U.S. Presidential Election 2016

[Svip]

El Diablo is right. Not Trump nor Carson are going to be the nominee.

 

Polls this far out are meaningless. Currently, pollsters poll registered voters, which is a vastly different group than likely voters (obviously a subset of the former). It's definitely not everyone would can be bothered to turn up at a primary. Also notice how there are so few undecided voters in those polls, that's because right now pollsters cut out undecided voters. According to data, most voters decide 1-2 weeks before their primary. That's still more than a month out.

 

The best way to look for indicators this early in the cycle are the endorsements. Generally speaking, by this point a candidate will have emerged with most endorsements who end up becoming the nominee. Romney in 2012, somewhat McCain in 2008 and definitely Bush in 2000. Sure, there were a few other 'front runners' in 2012, but the party leadership had definitely already decided on Romney.

 

Which leads me to an important point; the party leadership is never going to allow Trump or Carson to be the nominee. Neither party are that beholden to the democratic process of nominating their candidate, and the leadership will definitely intervene if Trump is about to be the nominee.

 

I stand by my statement that Trump is serious about his candidacy, but he is not really a serious contester. His influence will mostly be steering the debate, which he has so far managed in great amount, forcing his opponents to say some ridiculous stuff.

 

This GOP election cycle is more odd than usual, because no candidate has so far emerged as the leadership's preferred choice. 80% of the leadership remains undecided (i.e. haven't endorsed anyone).

 

I'll leave you with this nugget: The last time the Republicans won a US Presidential Election without a Nixon or a Bush on the ticket was in 1928.

Edited November 30, 2015 by Svip

[El Dildo]

El Diablo is right.

 

tell me more...

[Eutyphro]

El Diablo is right. Not Trump nor Carson are going to be the nominee.

 

Polls this far out are meaningless.

Is that only applicable to the GOP, or does Bernie still have a shot? I'm seriously starting to doubt Bernie's chances, because he doesn't seem to be making progress in the south, and in general he seems to be stagnating. At least he brought leftist positions publicity and pulled Hillary to the left though.

[El Dildo]

the Democrats process is fairly distinguished from what the GOP has to endure.

I feel like you can't exactly count Bernie out, despite his non-traditional candidacy. the Democrats leave more room for friendly competition (as compared to the trench warfare you see in Republican debates) and so this leaves the door wide open for Sanders to not only maintain momentum but at least changing the course of our political discussion by introducing a 'new' option for Liberals. if he misses the nod he could still secure a potential VP or cabinet calling.

 

it's hard to say what Bernie himself would actually settle for, but I don't think you can count him out.

the Hillary air-of-inevitability is not necessarily the most lock-tight game in the history of politics. it seems like it's her race to lose, but there's still some interesting speculation about the Clinton camp that will only increase in fervor as we get closer to the election. there's still some things she hasn't really accounted for... and I'm not talking about Benghazi or those stupid emails.

 

I'm talking about her stroke.

Sanders might be the oldest candidate but not by much. you people realize that Hillary is like 70 years old? she's only got the Bern beat by a few years but she's the one with the questionable medical history. after she had her little stroke incident a few years ago, she completely disappeared from the public view for a couple of months. does anyone remember this?? she came back out finally debuting these weird eyepatch glasses.

 

 

they said everything was fine and she seems alright.

but they've never really divulged any information about what exactly was her formal diagnosis or prognosis, for that matter. we don't know what kind of Frankenstein sh/t they pulled on her during those months where she was kept hidden from the public

 

she has more legitimate health concerns than Sanders or Christ Christie as this rate. there are sources trying to report that the Clinton's are attempting to hide an early onset diagnosis of MS (multiple sclerosis). it's going to be a very interesting election.

 

this motherf/cker burns with energy and he's not backing down.

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/11/30/bernie-sanders-makes-it-clear-hes-playing-this-game-to-win/

Edited November 30, 2015 by El Diablo

[make total destroy]

Bernie doesn't have a chance whatsoever.

[El Dildo]

yes I realize that's the easy/lazy answer.

 

and look, I'll be happy to eat my words, but I think it's going to be a little closer than people are giving it credit for...

Edited November 30, 2015 by El Diablo

[make total destroy]

I mean, sure, the guy has a ton of donors, and he has some grassroots support, but his last name ain't Clinton, and he is ideologically at odds with the Democratic party at large. He has about as much of a chance for candidacy as Ron Paul did in '08.

[El Dildo]

the biggest factor is the referendum-nature of the election itself.

...and the female vote.

