|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Remember when Obama's Presidency was over? According to the "liberal media", that's been pretty much every day since he took the oath of office, hasn't it?
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 03:59 |
|
|
Alter Ego posted:I cannot believe we are actually having a conversation about Ronald loving Reagan being a major party's nominee for President in TYOOL 1975. I mean, surely this can't have the demented, twisted storybook ending we want, right? There is no possible way Democrats are lucky enough to face Ronald loving Reagan in the fall of 1976?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Wow, he really is a fantastic businessman. Making $1.3 billion in a year with an income of just $362 million is nice trick.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
If Reagan ran for President today he'd be buried in a McGovern-style landslide thanks to the Internet's power of ferreting out information candidates don't want found. 1976 is not 2015 for a whole legion of reasons. Please, please stop equating the two, because Donald Trump doesn't have a tenth of the draw Ronald Reagan did.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
This is a bit of a tangent from more glorious Trump bragging but I had a question. Could an atheist win a nomination or the presidency? Not, like, a militant atheist or anything, just a non-believer. Obviously not for Republicans but would it be possible for a democrat? Just because, even though I've followed US politics for a while, I still get a little surprised the amount religion is brought up even by moderate candidates. In Britain that sort of thing is considered kind of weird because, outside of NI, religion isn't a big political issue. Just curious what the actual americans who know more about their country than me think.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
My favorite part of that release is that they're bragging that the forms weren't designed for someone of his wealth, yet there is still a checkbox that applies to them. If it wasn't designed to account for someone of his wealth, then it would be something like "40-50m" being the largest option.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:48
|
|
|
UrbicaMortis posted:This is a bit of a tangent from more glorious Trump bragging but I had a question. Could an atheist win a nomination or the presidency? Not, like, a militant atheist or anything, just a non-believer. Obviously not for Republicans but would it be possible for a democrat? Well, I mean, despite that he isn't, most people somehow thought Obama was at best an godless commie and worst an mooslem. I don't remember Bill or Hillary being particularly religious, and McCain wasn't either.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Remember when Obama's Presidency was over? Yeah, 4 weeks ago with the first setback on TPP Since then he got The Iran deal The Cuba deal Marriage equality ACA upheld Overtime TPA Drug crime clemency Transgender changes in the military Housing desegregation rules Green energy surge And the swing in national discussion in race following his "Amazing Grace" eulogy Shame his presidency was already over, I think he would have liked this
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:49
|
|
|
UrbicaMortis posted:This is a bit of a tangent from more glorious Trump bragging but I had a question. Could an atheist win a nomination or the presidency? Not, like, a militant atheist or anything, just a non-believer. Obviously not for Republicans but would it be possible for a democrat? I can't imagine a candidate who stated directly "I am not religious and don't believe in God" receiving either party's nomination at this time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:51
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:If Reagan ran for President today he'd be buried in a McGovern-style landslide thanks to the Internet's power of ferreting out information candidates don't want found. Yeah, this. Reagan was a horrible human being but he was immensely popular in CA when he was governor because he kept the mexicans/blacks/hippies down through several underhanded ways that got virtually no coverage.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:51
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:Yeah, 4 weeks ago with the first setback on TPP It's really is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:51
|
|
|
BurntCornMuffin posted:Out of curiosity, how much does the presidential candidate affect lower office votes in the general? Are people more or less likely to vote for a given party's mayor/rep/senator if the party presidential candidate is awesome/poo poo? Are there any numbers that show to what degree there is an effect? The idea is that the candidate turns out more of their party than the other candidate turns out of their party. Based on the assumption that voters tend to vote straight ticket, the winning presidential candidate's party gets more votes all the way down the ticket. The problem is of course that outside of statewide offices the candidates are going to running up their vote tally primarily in specific districts. So cities voting for the Democratic Candidate can run up the overall total while the geographically larger rural areas still all vote for the Republican candidate. Thus the state ends up with Federal and Statewide offices going to the Democrats while the more numerous local races go to the Republicans on balance. The numerous local races of course being those that decide who makes up half of Congress. There's also the issue of how many people split their vote, for any number of reasons. Voting for one party for Federal office and another for local office. It largely depends on the makeup of the entire ticket as to how much this happens. For instance a state could have a well liked Senator of one party who they continue to elect while also voting for the Presidential Candidate of the other party. Similarly someone could vote for a 3rd party candidate in a local election while voting for major party candidates in other elections. The result is that the size of the candidates coattails is highly dependent on not only the candidate but who is trying to ride those coattails.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
