U.S. Presidential Election 2016

[Dingdongs]

 

 

Good thing he's never going to actually win a presidential election, even if he does by some miracle get nominated.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. You never know what can happen...

I can be fairly sure about it. It's simple mathematics.

 

20% of individuals identify as Republican. 25% of Republicans currently support Trump. Therefore you can infer that trump holds the effective support of about 5% of the American voterate (is that a word? It is now).

 

The pundit who has a 99% success rate at predicting state outcomes in US presidential elections since 2008 has estimated his chance of winning a presidential election as somewhere above zero but below ten percent. I like those odds, as does anyone else who isn't batsh*t insane.

 

This is pretty accurate. The thing with Trump though is that he has both a high ceiling and a high floor.. his share of the polls has not gone above the mid 30s for GOP nominees, but also hasn't dropped below 20% at ANY point in the past 6 months. I don't see him gaining any support in the GOP race but I also do not see him falling out, like, ever. He's going to go to the convention with the delegates he wins, and it's going to be a lot. Joe Scarborough and other GOP insiders that aren't attached directly to the establishment have already said that Trump is going to probably be the nominee per delegates, but that the convention establishment won't allow it and will broker it out to somebody else.

[gooeyhole]

I'm oddly not expecting a great turnout for the Democrats this year. People wanted to go vote for Obama, he was hip, he had young folks attention, but Hillary is just....Hillary. Say it does go down to Trump vs. Clinton...I really believe the people who will turn up to vote for Clinton will do so just to spite Trump. Say what you want about Trump, he has peoples attention, lol. His fans are passionate, to put it lightly. I see them being there on voting day. He isn't a boring candidate with a bunch of political scandals.

 

I can't see him winning it however. The meme magic isn't strong enough yet.

Edited December 9, 2015 by Canadian Badass

[El Dildo]

historically, democrats turn out in less numbers than republicans.

 

part of it has to do with the fact that democrats are not interested in Red Meat.

if they're not fired up about something positive, then they don't get fired up, whereas the republicans tend to get really fired up early on about something negative (usually social issues). the GOP uses fear and anger to stir up momentum and they don't waste any time. they're always pissed off about something; civil rights for minorities, the fact that gay people exist, TERRORISTS MUSLIMS, or whatever.

 

it's just not the in the democrats M-O.

that's not how they operate. they tend to try and fire up their base with something positive, not divisive.

 

by it's very nature this makes it a little more difficult for democrats to get super excited about politics.

compared to the GOP who are forever in a state of agitation as THEIR COUNTRY gets TAKEN AWAY by the LIBERAL AGENDA ARGHHHH!! /rage

[Stephan90]

Unpopular candidates wouldn't be that much of a problem if the election was based on party programs that mirror the consensus of the party members rather than the faces of the presidential candidates who each say somthing different. What does it matter who the face is if it is supposed to be a democracy and not a dictatorship?

Edited December 9, 2015 by Stephan90

[X S]

historically, democrats turn out in less numbers than republicans.

 

That's some real kool-aid level Bernie rhetoric, because I know he has said this many times.

 

You would have been better off making the claim that elderly people are much more politically active, and therefore peddle an agenda irrespective to the needs and demands of the youth. That would be a better way of framing it. But even that claim is baseless because non-voter preference cannot be substantiated, ie. "I didn't vote because X". Therefore, the only real data that might provide some useful insight is the Gallup polls related to party affiliation. It's the Independents that decide elections, something I've said many times, and the numbers support it.

 

® 28% (D) 30% (I) 39%

 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

[Clem Fandango]

Better to say that elderly people read the tabloid gutter press and listen to talk radio and are in a constant state of focused urgency over the Muslim'n Chief. The Republicans are made up of several staunch voting blocks: posh boys, fundamentalist Christians, the aforementioned geezers, and paranoid militia gun nuts. The democrats are made up of everyone that doesn't have some insane agenda to be catered to, so while people who vote democrat might be excited about an issue, there's no mechanism for them to be pandered to in the Democratic party, and little solidarity between the different groups. And it'd be counter productive for the Democrats to champion peoples' issues obviously, the Republicans can only do it because all their voters' concerns are manufactured bullsh*t that they'll never get an answer to.

I'm oddly not expecting a great turnout for the Democrats this year. People wanted to go vote for Obama, he was hip, he had young folks attention, but Hillary is just....Hillary. Say it does go down to Trump vs. Clinton...I really believe the people who will turn up to vote for Clinton will do so just to spite Trump. Say what you want about Trump, he has peoples attention, lol. His fans are passionate, to put it lightly. I see them being there on voting day. He isn't a boring candidate with a bunch of political scandals.

 

I can't see him winning it however. The meme magic isn't strong enough yet.

Canadian 'I am not a neo-nazi' Badass thinks we're convinced he's having a laugh but it's pretty clear he's a Trump supporter.

[gooeyhole]

I like the way he f*cks with the media but I'm fully aware he's not an ideal candidate in the election. He is turning the people around him into jokes, it's pretty much a guarantee Hillary will win. And enough with the neo-nazi stuff, please. Not that I didn't bring it on myself, I apologized for it.

 

And what's wrong with supporting Trump? You're acting like that's illegal, lol. Plus, I can't vote anyway...y'know, the whole Canadian thing.

 

You can't blame a man for buying into a little bit of Trump, I mean Jesus, have you seen the type of candidates we had in our last election? Tommy the commie, a cute guy with an art degree & the corrupt Harper, no party in Canada gives a conservative a sense of hope, lmao.

Edited December 10, 2015 by Canadian Badass

[Dingdongs]

Better to say that elderly people read the tabloid gutter press and listen to talk radio and are in a constant state of focused urgency over the Muslim'n Chief. The Republicans are made up of several staunch voting blocks: posh boys, fundamentalist Christians, the aforementioned geezers, and paranoid militia gun nuts. The democrats are made up of everyone that doesn't have some insane agenda to be catered to, so while people who vote democrat might be excited about an issue, there's no mechanism for them to be pandered to in the Democratic party, and little solidarity between the different groups. And it'd be counter productive for the Democrats to champion peoples' issues obviously, the Republicans can only do it because all their voters' concerns are manufactured bullsh*t that they'll never get an answer to.

I'm oddly not expecting a great turnout for the Democrats this year. People wanted to go vote for Obama, he was hip, he had young folks attention, but Hillary is just....Hillary. Say it does go down to Trump vs. Clinton...I really believe the people who will turn up to vote for Clinton will do so just to spite Trump. Say what you want about Trump, he has peoples attention, lol. His fans are passionate, to put it lightly. I see them being there on voting day. He isn't a boring candidate with a bunch of political scandals.

 

I can't see him winning it however. The meme magic isn't strong enough yet.

Canadian 'I am not a neo-nazi' Badass thinks we're convinced he's having a laugh but it's pretty clear he's a Trump supporter.

this is partly true but elderly voters, especially ones over 70 that are entirely removed from the workforce, are not all a bunch of racist far right Republicans. There are plenty of them that vote Democrat. They just are overrepresented since they have absolutely nothing else to worry about.

[El Dildo]

It's the Independents that decide elections, something I've said many times, and the numbers support it.

yeah I never said anything to the contrary....

 

I dunno what the hell kool-aid you're talking about.

your gallup poll is just about self-idenifitaction, not turnout.

[X S]

 

Better to say that elderly people read the tabloid gutter press and listen to talk radio and are in a constant state of focused urgency over the Muslim'n Chief. The Republicans are made up of several staunch voting blocks: posh boys, fundamentalist Christians, the aforementioned geezers, and paranoid militia gun nuts. The democrats are made up of everyone that doesn't have some insane agenda to be catered to, so while people who vote democrat might be excited about an issue, there's no mechanism for them to be pandered to in the Democratic party, and little solidarity between the different groups. And it'd be counter productive for the Democrats to champion peoples' issues obviously, the Republicans can only do it because all their voters' concerns are manufactured bullsh*t that they'll never get an answer to.

I'm oddly not expecting a great turnout for the Democrats this year. People wanted to go vote for Obama, he was hip, he had young folks attention, but Hillary is just....Hillary. Say it does go down to Trump vs. Clinton...I really believe the people who will turn up to vote for Clinton will do so just to spite Trump. Say what you want about Trump, he has peoples attention, lol. His fans are passionate, to put it lightly. I see them being there on voting day. He isn't a boring candidate with a bunch of political scandals.

 

I can't see him winning it however. The meme magic isn't strong enough yet.

Canadian 'I am not a neo-nazi' Badass thinks we're convinced he's having a laugh but it's pretty clear he's a Trump supporter.

this is partly true but elderly voters, especially ones over 70 that are entirely removed from the workforce, are not all a bunch of racist far right Republicans. There are plenty of them that vote Democrat. They just are overrepresented since they have absolutely nothing else to worry about.

 

 

And juxtapose that with many youg voters, ages 29 and below, who tend to be more liberal but busier with their lives. In 60 to 80 years time, the conservative base will be claiming that robots or the recent alien invaders don't have basic rights. Rinse and repeat.

 

Well, maybe not that soon, but that day will come.

[X S]

yeah I never said anything to the contrary....

 

 

I dunno what the hell kool-aid you're talking about.

your gallup poll is just about self-idenifitaction, not turnout.

 

 

You're right, I'm confusing the two, but oddly enough, turnout increased from '08 to '12 among women and independents, and it's difficult to say that if more self-identifiable Democrats just voted that it might have altered the results. Congress is still a Republican majority, even after holding two more elections in the House. So not exactly sure how Bernie's argument holds weight for the more recent elections.

[Svip]

The thing is; Trump have already cost the Republicans this election.

 

A lot of people (including myself) like to point out that while Trump does maintain a 20-30% part in the polls, the remaining 70% will never vote for Trump. But what people is forgetting is the reverse of that coin; that Trump's supporters will not vote for anyone but Trump.

 

So either they will stay home on election day (as it's not Trump on the ballot) or they will go out and vote for Trump (because he is running as an independent). Either way, this 5% of the electorate is not an insignificant portion, and suddenly more safe Republican states are back in play. And common swing states are far more likely to tilt Democrat.

 

Add to that that the Republicans still lack a strong candidate to lead the field.

 

That's why I stand by my prediction that Clinton will be the next president of the United States. I just don't know who she'll be running against.

[El Dildo]

Congress is still a Republican majority, even after holding two more elections in the House. So not exactly sure how Bernie's argument holds weight for the more recent elections.

 

yeah like I said, the GOP is better at stirring up rage.

 

the congressional landscape doesn't really change the argument.

when Obama won the presidency the GOP went more aggressively towards local elections than they probably ever have, ever.. they went crazy with the rhetoric about how OUR COUNTRY was being TAKEN AWAY by the Communist Kenyan Antichrist who was going to legalize cocaine and let humans marry farm animals. you remember that, right? while the democrats were busy enjoying their new president and the things he was talking about, they forgot about local elections as usual. because they weren't pissed off about anything. they were getting gay marriage and medical pot and they shot Osama bin Laden in the face. the democrats weren't riled up.

 

meanwhile the Republicans never took a day off.

constantly trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act and pretending that buttsex was the cause of hurricanes and the war on Christmas.

 

this is how they do it over in GOP land, inside the bubble.

the war never ends for them.

[Clem Fandango]

I think we need to ban or auto-correct the word 'liberal' since people clearly can't be trusted to use it right.

[Svip]

I think we need to ban or auto-correct the word 'liberal' since people clearly can't be trusted to use it right.

I only use political ideological terms in their traditional 19th century meanings. Liberal to me means someone who wants political rights for the people, e.g. secret ballots, right to association, privacy, etc. Social rights/protection is not part of being liberal to me.

[Clem Fandango]

 

Congress is still a Republican majority, even after holding two more elections in the House. So not exactly sure how Bernie's argument holds weight for the more recent elections.

 

yeah like I said, the GOP is better at stirring up rage.

 

the congressional landscape doesn't really change the argument.

when Obama won the presidency the GOP went more aggressively towards local elections than they probably ever have, ever.. they went crazy with the rhetoric about how OUR COUNTRY was being TAKEN AWAY by the Communist Kenyan Antichrist who was going to legalize cocaine and let humans marry farm animals. you remember that, right? while the democrats were busy enjoying their new president and the things he was talking about, they forgot about local elections as usual. because they weren't pissed off about anything. they were getting gay marriage and medical pot and they shot Osama bin Laden in the face. the democrats weren't riled up.

 

meanwhile the Republicans never took a day off.

constantly trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act and pretending that buttsex was the cause of hurricanes and the war on Christmas.

 

this is how they do it over in GOP land, inside the bubble.

the war never ends for them.

 

The Republicans won these victories because they highjacked the tea party movement and used it to attract financial capital for the elections and to put forth a cohesive Conservative vision. There's no more paleo-conservatives or 'liberal Republicans' just tea party conservatives, which as you say means they're constantly riled up about the same (crazy) things and support the same (insane) solutions.

 

Also: gerrymandering.

 

I think we need to ban or auto-correct the word 'liberal' since people clearly can't be trusted to use it right.

I only use political ideological terms in their traditional 19th century meanings. Liberal to me means someone who wants political rights for the people, e.g. secret ballots, right to association, privacy, etc. Social rights/protection is not part of being liberal to me.

 

I use political ideological terms in the way they're used by the majority of the world's population. I also think terms become meaningless when they're bandied about inconsistently.

[Creed Bratton]

It's not even 2016 and these elections are so much more fun than 2012 elections. I suspected as much, but even I underestimated just how much fun it was going to be. We have a Neo-Nazi, a sociopath ex-CEO, a retarded neurosurgeon, a socialist old man and a...Clinton. Such a bundle of fun.

[X S]

yeah like I said, the GOP is better at stirring up rage.

 

the congressional landscape doesn't really change the argument.

when Obama won the presidency the GOP went more aggressively towards local elections than they probably ever have, ever.. they went crazy with the rhetoric about how OUR COUNTRY was being TAKEN AWAY by the Communist Kenyan Antichrist who was going to legalize cocaine and let humans marry farm animals. you remember that, right? while the democrats were busy enjoying their new president and the things he was talking about, they forgot about local elections as usual. because they weren't pissed off about anything. they were getting gay marriage and medical pot and they shot Osama bin Laden in the face. the democrats weren't riled up.

 

meanwhile the Republicans never took a day off.

constantly trying to repeal the Affordable Care Act and pretending that buttsex was the cause of hurricanes and the war on Christmas.

 

this is how they do it over in GOP land, inside the bubble.

the war never ends for them.

 

Well, to be fair, the very word 'activist' can be used to describe Democrats and American liberals, so this isn't exactly exclusive to the far-right; just look at the recent campus riots. The Left is just as prone to their own prejudices and bottom-of-the-barrel slogans as the Republicans. They are not immune from stupidity, and I would argue that they are much more politically active than the the Right.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[El Dildo]

dude we can all find videos of stupid people all day long, on both sides.

 

 

 

at the end of the day, the Republican party is still much more indefensible.

especially in its current incarnation.

 

neither side is perfect.

but it's the GOP that tends to attract the bigot, racist, sexist, homophobic, assholes. and it's for a reason....

[X S]

Are we seriously debating how much better the stupidy of one group is better than the other? A stupid is a stupid does, sir.

 

>.>

[Saggy]

There is no debate. Just Google the word "libtard" and specify blog entries...

 

Why is there no catchy little moniker for Republicans?

[Dingdongs]

There is no debate. Just Google the word "libtard" and specify blog entries...

 

Why is there no catchy little moniker for Republicans?

conservatard

 

Thanks I'l be here all week

[Spaghetti Cat]

I recall the term 'Tea-bagger' not that long ago...

 

And here we are going on about how Democrats have a positive message.

[gooeyhole]

There is no debate. Just Google the word "libtard" and specify blog entries...

 

Why is there no catchy little moniker for Republicans?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/nice personservative

 

Also, I remember hearing Republic*nt before, I liked that one.

Edited December 10, 2015 by Canadian Badass

[El Dildo]

Are we seriously debating how much better the stupidy of one group is better than the other?

hello?

you're the one who posted the first videos and said "The Left is just as prone to their own prejudices and bottom-of-the-barrel slogans as the Republicans. They are not immune from stupidity..."

 

which is an empty statement to make.

because - as illustrated - stupid people are everywhere. we're not seriously debating anything that you haven't brought up first. my only point is that it doesn't matter how many stupid people are on either side. only one side is the perennial home of the racists and backwater bigots and it's the Grand Old Party.

Edited December 10, 2015 by El Diablo

[Spaghetti Cat]

I believe what XS is going on about was your comment earlier about Dems only putting out positive messages for their supporters which doesn't quite hold muster.

 

Now the rest of it, where you're talking about enthusiasm within the electorate, I could agree with.

 

It is true that many of the lower ticket items swung to the Reps in the last couple of elections. We may disagree on the how and why though.

[El Dildo]

ok let's split hairs....

I shouldn't have used the word "only."

 

yes; democrats can be dirty and appeal to baser attacks.

but generally speaking they don't. generally they talk about going forwards and maintaining progress, not "taking" the country "back"wards or pretending that it's literally under attack by the opposite agenda.

 

and on the whole, democrats use less negativity than the GOP.

especially in the last 10-15 years.

[Dingdongs]

ok let's split hairs....

I shouldn't have used the word "only."

 

yes; democrats can be dirty and appeal to baser attacks.

but generally speaking they don't. generally they talk about going forwards and maintaining progress, not "taking" the country "back"wards or pretending that it's literally under attack by the opposite agenda.

 

and on the whole, democrats use less negativity than the GOP.

especially in the last 10-15 years.

I would say they're less negative because they're the ones in power. The Democrats were pretty f*cking negative when Bush was in office. And as you know I agree with Democrats on like 80% of stuff. It's just the reality of politics.... 35 percent of polled Democrats said they thought Bush was behind 9/11.... and we criticize Republicans because a slightly less number think Obama is a Muslim?

[El Dildo]

The Democrats were pretty f*cking negative when Bush was in office. And as you know I agree with Democrats on like 80% of stuff. It's just the reality of politics....

no see, because Bush was legit terrible.

 

huge difference

[make total destroy]

its almost like the two largest political parties and their supporters are just two sides of the same coin that utilize the same style of rhetoric or something