|
De Nomolos posted:Polls said the same thing this early about O in 2012. Basically, the D vote has already coalesced and all the undecideds are Republicans who claim they want to "wait and see" but are just gonna vote for the Do you have anything to demonstrate that this is true? Totally willing to believe you, but it's very counter-intuitive.
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 17:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:26 |
|
|
Obdicut posted:Do you have anything to demonstrate that this is true? Totally willing to believe you, but it's very counter-intuitive. NBC/Marist, South Carolina, December 2011 Obama 45 Romney 42 (Obama ended up getting 44% in SC, so it was entirely a question of the Republican vote choosing "undecided" instead of Romney)
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
computer parts posted:One point does not make a trend. Yes except this is part of a continuing trend in a decline of voter participation, and saying 2014's results are meaningless completely discounts the idea that other factors could have influenced the results in a way that could affect future elections such as the sudden inrush of voter ID laws or the Dems having trouble pushing things that get their base enthusiastic. I'm not saying a women voter split of 51D/47R is the new normal especially with Hillary likely on the ballot but for Democrats to assume that 2014 happened in a vacuum and not study possible causes for it would be really irresponsible on their part. The election after your core constituencies failed to turn out is a really bad time to take their votes for granted.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Dr.Zeppelin posted:Yes except this is part of a continuing trend in a decline of voter participation I see a consistent trend. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I see a consistent trend. It's important to notice that much of the high turnout of the 19th century traces to things like only wealthy white men being able to vote, and that the low turnout at the end of the 18th and beginning of 19th has to do with the fact that there was simply no popular vote for president in most states for quite some time, nor were there popular votes for senators.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
Also, if the parties were still offering free beer for your vote at the polls, I bet we'd get that turnout back up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Joementum posted:Also, if the parties were still offering free beer for your vote at the polls, I bet we'd get that turnout back up. Damnit, Joe, why is this illegal?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
How do you think the Reps will try to define Hillary in the general?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
bpower posted:How do you think the Reps will try to define Hillary in the general? She's an out of control ambition elemental who will say or do anything to get elected.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:15
|
|
|
bpower posted:How do you think the Reps will try to define Hillary in the general? "BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
Alkydere posted:"BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI! BENGHAZI!" I won't say you're wrong, I will say that I think there will be more, 'OBAMA! OBAMA! OBAMA! OBAMA!' than there is Failghazigateistan.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
ewe2 posted:How significant is the Hispanic vote to the primaries now? Is Rubio representative enough, and/or the Republicans clueless on how to appeal to that demographic? Are the Democrats much better? Is my intuition that they are and the Republicans useless good enough or is it more complicated? It is pretty much meaningless in IA, NH and SC and incredibly important in Nevada. After that who gives a gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:33
|
|
|
bpower posted:How do you think the Reps will try to define Hillary in the general? Well, y'know, you don't want to give power over the button to someone who gets so emotional in, y'know, "that time of the month." 
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
JonathonSpectre posted:Well, y'know, you don't want to give power over the button to someone who gets so emotional in, y'know, "that time of the month." It's 3 AM. The phone rings at the white house. The Russians have deployed tactical nuclear weapons against the Ukranian forces. Do you trust Hillary to man up and take decisive action to prevent nuclear war? Vote Bush '16, a man who can look Putin in the eyes and see the soul of a communist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Do you have anything to demonstrate that this is true? Totally willing to believe you, but it's very counter-intuitive. Its historically proven to be the case when one side has its field all sown up and the other has a competitive primary. For instance the only time where McCain was polling anywhere near Obama was after he had won his nomination fight but Hillary still had a shot at beating Obama. There's tons of keep lower level examples of this being true too, including a few where the primary occurs so late that the competitive primary winner is unable to reconnect with his primary opponent's supporters before the general election. Keep in mind too that Hillary Clinton is basically a known quantity while the Republicans aren't. For instance I made a Scott Walker reference at work the other day (we were visited by Trek representatives and I was coming up with ways to piss them off) and one of the guys I was talking to did not know who he was. At this point for Jeb Bush the poll results were probably more akin to finding the answer to "do you want W to come back?" than what it was actually asking.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
It's going to be incoherent screaming and misogyny all the way down. They'll be bouncing between "Benghazi!" "Obama!" "
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:48
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:I'm sure they will have no problem ultimately winning the state in the general election, but that kind of number is a pretty lovely indicator of how the general election will go, and it suggests she will likely win important states like VA pretty easily. Nah it's an indicator nobody in SC knows who the lower tier GOP candidates are. Polls this far out are just checking name recognition.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
bpower posted:How do you think the Reps will try to define Hillary in the general? Anyone but Jeb and it will be "the OLD politics of Washinton don't work any more, elect a new (YOUNG) face instead of the same old (OLD) Washington name that's been around forever (SHE'S OLD)" A direct attack won't work though and will just alienate a lot of women and elderly voters.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Well, I give you this--I'd be willing to vote to send Bill back to the white house, and that desire trumps my disdain for all things Hillary.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
I think it's pretty obvious that they will suggest Obama's policies didn't work but over the last 2 years while they've been in control of Congress look at how well the country is doing and we'd all be doing better with a Republican in office and not someone who will continue Obama's legacy (e.g. Hillary) of preventing Republicans from getting things done. I'm most interested in seeing where things fall with respect to PPACA during the primaries, because that poo poo will translate into the general election platform for Republicans. Will repeal be a winnable platform in 2016?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
The ACA is an entirely predictable and boring issue in 2016. Every Republican will be against it and run on a platform of repealing it fully. A few of them might come out with their own plans. Look for this to be a thin proposal to protect people with preexisting conditions and introduce tort reform and not so much on the whole "how we're going to pay for this" part. Hillary will run on a platform of expansion and improvement of the existing law, again, without many details.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
Joementum posted:The ACA is an entirely predictable and boring issue in 2016. Every Republican will be against it and run on a platform of repealing it fully. A few of them might come out with their own plans. Look for this to be a thin proposal to protect people with preexisting conditions and introduce tort reform and not so much on the whole "how we're going to pay for this" part. Right, Hillary will run on a pro-Obama campaign while everyone else runs on an anti-Obama campaign. No way this could fail for her at all, nosiree. Jeb '16: Surrender yourself and face the carnage alternatively, Biden '16: Save us Joe, you're our only hope
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
bpower posted:How do you think the Reps will try to define Hillary in the general? How many ways can you say "shrill harpy" or "castrating bitch" without actually using those words?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Right, Hillary will run on a pro-Obama campaign while everyone else runs on an anti-Obama campaign. No way this could fail for her at all, nosiree.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I see a consistent trend. Out of curiosity, when did women get the vote on that chart?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
Mister Macys posted:Out of curiosity, when did women get the vote on that chart? 1920 was the first election year women could vote.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Right, Hillary will run on a pro-Obama campaign while everyone else runs on an anti-Obama campaign. No way this could fail for her at all, nosiree. It's kind of a mystery why Hillary Clinton (D) has taken up a position so different from that of Jeb Bush (R), Chris Christie (R), Rand Paul (R), Scott Walker (R) and Mike Huckabee (R). Is only there were some kind of differentiating factor that could explain this discrepancy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
"It's snowin'. It's cold. But ahm fahred up." ~ Rick Perry, in New Hampshire. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxbtpRhdwjs
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
Zwabu posted:How many ways can you say "shrill harpy" or "castrating bitch" without actually using those words? Castration tests pretty well in Iowa, iirc.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
Joementum posted:"It's snowin'. It's cold. But ahm fahred up." ~ Rick Perry, in New Hampshire. "Live free or die. Amen." ~ Rick Perry, as I roll my eyes hard enough to permanently affect my vision. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxbtpRhdwjs&t=24s
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 20:24
|
|
|
Nessus posted:IDK, man, there was a guy who was pretty pro-Obama and he won the last two presidential elections pretty well? Oh, really? Is this dude running for a third term, while the party base runs as far away from him as they can?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Right, Hillary will run on a pro-Obama campaign while everyone else runs on an anti-Obama campaign. No way this could fail for her at all, nosiree. Are you proposing that Hillary Clinton will run pro-Obama while Vice President Joseph "Literally Obama's Vice President" Biden won't?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
ZeeToo posted:Are you proposing that Hillary Clinton will run pro-Obama while Vice President Joseph "Literally Obama's Vice President" Biden won't?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Oh, really? Is this dude running for a third term, while the party base runs as far away from him as they can?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
Nessus posted:The party base is running away from him? My impression is that by and large they are on board with the outlines of B-Rock's Islamic Shocks, if different on implementations. No, but see, a bunch of Congresspeople up for re-election in deep red areas tried to distance themselves from him and all lost so what they think doesn't matter anymore, therefore he's toxic and the whole party hates him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:The Lindsay Graham train is leaving the station and it's time to hop on board - you don't want to be left behind! I do declare this to be the finest mint julep car I have ever seen
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
If graham handed out mint juleps at campaign stops he'd probably do better than he's actually going to.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 21:46
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Oh, really? Is this dude running for a third term, while the party base runs as far away from him as they can? More like My Imaginary Talking Points SLAM JAM THANK YOU MA'AM
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
Daduzi posted:It's kind of a mystery why Hillary Clinton (D) has taken up a position so different from that of Jeb Bush (R), Chris Christie (R), Rand Paul (R), Scott Walker (R) and Mike Huckabee (R). Women's issues. Barack is playing dirty by having Oprah shill for him. Hillary never stood a chance.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 00:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:26 |
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Right, Hillary will run on a pro-Obama campaign while everyone else runs on an anti-Obama campaign. No way this could fail for her at all, nosiree. It's really not a bad plan if turnout doesn't suck.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2015 00:58
|
|
