whether it'll be enough. I suspect not; there's probably early voting going on and Cruz is a poor enough fit for the people who are still fans of Romney that some won't vote, or will pick Rubio/Kasich, anyway. But even in trump's strongest Southern state, Alabama, he only won 43% of the vote. The votes are there for this to be done; all that's left is to see whether it will be.

For the record, KY and ME are probably safe for trump in spite of the motion I describe; neither state has a single conclusive anti-trump candidate like LA does. What's left is just to see the margins and relative standings, though I suspect those will be telling of certain things.

Rubio is going down because HIS campaign stinks, not because Romney is some kind of god damn genius. Kasich's numbers aren't really up or down in Louisiana - he never really had a shot there anyway.

By the way, Romney got booed at the debate when his name was mention, and this was an audience that obviously did not favor Trump. Republicans, by and large, did not like Romney's speech.

Rubio is only going down in the places where a different clear anti-trump candidate exists. Where it doesn't, his support hasn't shifted (see the poll in Kentucky that showed him in second). Anybody who left because Rubio's not running the greatest of campaigns left a long time ago -- before NH, probably. Since then, his only losses have been tactical.

Romney got booed because the trump supporters, libertarians, and evangelical types (Cruz supporters, for short) all don't like him, and they make up a fairly large majority of the party all together. Guess what: the latter two groups don't like trump either. The election is not between him and Romney. Romney getting booed doesn't matter because the speech was not directed at the people who booed Romney. The point was to convince Rubio/Kasich voters to vote for the most plausible anti-trump. We're about to see how well it works.

If Trump loses, that wouldn't be because of Romney lol lol

Not entirely, no. But Romney is playing his part.

That Kentucky poll was from before the Romney speech you ingrate, and before Super Tuesday, whose results were pretty brutal for Marco.

Breathe, Maxwell, breathe. You can do it. You can breathe. I know it's hard. But you can breathe.

Anyway, my point about the Kentucky poll is that there has been no decline in support for Rubio since before New Hampshire except in states where there is a clear alternative to trump who is not Rubio (of which Kentucky is not one). Thus, the fact that it was conducted before Super Tuesday shouldn't matter, because in Kentucky there has not been appreciable movement since long before Super Tuesday.

Sure, the Super Tuesday results were pretty brutal for Marco, but so were New Hampshire and Nevada. What on earth would cause people to stick through those defeats but then decide Super Tuesday was too much? Super Tuesday could not have caused any significant depreciation in Rubio's support because anyone who would've been convinced by those results to leave had already left.
1718  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Election Scenario: Brokered GOP Convention; Trump Runs Third Party on: March 04, 2016, 04:51:20 pm
Romney wins ID, UT, WY, the Dakotas, NE-1, NE-3, Nebraska statewide. trump wins OK, KY, WV. Hillary sweeps the rest of the country.

I still see the argument for someone other than Cruz winning a contested convention as problematic, however.
1719  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: LA-University of New Orleans: Trump+12 on: March 04, 2016, 04:44:50 pm
Rubio and Kasich plunging as the voters of Louisiana and across the country heed Romney's call to vote strategically. Still uncertain whether it'll be enough in this state, though.

I'm so embarrassed that you think that.

Lolz. Do you think Rubio and Kasich are going to do well in Louisiana and crush their competition? Do you not notice the decline in their standing compared with other LA polling? Do you think Mitt Romney's speech was targeted at trump voters? Of course it wasn't, the man's not stupid. He knows he inflamed them more with that speech, but now that it's been conclusively demonstrated that they're a minority of the party it doesn't matter.

The speech was targeted at people who are loyalist enough to the establishment that they continue to support Rubio/Kasich -- which is to say, Mitt Romney fans. He told them, in no uncertain terms, to vote strategically, and in Louisiana that means for Cruz. (Of course, it hasn't been just Romney doing this; over the past week, there's been a pretty great movement from the anti-trump crowd onto the strategic-voting bandwagon, which the candidates have clearly been abetting. It wouldn't be effective if it were just Romney, but he's an effective symbol for these people).

The question is whether it'll be enough. I suspect not; there's probably early voting going on and Cruz is a poor enough fit for the people who are still fans of Romney that some won't vote, or will pick Rubio/Kasich, anyway. But even in trump's strongest Southern state, Alabama, he only won 43% of the vote. The votes are there for this to be done; all that's left is to see whether it will be.

For the record, KY and ME are probably safe for trump in spite of the motion I describe; neither state has a single conclusive anti-trump candidate like LA does. What's left is just to see the margins and relative standings, though I suspect those will be telling of certain things.

Rubio is going down because HIS campaign stinks, not because Romney is some kind of god damn genius. Kasich's numbers aren't really up or down in Louisiana - he never really had a shot there anyway.

By the way, Romney got booed at the debate when his name was mention, and this was an audience that obviously did not favor Trump. Republicans, by and large, did not like Romney's speech.

Rubio is only going down in the places where a different clear anti-trump candidate exists. Where it doesn't, his support hasn't shifted (see the poll in Kentucky that showed him in second). Anybody who left because Rubio's not running the greatest of campaigns left a long time ago -- before NH, probably. Since then, his only losses have been tactical.

Romney got booed because the trump supporters, libertarians, and evangelical types (Cruz supporters, for short) all don't like him, and they make up a fairly large majority of the party all together. Guess what: the latter two groups don't like trump either. The election is not between him and Romney. Romney getting booed doesn't matter because the speech was not directed at the people who booed Romney. The point was to convince Rubio/Kasich voters to vote for the most plausible anti-trump. We're about to see how well it works.

If Trump loses, that wouldn't be because of Romney lol lol

Not entirely, no. But Romney is playing his part.
1720  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Opinion of Semi-direct Democracy? on: March 04, 2016, 04:19:45 pm
Tends to be HS in practice as a process extremely vulnerable to demagoguery.
1721  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: LA-University of New Orleans: Trump+12 on: March 04, 2016, 04:17:03 pm
Rubio and Kasich plunging as the voters of Louisiana and across the country heed Romney's call to vote strategically. Still uncertain whether it'll be enough in this state, though.

I'm so embarrassed that you think that.

Lolz. Do you think Rubio and Kasich are going to do well in Louisiana and crush their competition? Do you not notice the decline in their standing compared with other LA polling? Do you think Mitt Romney's speech was targeted at trump voters? Of course it wasn't, the man's not stupid. He knows he inflamed them more with that speech, but now that it's been conclusively demonstrated that they're a minority of the party it doesn't matter.

The speech was targeted at people who are loyalist enough to the establishment that they continue to support Rubio/Kasich -- which is to say, Mitt Romney fans. He told them, in no uncertain terms, to vote strategically, and in Louisiana that means for Cruz. (Of course, it hasn't been just Romney doing this; over the past week, there's been a pretty great movement from the anti-trump crowd onto the strategic-voting bandwagon, which the candidates have clearly been abetting. It wouldn't be effective if it were just Romney, but he's an effective symbol for these people).

The question is whether it'll be enough. I suspect not; there's probably early voting going on and Cruz is a poor enough fit for the people who are still fans of Romney that some won't vote, or will pick Rubio/Kasich, anyway. But even in trump's strongest Southern state, Alabama, he only won 43% of the vote. The votes are there for this to be done; all that's left is to see whether it will be.

For the record, KY and ME are probably safe for trump in spite of the motion I describe; neither state has a single conclusive anti-trump candidate like LA does. What's left is just to see the margins and relative standings, though I suspect those will be telling of certain things.
1722  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Christie recall? on: March 04, 2016, 03:33:32 pm
Disliking the candidate he supports is no grounds for a recall.  Dream on, liberals.

It's not just liberals anymore, Oldies. The whole state despises Christie with one voice.
1723  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: LA-University of New Orleans: Trump+12 on: March 04, 2016, 03:30:56 pm
Rubio and Kasich plunging as the voters of Louisiana and across the country heed Romney's call to vote strategically. Still uncertain whether it'll be enough in this state, though.
1724  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Jim Webb: I won't vote for Clinton, but I may for Trump Politico on: March 04, 2016, 03:29:25 pm
How stupid are the people of Virginia for voting for this loser over George Allen?

So, you're slanderously accusing TRUMP of being racist, yet you would rather have had an actual racist in the Senate than Jim Webb?

Would I rather have someone who used a racial slur once (who aligns with me on essentially all foreign-policy and economic matters) or someone pointlessly enabling an actual racist for the sake of their own ego? Easy decision.

You should really read about Allen's history before making another white noise here.

Also, as much as I dislike Trump and what he stands for, supporting or opposing him was hardly an issue in 2006.

He lost because he used a racial slur once, yes. Other instances were not widely publicized (though they certainly happened, I'm not denying that).

trump wasn't an issue at all in 2006, of course, but he is now in 2016, and certainly the people in Arlington County and other heavy-Webb areas outside of low-population Appalachia (ie, the places that gave him the victory) are regretting their votes now.
1725  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Jim Webb: I won't vote for Clinton, but I may for Trump Politico on: March 04, 2016, 03:22:36 pm
How stupid are the people of Virginia for voting for this loser over George Allen?

So, you're slanderously accusing TRUMP of being racist, yet you would rather have had an actual racist in the Senate than Jim Webb?

Would I rather have someone who used a racial slur once (who aligns with me on essentially all foreign-policy and economic matters) or someone pointlessly enabling an actual racist for the sake of their own ego? Easy decision.

Not only is it an easy decision, I'm confident a majority of Webb-'06 voters would take George Allen over anyone endorsing trump. Bet Arlington County is regretting that >70% for Webb vote right about...now.

How stupid are the people of Virginia for voting for this loser over George Allen?

Voting for a racist douchebag would be smart?

k

hells yeah bruh
Pages: 1 ... 64 65 66 67 68 [69] 70 71 72 73 74 ... 343


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines