Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 30, 2016, 10:36:40 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 326
51  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Republican National Convention **live commentary thread** on: July 20, 2016, 09:28:41 pm
https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/status/755950042146484225

Quote
Two sources tell me Trump team actively whipped the “boos” at the end of Cruz speech


If they did, they are idiots.

The "if" is unnecessary here
52  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Republican National Convention **live commentary thread** on: July 20, 2016, 08:55:22 pm
Going to drop by as the guy who was probably Ted Cruz's biggest backer on this forum for a month ago to say that this speech is fantastic, he had my support earned, and I hope he will be part of the conversation in 2020
53  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Ted Cruz would run in 2020 even if Trump is president, RNC official says on: July 20, 2016, 07:20:14 pm
LOL, what a loser. Rafael Eduardo desperately wants another crushing defeat against Big Don.

Because the media handed the GOP nomination to Trump overturning the will of the grassroots voters who supported the true Republican candidate Ted Cruz.

Pretty sure the voters supported Trump in a landslide.

By that definition Ted Budd won a primary landslide too.
54  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Question for Never Trump Republicans on: July 19, 2016, 12:12:57 am
Hillary is going to win, and yes she'll be a bad President.  However, Trump is damaging my party beyond repair, and it's plssing me off.  Many of Trump's supporters just want an outlet to be bigots and be proud of it and couldn't care less about the Republican Party.  I will be voting for Johnson.

I love that you insist on calling it "your" party as though you and the ten people who like Jeb! Bush have some birthright to overrule the millions of Trumpists and those who at least view Trump as acceptable.

All you ever do is complain about 99% of what the Republican Party says and does anyway. It's not 1957 anymore - there's no "social elite" status conferred on you by being a Republican.

It belongs to the 56% (really greater, since he was unopposed in the last 10 states; somewhere in the mid-'60s) that voted against Trump; we are the alliance of Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich and so on. Your constant repetition of the "millions for Trump" ignores the many more millions against him. So long as Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell are still leaders of our congressional delegations, and we can elect economic conservatives like Matt Bevin in populist states like Kentucky, it is indeed still our party.

Those who view Trump as acceptable is a much smaller number than those voting for Trump. There is a large number who simply view him as less unacceptable than Hillary Clinton.

And, lastly, I'm voting for Gary Johnson (though I'm sure everyone here knew that).

Why couldn't you get millions more on your side, then?

If there were 13M votes for Donald Trump and 16M for the others, why couldn't any of the others bring any more people to their side to vote against Trump?

Unfortunately, the candidates who were capable of appealing to all of those 16M (people like Rubio or Walker, on-paper appealing to social and fiscal conservatives) struck out. Once we were down to Trump/Cruz/Kasich, it was always going to be either Trump with his largest chunk and majority bonuses in some states or contested convention.

There are hundreds of millions of Americans who did not vote in the Republican Party at all. If you had even attempted to appeal to any of them, you could have easily outvoted Donald Trump.

This is true, I guess, and it's a fair point, but it doesn't take away from my main point that the people who want Trumpism (as opposed to simply finding it superior to Clintonism, a position I don't hold but can at least understand) are well short of 50% in the party.
55  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will Cruz endorse Trump? on: July 19, 2016, 12:08:35 am
I am sure that probably came as the price for his speaking role.

I am quite confident that Cruz did not pay a price for his speaking role. If anything, the reverse occurred. What does he gain with a speaking role?

Cruz will speak about the need to beat Hillary Clinton, possibly without mentioning Trump.  In the end, he'll state he's "voting for the Republican ticket" or something like that.  He's not going to be like Romney or Rockefeller in 1964 who paid the price for not supporting Goldwater.

Truthfully, I think that the whole #NeverTrump crowd have dug their political graves.  None of these folks will ever be viable Presidential or Vice Presidential candidates, and a number of them will face stiff primaries in the future for their apostasy. 

But neither of them paid a price! Romney was the frontrunner for President for the next three years until he sunk himself with his own gaffes in '67, and Rockefeller rebounded just fine and became Vice President -- a much higher office than Goldwater ever achieved.

And, yeah, so far downballot only Trump supporters are being defeated in primaries. You're still a minority of the party, essentially everywhere.
56  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Question for Never Trump Republicans on: July 19, 2016, 12:04:42 am
Hillary is going to win, and yes she'll be a bad President.  However, Trump is damaging my party beyond repair, and it's plssing me off.  Many of Trump's supporters just want an outlet to be bigots and be proud of it and couldn't care less about the Republican Party.  I will be voting for Johnson.

I love that you insist on calling it "your" party as though you and the ten people who like Jeb! Bush have some birthright to overrule the millions of Trumpists and those who at least view Trump as acceptable.

All you ever do is complain about 99% of what the Republican Party says and does anyway. It's not 1957 anymore - there's no "social elite" status conferred on you by being a Republican.

It belongs to the 56% (really greater, since he was unopposed in the last 10 states; somewhere in the mid-'60s) that voted against Trump; we are the alliance of Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich and so on. Your constant repetition of the "millions for Trump" ignores the many more millions against him. So long as Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell are still leaders of our congressional delegations, and we can elect economic conservatives like Matt Bevin in populist states like Kentucky, it is indeed still our party.

Those who view Trump as acceptable is a much smaller number than those voting for Trump. There is a large number who simply view him as less unacceptable than Hillary Clinton.

And, lastly, I'm voting for Gary Johnson (though I'm sure everyone here knew that).
57  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Excited to say I will be protesting the RNC! on: July 18, 2016, 10:08:51 am
Even MORE excited to say that you will be able to catch me on the realpolitics.us podcast 7-8 PM Monday-Tuesday and 10-11 PM Wednesday-Thursday covering the RNC! Please tune in for some classic Vosemian analysis (whatever your opinion of that is, I suppose)!
58  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: Australian Federal Election- July 2, 2016 on: July 17, 2016, 12:28:13 am
Oh ffs, this still isn't over?

Except for those that reached a quota on Election Night, we still know basically nothing about the Senate composition.
59  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: What's more important: democracy, or liberalism/secularism? on: July 15, 2016, 11:14:12 pm
Definitely the second. Democracy that is nothing but the abusive force of the majority of the nation deserves to be put down with force.
60  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: NBC/WSJ/Marist: Clinton up in CO, FL, NC, VA on: July 15, 2016, 03:24:31 am
The state-level polling numbers all look about right (North Carolina is maybe too favorable for Democrats, but I might just be underestimating the pace of demographic change or Trump's toxicity in certain areas or something). I'm very encouraged by the poll showing Rubio+3 even as Clinton+5 (Burr+7 even as Clinton+6 is even more impressive); polling from all outfits continues to underscore that Republican congressional incumbents are running significantly ahead of Trump, which augurs well both for the elections this year and for future intraparty battles generally. People want Republicanism more than they want Trumpism.
Incumbents have an inherent advantage regardless of party affiliation. Even if people hate Congress, they don't necessarily hate their Congressman. Comparing Trump to an incumbent R is like comparing apples to oranges. Plenty of states will have an incumbent D running for Senate but vote R for President and vice versa.

This is true, but the gaps are not usually that large (+8 and +13, respectively) except for particularly entrenched, long-time, popular Congressmen. In 2012, the Democratic Senators in Ohio and Pennsylvania (both freshmen seeking reelection) overperformed Obama's margin by 3 points each; the Senator from Florida, a long-serving Senator whose opponent collapsed, managed 12 (and in a similar case in Michigan, 10 was achieved). So, the effect that you talk about does exist, but you still wouldn't expect freshmen Senators to achieve these massive gaps of 8 and 13 points.

Also, the only D Senator running for reelection in a state where Trump has even the remotest hope of winning is Michael Bennet in Colorado (though even that is unlikely, even in a Trump victory scenario). Every other D Senator is running in a state that would vote Clinton even if Trump were winning by double-digits nationally. So...no.
61  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Dianne Feinstein officially opposes pot legalization in California on: July 15, 2016, 12:38:26 am
Feinstein is one of the most authoritarian senators, so this is sad, but not surprising.

The good people of California have the chance to elect a real progressive to replace her.

How's that a bad thing? The country would do better with more authoritarianism.

62  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will Pence help or hurt the ticket? on: July 15, 2016, 12:36:15 am
No change. I guess he might help among the hardcore social conservative voters who were for Cruz before the primary process even started, but I have to imagine all the persuadables have gone to Trump already. Might actually marginally hurt in Indiana, but I doubt Trump's losing there outside of a total collapse scenario anyway.

Donald Trump is such a unique figure, and people are so set and decided in their opinions of him, that it's hard to imagine any VP choice really meaningfully helping or hurting.

What about the near 20% undecideds regularly showing in polls?


Most of these are people who have strongly unfavorable opinions of Trump and Hillary. I don't think Pence will help Trump with this group too much; he's not enough of a unique, narrative-changing figure. I see a large number of these people ultimately not voting, another large fraction voting third-party, and then whichever of Hillary or Donald gets a larger number only gains a margin of 1-2%. There will not be a mad rush towards one of the candidates unless the favorables of one of the candidates improve, and that doesn't happen in a negative campaign (which Hillary and Donald both seem intent on waging). So I think in the end that'll be much less relevant than you think.
63  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: NBC/WSJ/Marist: Clinton up in CO, FL, NC, VA on: July 15, 2016, 12:17:55 am
The state-level polling numbers all look about right (North Carolina is maybe too favorable for Democrats, but I might just be underestimating the pace of demographic change or Trump's toxicity in certain areas or something). I'm very encouraged by the poll showing Rubio+3 even as Clinton+5 (Burr+7 even as Clinton+6 is even more impressive); polling from all outfits continues to underscore that Republican congressional incumbents are running significantly ahead of Trump, which augurs well both for the elections this year and for future intraparty battles generally. People want Republicanism more than they want Trumpism.

The NC governor is in a tight race; the CO Sen seat is safe DEM and wait until the FL Dem primary is over before making any proclamations - Rubio below 50 for an incumbent is bad. Same for Toomey in PA.

Gubernatorial elections are dissociated from national ones (Republicans likely winning VT-Gov this year says nothing about the national situation) and national Republicans gave up on the CO race in 2015, so neither of those are too significant.

The "incumbent under 50 will lose" meme is old and tired. Rubio could of course still lose, but a poll showing him up is good news for him and bad news for Murphy. (Just as the poll showing Toomey losing to McGinty is terrible news for Toomey). But even that's not really my point -- my point is that Burr's margin is 13 points ahead of Trump, and Rubio's margin is 8 points ahead. Your Republican congressional incumbents, notwithstanding their free trade votes and Washington insider statuses and other heresies, are running far ahead of Trump. Even if they lose, they'll come much closer to winning than Trump does. That should say a great deal about where the party needs to go in order to win a national election.
64  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: NBC/WSJ/Marist: Clinton up in CO, FL, NC, VA on: July 15, 2016, 12:09:37 am
The state-level polling numbers all look about right (North Carolina is maybe too favorable for Democrats, but I might just be underestimating the pace of demographic change or Trump's toxicity in certain areas or something). I'm very encouraged by the poll showing Rubio+3 even as Clinton+5 (Burr+7 even as Clinton+6 is even more impressive); polling from all outfits continues to underscore that Republican congressional incumbents are running significantly ahead of Trump, which augurs well both for the elections this year and for future intraparty battles generally. People want Republicanism more than they want Trumpism.

Vosem, that can't be right and you know it.

It's obvious the inflated Clinton numbers come from Anti-Trump Republicans. We should give them more time to come home.

I'm not sure it's quite as simple as that (as impressive as Hillary's margins are, her actual percentages are pretty pathetic for a Democratic presidential nominee in July). But even if we do go with that as the explanation, what makes you think currently anti-Trump Republicans are likely to back him in meaningful numbers?

There really doesn't seem to have been any improvement since he received the nomination (he received a bounce, which has since faded) -- he was at 40.5 in the national 2-way polling then, and he is at 40.9 now (I would use the multi-party version, which I think reflects the reality much better, but RCP only started keeping track of it in June). What will Trump do, that he hasn't been doing over the past two months, to get voters like this to back him?

(As an aside, I think you predicted back in April or May that I, as a stalwart of anti-Trump Republicanism, would end up voting Trump in November -- still supporting Johnson here, and still intending to take a few shots and mark Hillary on the ballot if the election seems to be close).
65  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: NBC/WSJ: Fl, VA, CO, NC on: July 14, 2016, 11:52:32 pm
Burr outperforming Trump by 13 and Rubio outperforming Trump by 8 sends a very certain message very loud and clear.

NC Senate is a tough one.

Ross struggling with name recognition, but Burr isn't particularly popular either. She's outraising him too.

Think she may be able to pull a Kay Hagan.

Sure, you might have predictions about how the rest of this campaign will go, and Ross can certainly still win, but I don't think you can spin this poll into anything other than terrible news for her. She's down 7 even as her presidential nominee is up by much more than anyone expected her to be up.

Similarly, while Florida is much closer, this can't be spun as positive news for Murphy.

Murphy is still unknown in Florida. If Clinton carries Florida by over 5, Rubio will struggle with the late deciders against Trump. It's hard to predict exactly what's gonna happen.

The "by over 5" qualifier is unnecessary; if Clinton wins Florida, Rubio will struggle with undecideds. That said, if his margin really is 8 points ahead of Trump's, he really should be fine regardless.
66  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: NBC/WSJ/Marist: Clinton up in CO, FL, NC, VA on: July 14, 2016, 11:46:16 pm
The state-level polling numbers all look about right (North Carolina is maybe too favorable for Democrats, but I might just be underestimating the pace of demographic change or Trump's toxicity in certain areas or something). I'm very encouraged by the poll showing Rubio+3 even as Clinton+5 (Burr+7 even as Clinton+6 is even more impressive); polling from all outfits continues to underscore that Republican congressional incumbents are running significantly ahead of Trump, which augurs well both for the elections this year and for future intraparty battles generally. People want Republicanism more than they want Trumpism.
67  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: A year ago today, did you expect the GOP nominee to be Trump? on: July 14, 2016, 11:14:55 pm
No. Trump wasn't the likeliest individual until after the debate between Iowa and New Hampshire, and the chance of his nomination wasn't greater than 50% until some point in mid-April.
68  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will Pence help or hurt the ticket? on: July 14, 2016, 10:00:06 pm
No change. I guess he might help among the hardcore social conservative voters who were for Cruz before the primary process even started, but I have to imagine all the persuadables have gone to Trump already. Might actually marginally hurt in Indiana, but I doubt Trump's losing there outside of a total collapse scenario anyway.

Donald Trump is such a unique figure, and people are so set and decided in their opinions of him, that it's hard to imagine any VP choice really meaningfully helping or hurting.
69  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Washington Post: NeverTrump is officially dead on: July 14, 2016, 09:56:37 pm
NeverTrump as it pertains to the primary process is dead.  It will be alive and well for the general.
70  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Dubya's dancing at memorial embarasses Laura and Michelle on: July 13, 2016, 05:56:22 pm
Massive FF, as usual.
71  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: VA, CO (Fox): Clinton +7 (VA), +10 (CO) on: July 13, 2016, 05:48:07 pm
Pennsylvania Pennsylvania Pennsylvania
Florida Florida Florida
Ohio Ohio Ohio

Trump could still lose with all 3 of those if Clinton wins NC



280-258 for Hillary

North Carolina won't vote to the left of Florida in 2016. This map is more realistic if we cede FL, OH, and PA to Trump but are still looking for a Clinton victory:



Clinton 271-267. Just because no one knows what Utah is doing and it is not moving in alignment with the nation. Though I still strongly doubt a Trump win in Florida or Pennsylvania, ftr.
72  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: NBC/WSJ/Marist Senate polls IA/ PA/ OH McGinty Leading, Ohio Tied, Grassley +10 on: July 13, 2016, 03:19:55 pm
McGinty 47-44

That's unpleasant

LOL@PA. Junk poll!

What's junk about Toomey running +6 of Trump? You think it's more than that? Unlikely.

I don't believe Clinton +8 will be the case on election day.

Why not?
73  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Who are your family and friends voting for in November? on: July 13, 2016, 01:08:10 am
Most of my immediate family will be voting for Johnson, after supporting Rubio in the primary for the most part. My extended family (who arrived here in the early rather than late 20th century) tend to be flaming liberals, and will mostly transfer from Sanders to Clinton, though one person voted for Stein in 2012 and will presumably therefore be doing so again; she may take some others with her this time. The elderly extended family is pretty solidly in Trump's corner.

A result of Johnson in first and Stein in second for my family is actually decently possible, though this'll depend on who exactly votes and who exactly doesn't.

Among my friends, in the primary there was a split with (counting only those who post about politics; likely to be pretty skewed but whatever) maybe 60% of my Facebook feed being pro-Sanders (essentially all of whom have gone over to Hillary by now; I'm not sure I've ever heard Stein's name outside of family reunions and Atlas); about 30% being vocal Republican #NeverTrumpers (only a very small number of whom have gone to Trump; these have split pretty evenly between no longer speaking about politics or voting for Johnson) and about 10% having been Trumpies from the start (this group skews older, with family friends and whatnot). I'm not sure I knew anyone vocally pro-Hillary during the primary, which is sort of amusing.

Generally speaking, among all my acquaintances, Trump and Hillary are locked in a narrow race among people above about 30 years old. With those below, Hillary has a massive lead, but Johnson supporters definitely outnumber Trump's. I know no one for Johnson over the age of 30 outside of my own family (who were all introduced to his campaign by me). Under 30, it's not a particularly uncommon position to hold. Support for Trump is also generally fairly tied to just "being a Republican" among the over-30 set, while I'd say a majority of self-identified under-30 Republicans have not decided to vote for Trump.
74  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: TX-23: Anzalone-Liszt (D): Rep. Hurd (R) losing rematch on: July 13, 2016, 12:45:05 am
Not surprised, but isn't the PVI of this district R+3? Romney won it 51-48 in 2012.
Yes, but Canseco always manages to overperform.

The GOP should have renominated Canseco in 2014.

You just can't win that district as a Republican unless you get the "Hispanic Surname Bump."

I'm sorry, but this is pretty silly. Canseco lost this district in 2012 with an environment almost certainly better than it will be this year (Romney, who had no Hispanic last name, ran ahead of him and in fact won outright). Hurd won in 2014, as a Republican, without a "Hispanic Surname Bump".

This is the sort of rural, heavily-Hispanic area that is prone to extremely large swings between presidential and midterm elections normally, and where Trump is going to play very poorly and exacerbate that trend even further. I don't think any Republican could've defended this with Trump at the top.
75  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Opinion of Theresa May on: July 12, 2016, 12:43:03 pm
Cautiously optimistic about how this'll go. FF.

Sad that Cameron is done, of course. I was a big fan.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 326


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines