Should Dave make a 2016 presidential election board right now?

[Mr. Morden]

The Presidential Election Trends board is more active than several other "front page" boards on Atlas, like Presidential Election Results and Gubernatorial Elections.  And most of the recent threads there are about the 2016 presidential election.

The 2012 GOP primary race is basically over, and general elections are boring.  We need to look ahead to the next set of presidential primaries, coming up in just 45 months.

[Paul Kemp]

It should probably be a "2016 and Beyond" forum. Some like to get ahead of themselves.

[Frodo]

Can't it wait until at least next year?

[© Tweed the Younger]

not opposed.

[Diabolical Minds Think Alike]

I don't see why not.

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

Just e-mail him.

[Mr. Morden]

Just e-mail him.

I'm not necessarily supporting this yet.  Just canvassing public opinion.  My OP was basically intended to be provocative, to get discussion rolling.

[Senator Napoleon]

It should probably be a "2016 and Beyond" forum. Some like to get ahead of themselves.

Discussion of future presidential elections, maybe?

[Californian Tony]

For God's sake, no. Useless Presidential speculations full of ridiculous hypotheticals while we have absolutely no idea of the candidates, the situation and the trends is the last thing I want to see.

Ideally, next Presidential election boards should be created 2 years ahead of said election and not before.

[So the Heroes Fall]

For God's sake, no. Useless Presidential speculations full of ridiculous hypotheticals while we have absolutely no idea of the candidates, the situation and the trends is the last thing I want to see.

Ideally, next Presidential election boards should be created 2 years ahead of said election and not before.

This. The 2012 forum was an utter trainwreck until about a year ago.

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

Do we really need even more horrible board than 2012?

[Mr. Morden]

For God's sake, no. Useless Presidential speculations full of ridiculous hypotheticals while we have absolutely no idea of the candidates, the situation and the trends is the last thing I want to see.

Except, it's already happening regardless:

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?board=21.0

2016 presidential election will be split off from presidential election trends within the next 7 months or so regardless.  The question is when that should happen.  And no one will force you to read speculation on 2016 now or later.  If you don't like the board, you don't have to visit it.

[BushKenya]

I would say wait until after the conventions and then fire it up.

[Californian Tony]

For God's sake, no. Useless Presidential speculations full of ridiculous hypotheticals while we have absolutely no idea of the candidates, the situation and the trends is the last thing I want to see.

Except, it's already happening regardless:

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?board=21.0

2016 presidential election will be split off from presidential election trends within the next 7 months or so regardless.  The question is when that should happen.  And no one will force you to read speculation on 2016 now or later.  If you don't like the board, you don't have to visit it.

I fear that this would act as an encouragement to useless speculation.

[Paul Kemp]

It should probably be a "2016 and Beyond" forum. Some like to get ahead of themselves.

Discussion of future presidential elections, maybe?

That's not what the title of the forum is though. Trends indicate something completely different.

For God's sake, no. Useless Presidential speculations full of ridiculous hypotheticals while we have absolutely no idea of the candidates, the situation and the trends is the last thing I want to see.

Except, it's already happening regardless:

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?board=21.0

2016 presidential election will be split off from presidential election trends within the next 7 months or so regardless.  The question is when that should happen.  And no one will force you to read speculation on 2016 now or later.  If you don't like the board, you don't have to visit it.

I fear that this would act as an encouragement to useless speculation.

Oh no! On the INTERNET?!?!? We can't have that!

...if you don't like it don't read it. By creating a separate board, it will take the discussion out of other boards.

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

Separate boards slow down the server.  If these speculations are a problem with clutter on the board where they currently are, then start a new forum, but if there's not a big clutter problem, it's best for the server to keep them where they are.

[Grumps]

Separate boards slow down the server.

Cool, let's delete one of yours.  OT sounds good.

[Senator Snowstalker]

Wait until after the 2014 midterms.

[Mr. Morden]

Dave will surely create the 2016 board by November, so whatever slowdown occurs from the extra board will happen then anyway.  The question is about whether he might as well just make it now.

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

Separate boards slow down the server.

Cool, let's delete one of yours.  OT sounds good.

I'd say FC.  At least OT serves some purpose.

[Yelnoc]

Let's push him to update the software before we start fooling around with new boards.

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

Let's push him to update the software before we start fooling around with new boards.

What's wrong with the software?

[Yelnoc]

Let's push him to update the software before we start fooling around with new boards.

What's wrong with the software?

What version of this forum software are you using?  I don't know the name of it, but all of the other sites I have seen using the shell have more features, which makes me think Dave might not have been installing updates.

[Mr. Morden]

*bump*

April may have been too early, but the time is now right.

[BushKenya]

*bump*

April may have been too early, but the time is now right.

I still think we should wait until after the conventions, maybe even October.