|
re:convention chat, what was the deal with Minnesota voting only like 54% for Obama in 2008 while states like Wisconsin and Michigan went 56-57% for him?
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 15:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 19:09 |
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:re:convention chat, what was the deal with Minnesota voting only like 54% for Obama in 2008 while states like Wisconsin and Michigan went 56-57% for him? Plus, the 2008 turnout rate in Minnesota was somewhere around 75%, compared to 70% in Wisconsin and 65% in Michigan. Republicans in Wisconsin and Michigan weren't as motivated to turn out as Republicans in Minnesota, then, but that's only because Minnesota always turns out to vote in high proportions. (Except in 2014.) Either way, it just means that it's always silly when people consider Minnesota a swing state, because it's really not, especially when compared to Wisconsin, where they voted for Scott Walker three times...and, to get it back to 2016 chat, where they'll vote for Scott Walker again.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
What's this separate state rule people keep mentioning for Veep? Is it just because having a Veep from a different state gives you a better chance of winning that state due to 'favorite son' voters? I thought in recent presidential runs that effect has been negligible. Also, which Democratic candidate would Obama campaign hardest for? I have to think Hillary as a tit-for-tat for serving as Secretary of State for four years. Where are his former staffers going now that campaign season is building up? Who's had the best 'boots on the ground' game in the past? It's always seemed to me that what wins close races isn't having more TV ads or radio spots or endorsements from local or national political figures but having a group of people willing to drive busses and vans full of voters to the polls, hand out voting guides, and campaign from door to door collecting likely voter information and following up on or before voting day. This is obviously the most work-hours intensive way of campaigning but I can think of a dozen times the 'obvious' frontrunner got upset by smaller players with a better ground game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
VanSandman posted:What's this separate state rule people keep mentioning for Veep? Is it just because having a Veep from a different state gives you a better chance of winning that state due to 'favorite son' voters? I thought in recent presidential runs that effect has been negligible. Via the 12th Amendment: quote:The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The part about them not being an inhabitant of the same state was in the original constitution.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 17:53
|
|
|
That's a really stupid thing to have written into law.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
forbidden lesbian posted:That's a really stupid thing to have written into law. Not if you're worried about sectionalism, and people voting for their state's candidates instead of the best ones.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
True of most of the US Constitution, tbh.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
CaptainCarrot posted:Not if you're worried about sectionalism, and people voting for their state's candidates instead of the best ones. And the twelfth amendment was passed specifically because of the 1800 election, and that was a total clusterfuck. Sectionalism was a huge deal, and that clause helped ensure that there would be a mix of pro-slavery and anti-slavery opinions in the Executive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
Is there a thread where we make fun of the Democratic primary? Because I want to see Hillary and whoever Obama backs eat each other alive in the primary and laugh.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Dingleberry Jones posted:Is there a thread where we make fun of the Democratic primary? Why would Hillary eat herself alive?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 18:40
|
|
|
The fighting to be Hillary's VP will however, be incredible. But we wont get to see any of it play out in public 
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:Why would Hillary eat herself alive? The Hillouroboros would be great political theater.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
shadow puppet of a posted:The fighting to be Hillary's VP will however, be incredible. But we wont get to see any of it play out in public Joe Biden 
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:If Mitt did get it, who would be his running mate this time? Nikki Haley. Romney endorsed her in 2009, she's apparently conservative enough, and she's a minority woman. She's also currently in office (where Romney's been out for a while). happyhippy posted:Can't think of anyone to be honest, as all the usuals have bad mouthed Mitt a lot. Honestly, I don't think that the current comments against Romney would matter much. If Romney's winning come late fall, some of the also-rans are going to realize they don't have a shot, and switch to a more positive message or switch to attacking Democrats exclusively or switch to attacking other non-leading candidates. Then after they get whomped in Iowa/New Hampshire they'll drop out and endorse Romney, leaving them decently enough in the campaign's graces to still have a shot at VP nomination. Biden and Edwards had both been in the Democratic primary before dropping out and getting picked by the winner. Cheney essentially picked himself for Bush, and the 2012 Republican field was really weak. I don't think it's inconceivable that a fellow primary candidate gets tapped for GOP VP, but it hasn't happened in a while (Reagan picking GHWB seems to be the only example, but it's a small sample size).
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 19:40
|
|
|
Dingleberry Jones posted:Is there a thread where we make fun of the Democratic primary? Obama is not going to back anybody, which kind of tacitly helps Hillary because there needs to be a big shakeup for her to lose. No sitting President in the last 40 years has endorsed before the primary was over, with the exception of their VPs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Mitt has residences in California, Utah, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire. I'm not sure which of them he uses as residency for tax purposes, probably none of them (ha ha ha, terrific you guys), but it wouldn't be too hard to shuffle that around if needed. Where is Mitt registered to vote? He's either using that one for tax purposes, or giving his opponents a good talking point for launching a vote fraud investigation. (His vetting attorneys probably forced him to make sure his home is where he's registered) I could see Bolton for Republican veep pick, just as Bolton could see WMDs in the hands of ME terrorists Jerry Manderbilt posted:re:convention chat, what was the deal with Minnesota voting only like 54% for Obama in 2008 while states like Wisconsin and Michigan went 56-57% for him? Outside the cities, Minnesota is aging. Areas which used to be DFL strongholds are now teaparty bastions. It has to do with the transition of Congress from individual Members to a more parliamentary system. No longer are folks voting for their member, they're voting for parties regardless how they feel about their Member. I blame CNN. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 20:23 on Jan 15, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Obama is not going to back anybody, which kind of tacitly helps Hillary because there needs to be a big shakeup for her to lose. No sitting President in the last 40 years has endorsed before the primary was over, with the exception of their VPs. Wait, that means absolutely nothing. The only elections in the last 40 years where a President wasn't up for re-election were 1988, 2000, and 2008, and in two of those cases, the VP was running. So, essentially, you're making the argument that because W didn't endorse anyone in 2008, Obama won't endorse anyone in 2016. I realize that D&D wants to prove that Obama is exactly the same as Bush, but that seems really dedicated to the premise.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 20:32
|
|
|
Eschers Basement posted:Wait, that means absolutely nothing. The only elections in the last 40 years where a President wasn't up for re-election were 1988, 2000, and 2008, and in two of those cases, the VP was running. Obama is loving anathema to winning POTUS '16. Nobody except maybe Biden or Sanders would want his endorsement, especially now that his OFA db is in the wild.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
Do you really think an endorsement from Obama would be a net negative with the Dem primary electorate?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Obama is loving anathema to winning POTUS '16. Nobody except maybe Biden or Sanders would want his endorsement, especially now that his OFA db is in the wild. You're just bitter because he kicked you out in the first term
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
Jackson Taus posted:Nikki Haley. Romney endorsed her in 2009, she's apparently conservative enough, and she's a minority woman. She's also currently in office (where Romney's been out for a while). Doesn't she have the same kind of issues that Palin had that might be OK in South Carolina but to other places come off as crazy?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
sbaldrick posted:Doesn't she have the same kind of issues that Palin had that might be OK in South Carolina but to other places come off as crazy? She's very unpopular in South Carolina, and got reelected because Democrats are unelectable at the state level there, from what I can tell.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Where is Mitt registered to vote? Belmont, MA, at least in 2012
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:Joe Biden This is my dream choice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:She's very unpopular in South Carolina, and got reelected because Democrats are unelectable at the state level there, from what I can tell. As a SC native temporarily marooned in Virginia but FINALLY moving back to Carolina this summer, this is accurate. The woman is an incompetent rear end, but a Republican incompetent rear end, which is far less odious than any Democrat winning the office. ================================================================================== Re: Potential Romney VP candidates - a Romney-Bush ticket would great from a Republican's Viewpoint. I could see it happening. Unfortunately, I don't think the opposite - a Bush-Romney ticket, would have a chance in hell of happening. And I think Bush will probably be the nominee. He'd certainly be a much stronger general election candidate than Romney, but at this point I'd prefer Romney. If he can't beat Hillary, I don't think the conditions in the country will be conducive to Bush winning either.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 21:34
|
|
|
shadow puppet of a posted:The fighting to be Hillary's VP will however, be incredible. But we wont get to see any of it play out in public Game Change 3 is going to be great.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
Jackson Taus posted:Nikki Haley. Romney endorsed her in 2009, she's apparently conservative enough, and she's a minority woman. She's also currently in office (where Romney's been out for a while). Also in 2012 not only were the candidates weak, but they bad mouthed Romney. Hard to say which was the bigger reason none were picked. Unfortunately the sample size for "Romney VP picks" is rather small. Hopefully we'll get more data in 2016 and by the 2024 or 2028 run we'll be able to model Romney's behavior more accurately.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
Chris Christie posted:As a SC native temporarily marooned in Virginia but FINALLY moving back to Carolina this summer, this is accurate. The woman is an incompetent rear end, but a Republican incompetent rear end, which is far less odious than any Democrat winning the office. First what part of the state are you moving back to? Not like much has changed anyway. Also I always got the feeling that Haley could have been a meh governor but got the short end of the stick post Sanford. He had so poisoned the well when it came to legislative/gubernatorial cooperation that even the best politician coming in would have had some serious trouble and she wasn't the best.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
Jackson Taus posted:Nikki Haley. Romney endorsed her in 2009, she's apparently conservative enough, and she's a minority woman. She's also currently in office (where Romney's been out for a while). Only if she uses her real name 
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
Chris Christie posted:Re: Potential Romney VP candidates - a Romney-Bush ticket would great from a Republican's Viewpoint. I could see it happening. The Romney and Bush camps are already sniping at each other. There's bad blood there from Romney flacks who worked primary campaigns against Jeb, there is no way they'll form a unity ticket in either order.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 23:18
|
|
|
Misandrist Duck posted:Game Change 3 is going to be great. Coincidentally I'm watching Game Change right now. I'm amazed at the ignorance of Palin but how dense she is to look on the nationwide level. I don't know if we'll get this kind of VP pick again. But then again we got Paul Ryan get slammed by Biden in spectacular fashion so can't count anything out.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 23:27
|
|
|
BMB5150 posted:Coincidentally I'm watching Game Change right now. I'm amazed at the ignorance of Palin but how dense she is to look on the nationwide level. I don't know if we'll get this kind of VP pick again. But then again we got Paul Ryan get slammed by Biden in spectacular fashion so can't count anything out. Yeah but Paul Ryan met the minimum requirement for presentability, in that Joe Sixpack couldn't immediately tell he was a moron. Remember when a bunch of media outlets agreed that Ryan '''''won''''' that debate?
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
Slate Action posted:Yeah but Paul Ryan met the minimum requirement for presentability, in that Joe Sixpack couldn't immediately tell he was a moron. Remember when a bunch of media outlets agreed that Ryan '''''won''''' that debate? Remember Ryan refusing to say how he was going to fill the holes in his budget because it would take too long to explain or some poo poo? If a candidate said that in any other country it would be devastating. The US press just shrugged their shoulders and moved on. Bizarre.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2015 23:55
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Obama is loving anathema to winning POTUS '16. Nobody except maybe Biden or Sanders would want his endorsement, especially now that his OFA db is in the wild. This is the mistake that Gore made and it probably cost him the election. I can't see Hillary making the same stupid mistake.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 00:29
|
|
|
bpower posted:Remember Ryan refusing to say how he was going to fill the holes in his budget because it would take too long to explain or some poo poo? If a candidate said that in any other country it would be devastating. The US press just shrugged their shoulders and moved on. Bizarre. Only when told 'X' and then 'Not X' by someone else within a 3 day span will the American press question the words of a politician. Vague non-denials have been good enough since Reagan.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:Only if she uses her real name Barack HUSSEIN SOTERO
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Obama is loving anathema to winning POTUS '16. Nobody except maybe Biden or Sanders would want his endorsement, especially now that his OFA db is in the wild. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6477700 Obama's approval rating is almost back to 50%. Maybe it will go higher if he vetoes a few bills and stiffens his spine. He's won respect from a few gun-brandishing conservatives I know, for the Cuban relations reset.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 02:02
|
|
|
swampcow posted:http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6477700 Bold executive actions seemed to help a lot. We'll just have to see whether this holds up after he vetoes the Free Steak and Ice Cream American Freedom Forever Act. Though the bills the GoP has chosen to push as part of this tactic (so far) are things that affect the working class so directly that the strategists' usual "Them stiffs don't pay attention to the content of a bill. Just name it something that sounds too good to veto" thesis might not hold. PupsOfWar fucked around with this message at 02:59 on Jan 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 02:53
|
|
|
swampcow posted:http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6477700 Obama's approval is likely to be in the mid 50's or higher by the time primary season starts. He will definitely be a major factor at the convention.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 03:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 19:09 |
|
|
Obama's approval rating is intersting because the recent uptick is undoubtedly due to the perception of him acting on issues after multiple years of inaction from Congress, but action also creates division. If you do things, some people will not like those things. He'll need to continue acting while walking the line of not acting too much to sustain those numbers. Also, he's not going to endorse during the primary (unless the "primary" is Hillary vs. Sanders and people less electable than Sanders), but will certainly endorse and campaign with the nominee.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2015 03:52
|
|