 

some Democrats will not vote for Sanders [if] simply for the reason that they're afraid of losing the general election on principle.

they'll be afraid to the lose progress that was achieved under the Obama administration, and most people see Hillary as a rubber-stamp approval of the policies of the last 8 years, which they will desperately want to maintain given the insane state of the GOP and its competing policies.

Edited November 30, 2015 by El Diablo

[Skeever]

I haven't really heard anyone discuss Bernie's age, up until recently. McCain was about 72 years old as of January '09, right? Bernie will be 75 come January '17... I honestly don't know if he'd be able to finish one term at his age, let alone two.

Although I still have no doubt that Hillary will get the nomination, I'm sure it'll come close between her and Sanders.

[Dingdongs]

It won't even come close. Sanders really has no broad support. The Obama coalition of African Americans Hispanics and women is all behind Hillary. I'm certain if Hillary implodes then the democrats will find someone else like Cuomo that's in line with the party. They'll like, never really behind Bernie

Edited November 30, 2015 by Irviding

[El Dildo]

I'm not going to argue with you guys that it's Clinton's race to lose.

 

Sanders really has no broad support.

 

but this above statement is patently false...

he has broad support but that doesn't mean it will translate into election-day votes either.

[Dingdongs]

I'm not going to argue with you guys that it's Clinton's race to lose.

 

Sanders really has no broad support.

 

but this above statement is patently false...

he has broad support but that doesn't mean it will translate into election-day votes either.

He doesn't, though. His support is limited to a very small part of the democratic party. The minority voters, along with moderate and conservative democrats all support Clinton in vast numbers. This is an indisputable fact.. in fact I would bet you 10-20 percent of people who support Sanders can't even vote in the democratic primary because they either registered as Republicans to vote for Ron Paul, or aren't registered to a party.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/10/13/bernie-sanderss-big-black-voter-problem/

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/09/upshot/what-the-hispanic-vote-says-about-bernie-sanderss-chances.html

Edited November 30, 2015 by Irviding

[Eutyphro]

I mean, sure, the guy has a ton of donors, and he has some grassroots support, but his last name ain't Clinton, and he is ideologically at odds with the Democratic party at large. He has about as much of a chance for candidacy as Ron Paul did in '08.

 

​Ron Paul started out well in 08, but he got ignored until his popularity died out. With Bernie it is the opposite. He started with nothing and now he is at 30%, 25% behind Clinton, which is similar to 08 Obama around this time. The difference though is that 08 Obama had more growing potential than Bernie has right now. Bernie seems pretty stagnant. Bernie can't be ignored, mainly because the Democratic party has so few candidates. Such an arbitrary circumstance can play a big role.

 

The GOP is very susceptible to propaganda (FOX). Republican popular movements are frightened lower and middle class manipulated by corporate interests into protesting to directly oppose their self interests (the Tea Party). That's clear from how they ended up choosing Mitt, a rich asshole who believes only rich people and corporate entities matter. Trump is a rich asshole as well, but his unique brand of fascism seems to appeal. Just like Ron Paul, Trump has the propaganda against him as well, but the difference is that there's no possibility of ignoring him.. whereas Ron Paul is a pretty mellow guy, so he got ignored.

 

The GOP right now though seems less manipulable than before though. This time it seems that popularity depends on how xenophobic and nonconventional you are. Supposedly that's why Trump recently is going nazi on the topic of islam, because he thought that was where Carson got a popularity boost from (saying a muslim shouldn't be president). But according to you guys neither Trump nor Carson will keep this up, we'll see..

 

 

[Dingdongs]

 

But according to you guys neither Trump nor Carson will keep this up, we'll see.

Not me, I think Trump can keep this up until he gets to the convention and possibly wins their nomination

[El Dildo]

yeah I'm not betting that Bernie is going to win.

I'm betting that it's going to be closer than traditional metrics would otherwise suggest.

 

it is curious though that you give Trump the benefit of the doubt when he also doesn't stand a bats chance in hell of earning the nomination.

Edited November 30, 2015 by El Diablo

[Queen]

It would appear that the GOP is against Trump, but the people want him. Well, not all people, but a decent percentage. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if Trump doesn't get the nomination, but by the same token I wouldn't be surprised if he does get the nomination. He's consistently trumped (lol) my expectations. Just after he's dug his own grave, he seems to crawl back out again. But as so many have said before, it's too early to make accurate predictions. Anything can happen.

Edited November 30, 2015 by Queen

[Eutyphro]

 

he has broad support but that doesn't mean it will translate into election-day votes either.

He doesn't, though. His support is limited to a very small part of the democratic party. The minority voters, along with moderate and conservative democrats all support Clinton in vast numbers. This is an indisputable fact.. in fact I would bet you 10-20 percent of people who support Sanders can't even vote in the democratic primary because they either registered as Republicans to vote for Ron Paul, or aren't registered to a party.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/10/13/bernie-sanderss-big-black-voter-problem/

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/09/upshot/what-the-hispanic-vote-says-about-bernie-sanderss-chances.html

 

 

Bernie's problem doesn't really seem to depend on race, but mainly from the fact that he is not well known among voters, especially minority voters. The fact that it depends on race is a media manufactured bullsh*t story. Neither article you mention gives any data on what black/hispanic voters that know Bernie think of him. I'm afraid though that so many people being unfamiliar with Sanders will eventually make him unable to beat Hillary. And do you have data to back up your claims on "moderate/conservative democrats"?

 

As Gallup has seen at previous points in the campaign this year, Sanders' image is far worse among black Democrats than is Clinton's, as evidenced by his +21 net favorable among this group compared with +89 for Clinton. Sanders' weaker image score among black Democrats is partly a reflection of his lower familiarity rating -- 55% of black Democrats don't know enough about him to rate him. In contrast, 91% are familiar with Clinton

http://www.gallup.com/poll/186551/democrats-positive-views-clinton-improve-debate.aspx?g_source=Election%202016&g_medium=newsfeed&g_campaign=tiles

 

In general, only 64% of democrats are familiar enough with Sanders to rate him. These poll articles seem to be worded as pro Clinton propaganda though.

 

An earlier one:

 

It seems to me that when the familiarity is so low, the favorability is pretty meaningless.

Edited November 30, 2015 by Eutyphro

[make total destroy]

No matter who wins, you still live under the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie B-)

[Fonz]

No matter who wins, you still live under the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie B-)

"If you hate capitalism so much, why do you breathe capitalist oxygen in a capitalist society? Cheka-mate, commies!"

—Liberals, probably

[El Dildo]

No matter who wins, you still live under the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie B-)

...not if the Kenyan antichrist has anything to say about it!

 

[TheGodDamnMaster]

The reason why I don't want Clinton to get the nomination isn't just because it would mean Bernie losing (although I'm definitely not as on-board with his campaign as I was earlier) but because she seems so artificial. I find it hard to believe that the stuff coming out of her mouth is sincere half the time because it probably isn't. Look, I get it, people can change their political stances free of criticism, but it's hard to buy into the sincerity when you've acted according your old beliefs on a topic in the past. I also believe it suspect that the frontrunner for the party that is against rich and powerful assholes is being funded by those same rich and powerful assholes.

Edited November 30, 2015 by TheFoxRiverFugitive

[X S]

It's not so much that Hillary is a liar - all politicians are liars - but it's that she's about as exciting as watching paint dry. Her husband, at least, really knew how to light up an audience and engage his opponents. Hell, many have said that the speech he gave at the 2012 DNC was a huge factor cementing a victory for Obama. So I'll keep banging the drum on presence and appeal. If you have those traits as a politician, you've won half the battle. Unfortunately, Hillary lacks those. At least Bernie knows how to bang on the podium as warn everyone of doom and gloom.

 

Television killed the intellectual politician. Hence, Trump.

 

Donald Trump = Eric Cartman

 

Looks like being a "South Park Republican" is still a thing.

[Spaghetti Cat]

It's not so much that Hillary is a liar, it's that her pantsuits are constantly on fire.

 

 

 

I'll leave you with this nugget: The last time the Republicans won a US Presidential Election without a Nixon or a Bush on the ticket was in 1928.

 

While I can appreciate the point that you were making, dynasties in politics, Mr. Eisenhower, Ford (depending on how you count it), and Reagan would disagree. Unless I'm missing something here...

 

 

E: yep. missed the 'on the ticket' part. tricky wording

Edited December 1, 2015 by Spaghetti Cat

[Dingdongs]

yeah I'm not betting that Bernie is going to win.

I'm betting that it's going to be closer than traditional metrics would otherwise suggest.

 

it is curious though that you give Trump the benefit of the doubt when he also doesn't stand a bats chance in hell of earning the nomination.

He really does stand a shot at winning the GOP nomination, though. Somehow that guy appeals to all sectors of the GOP.... I posted up a Times article on it like a month ago in this thread a few pages back. His support extends far beyond far right wingers.... somehow.

 

Euty, that gallup poll doesn't really discount the articles, though. I'm not convinced that minority voters would be more inclined to vote Sanders if they just knew who he was more. Maybe you can say that about O'Malley but at this point in the cycle, people know who he is. That poll is from July. As for moderate/conservative democrats, yeah, it's in the second article....

[Clem Fandango]

It's not so much that Hillary is a liar - all politicians are liars - but it's that she's about as exciting as watching paint dry.

Your complacency disgusts me.

[Eutyphro]

Euty, that gallup poll doesn't really discount the articles, though. I'm not convinced that minority voters would be more inclined to vote Sanders if they just knew who he was more. Maybe you can say that about O'Malley but at this point in the cycle, people know who he is. That poll is from July. As for moderate/conservative democrats, yeah, it's in the second article....

 

 

In the Gallup poll from this month from the article I posted, only 45% of black Democrats are familiar enough with Bernie to judge him as opposed to 91% with Hillary. I posted the older one, because the new one posts a kind of pro Clinton narrative based on her favorability compared to Sanders, but when you check the older polls with the other candidates you see how silly the favorability stat is when the familiarity stat is so low. It's clear the favorability rating of Sanders among black Democrats isn't very meaningful. Imagine how unmeangful his favorability stat among African-American voters in general is. There's just not much to say about it right now. And the article reports on some kind of surge in Clinton popularity which isn't noticeable in other polling, and is probably within the standard margin of error.

Your second article only talks about conservatives and Obama. I don't see how it is relevant for Bernie. I do think though that Sanders is at his top right now. He is where Obama was in popularity in this moment in the race, but Obama had that 'A Change is Gonna Come' thing going, which gave him sh*tloads of momentum. I don't see momentum like that for Bernie right now to push him any further. I don't think he'll get the surge in familiarity that'll give him a chance to win. He seems to have reached most of the people he can by now, through rallies, debates, news, internet, etc.. Makes me wonder though whether those people who don't know him yet by now are actually going to vote in the primary. They must've been watching the Kardashians all through the campaign cycle, or lived under a rock. It's strange.

Edited December 1, 2015 by Eutyphro

[X S]

Your complacency disgusts me.

 

I love how mad you get.

[Dingdongs]

 

Euty, that gallup poll doesn't really discount the articles, though. I'm not convinced that minority voters would be more inclined to vote Sanders if they just knew who he was more. Maybe you can say that about O'Malley but at this point in the cycle, people know who he is. That poll is from July. As for moderate/conservative democrats, yeah, it's in the second article....

 

 

In the Gallup poll from this month from the article I posted, only 45% of black Democrats are familiar enough with Bernie to judge him as opposed to 91% with Hillary. I posted the older one, because the new one posts a kind of pro Clinton narrative based on her favorability compared to Sanders, but when you check the older polls with the other candidates you see how silly the favorability stat is when the familiarity stat is so low. It's clear the favorability rating of Sanders among black Democrats isn't very meaningful. Imagine how unmeangful his favorability stat among African-American voters in general is. There's just not much to say about it right now. And the article reports on some kind of surge in Clinton popularity which isn't noticeable in other polling, and is probably within the standard margin of error.

Your second article only talks about conservatives and Obama. I don't see how it is relevant for Bernie. I do think though that Sanders is at his top right now. He is where Obama was in popularity in this moment in the race, but Obama had that 'A Change is Gonna Come' thing going, which gave him sh*tloads of momentum. I don't see momentum like that for Bernie right now to push him any further. I don't think he'll get the surge in familiarity that'll give him a chance to win. He seems to have reached most of the people he can by now, through rallies, debates, news, internet, etc.. Makes me wonder though whether those people who don't know him yet by now are actually going to vote in the primary. They must've been watching the Kardashians all through the campaign cycle, or lived under a rock. It's strange.

 

I hear what you're saying, and I will actually even concede that for the majority of the black community, Sanders is a much better champion for getting them out of poverty and fixing their issues. I'm just telling you what the polling shows right now. Black community leaders/pastors/mayors, who have a very big say in mobizilign the black vote, have already all but entirely fallen behind Clinton.

[Eutyphro]

If you follow Bernie's FB page you'll see he does have support among some influential African Americans, and I believe that the better informed African Americans will get on Bernie, the more support he'll get from them. Martin Luther King Jr. was a socialist as well.. He'd support Bernie. Would be crazy if he would beat Hillary and were to run against Carson.. Unlikely scenario though. I especially liked this speech by Dr. Cornel West endorsing Bernie:

[Not A Nice Person]

If you follow Bernie's FB page you'll see he does have support among some influential African Americans, and I believe that the better informed African Americans will get on Bernie, the more support he'll get from them. Martin Luther King Jr. was a socialist as well.. He'd support Bernie. Would be crazy if he would beat Hillary and were to run against Carson.. Unlikely scenario though. I especially liked this speech by Dr. Cornel West endorsing Bernie:

 

 

I hope he gets more recognition in the black community... my sister said she's voting for Hillary just because she's a democrat, not knowing anything about her, that's how dumb undecided voters are.