UrbicaMortis posted:This is a bit of a tangent from more glorious Trump bragging but I had a question. Could an atheist win a nomination or the presidency? Not, like, a militant atheist or anything, just a non-believer. Obviously not for Republicans but would it be possible for a democrat? Well, let's examine that for a second. An atheist's chances at the Oval Office have dramatically improved in recent years, as the number of people who self-identify as "religious" (no matter the denomination) has gone down. However, in Gallup's annual "Would you vote for a candidate who was..." poll, atheists remain the least electable group, although at least a majority (54%) would still consider voting for them: http://www.gallup.com/poll/155285/Atheists-Muslims-Bias-Presidential-Candidates.aspx That was in 2012, so I can only assume the numbers have improved slightly since. I believe that many closeted atheists have probably been elected to office already--but the ones who are "out and proud" would have a very tough time of it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
UrbicaMortis posted:This is a bit of a tangent from more glorious "Spread it out in small doses" Donald "I will be the greatest jobs president that God ever created" Trump bragging but I had a question. Could an atheist win a nomination or the presidency? Not, like, a militant atheist or anything, just a non-believer. Obviously not for Republicans but would it be possible for a democrat? Nah, probably not. Religion is still huge in the lives of a lot of Americans and, even if we don't include conservative evangelicals, a lot of peoples politics. You'd probably have an easier time getting just about any other single or intersectional minority into office than even an upper-class white guy who openly says there is no god. You can be non-religious, but being openly atheist seems a bridge too far.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
Reagan was at least a governor beforehand.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:If Reagan ran for President today he'd be buried in a McGovern-style landslide thanks to the Internet's power of ferreting out information candidates don't want found. 1976 is not 2015 for a whole legion of reasons. Please, please stop equating the two, because Donald Trump doesn't have a tenth of the draw Ronald Reagan did. Yeah but Reagan had an coherent and popular, though vile, ideology behind him, he wasn't just a suit. I don't agree with the idea that Trump represents the average GOPer, he really is just a crazy motherfucker
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Well, I mean, despite that he isn't, most people somehow thought Obama was at best an godless commie and worst an mooslem. I don't necessarily think the majority of people actually thought Obama was a muslim. Especially since he talked about God quite a lot in his speeches. Good point about Hillary and McCain, although I'm pretty sure they're still Christians, or at least would claim to be if asked.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:"It says No Trumps. Plural. We're allowed to have one." Reince Priebus reveals that he changed his middle name to Trump shortly before the announcement. Holy poo poo, Priebus' name is actually Reinhold Richard Priebus. Why the gently caress would you just up and decide to go by Reince?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:It doesn't work. A Trump/Cruz third party ticket would mean a landslide victory for the Democrat nominee and they'd probably take states like Texas because of the vote splits on the right. Hilary Clinton winning the same way Bill did would be hilarious and I think someone in the GOP might actually murder Ted Cruz on the Senate floor if he runs as a third party spoiler. Who's to say Trump-Cruz won't get 45% in Texas and enough other red states to beat out what Obama got there (low 40s, high 30s), beat the real GOP nominee, and claim a new mandate to obstruct Hillary "NOT MY PRESIDENT" Clinton? I mean, that's what the GOP really wants: to bitch and complain and not have to have responsibility.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
UrbicaMortis posted:This is a bit of a tangent from more glorious Trump bragging but I had a question. Could an atheist win a nomination or the presidency? Not, like, a militant atheist or anything, just a non-believer. Obviously not for Republicans but would it be possible for a democrat? Currently, there is no way a public atheist would win the nomination for either party. From 2011 http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2011-12-10/religion-atheism/51777612/1 "Psychologists at the University of British Columbia and the University of Oregon say that their study demonstrates that anti-atheist prejudice stems from moral distrust, not dislike, of nonbelievers...The study, conducted among 350 Americans adults and 420 Canadian college students, asked participants to decide if a fictional driver damaged a parked car and left the scene, then found a wallet and took the money, was the driver more likely to be a teacher, an atheist teacher, or a rapist teacher? The participants, who were from religious and nonreligious backgrounds, most often chose the atheist teacher." From 2012 http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/in-atheists-we-distrust/ "Atheists are one of the most disliked groups in America. Only 45 percent of Americans say they would vote for a qualified atheist presidential candidate, and atheists are rated as the least desirable group for a potential son-in-law or daughter-in-law to belong to. "
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Reince Priebus reveals that he changed his middle name to Trump shortly before the announcement. Better question, why wouldn't you just use Richard?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
De Nomolos posted:Who's to say Trump-Cruz won't get 45% in Texas and enough other red states to beat out what Obama got there (low 40s, high 30s), beat the real GOP nominee, and claim a new mandate to obstruct. Hillary needs like 3 states, baseline, to get to 270. If the Republicans split their vote share (no one who votes for Cruz/Trump was going to vote for Hillary anyway) then there's zero chance that they could prevent her from getting to 270. In fact, the odds would be that more likely for her to WIN some of those states that you're talking about because you're just splitting the same pool. They wouldn't get to bitch and complain. They'd lose in a landslide and have serious issues holding on to the Senate and possible imperil their majority in the House.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:04
|
|
|
UrbicaMortis posted:I don't necessarily think the majority of people actually thought Obama was a muslim. Especially since he talked about God quite a lot in his speeches. Good point about Hillary and McCain, although I'm pretty sure they're still Christians, or at least would claim to be if asked. I am here to tell you that in TYOOL 2015, a majority of people I run into in metropolitan Atlanta
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:04
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Yeah but Reagan had an coherent and popular, though vile, ideology behind him, he wasn't just a suit. I don't agree with the idea that Trump represents the average GOPer, he really is just a crazy motherfucker Maybe not the average GOPer, but certainly the average GOP primary voter. Remember, republicans have had a "gently caress minorities" mindset for decades but the people in charge have always done it with a wink and a nod while the rank and file have been openly saying it for even longer. Trump stepping up and openly saying it finally gives the base exactly what they want because him not hiding his racism behind a wink and a nod means they finally have a true conservative hero that isn't just another RINO. Not only that, him being an egotistical, loud mouthed, money flaunting billionaire is embodiment of everything they think they could be if they just work hard enough. Trump is literally the distilled and concentrated base of the GOP which is why he's beating the gently caress out of the establishment candidates right now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/poll-donald-trump-favorability-increasing-120139.html http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-favorability-ratings-poll-2015-7 Trump's favorabilty seems to be consistently increasing among Republican primary voters, for now. One poll had his favorability among Republican primary voters went from 16% in May, before he announced, to 57% today. Where is his peak?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:07
|
|
|
SuperDucky posted:I am here to tell you that in TYOOL 2015, a majority of people I run into in metropolitan Atlanta Hmm. That's depressing. I figured it was only freeper level people who seriously believed that stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
William Bear posted:http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/poll-donald-trump-favorability-increasing-120139.html The problem is saturation. It's not like people don't know who he is. I can't imagine him getting any higher. The lovely thing is some one like him could win Iowa.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
I think Trump is best viewed more as a consequence of the constant blaring of the GOP media machine than anything. Like I don't think the average GOPer actually buys into all the poo poo pumped out by Fox and the like, it's a political tactic to shut down sane and rational discussion by just flooding the public space with garbage. There are definitely people who do but it's not the main thread of conservative thinking. Then the garbage achieved sentience and that's Trump
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:I think Trump is best viewed more as a consequence of the constant blaring of the GOP media machine than anything. Like I don't think the average GOPer actually buys into all the poo poo pumped out by Fox and the like, it's a political tactic to shut down sane and rational discussion by just flooding the public space with garbage. But then the garbage achieved sentinence and that's Trump there's a good argument to make that Trump is THE base. that he's really just spewing the same bile that the majority of republican voters believe.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:10
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Better question, why wouldn't you just use Richard? Yeah, I would just Rience my hands of that first name altogether.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
SuperDucky posted:I am here to tell you that in TYOOL 2015, a majority of people I run into in metropolitan Atlanta Setting aside this useless anecdotal data, do you just run around all day asking every person if Obama is a Muslim? Or is it just that only crazy people ever feel the need to talk about his faith, and they think he's a secret Muslim?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:I think Trump is best viewed more as a consequence of the constant blaring of the GOP media machine than anything. Like I don't think the average GOPer actually buys into all the poo poo pumped out by Fox and the like, it's a political tactic to shut down sane and rational discussion by just flooding the public space with garbage. There are definitely people who do but it's not the main thread of conservative thinking. Then the garbage achieved sentience and that's Trump You have it backwards. The average GOPer absolutely buys all the  poo poo, along with all the talk radio poo poo that's even worse. It's mostly the ones in power that don't buy into that poo poo but will absolutely throw some red meat to the base every now and then to get their votes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Setting aside this useless anecdotal data, do you just run around all day asking every person if Obama is a Muslim? Or is it just that only crazy people ever feel the need to talk about his faith, and they think he's a secret Muslim? I'd have to look, but there's actually data on this where something like 20-30% of people polled in 2015, said they thought he was Muslim.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Better question, why wouldn't you just use Richard? Because then Charles Pierce would have to come up with a different nickname for him.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Setting aside this useless anecdotal data, do you just run around all day asking every person if Obama is a Muslim? Or is it just that only crazy people ever feel the need to talk about his faith, and they think he's a secret Muslim? Also, aren't the majority of people in Metropolitan Atlanta black?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:If Reagan ran for President today he'd be buried in a McGovern-style landslide thanks to the Internet's power of ferreting out information candidates don't want found. 1976 is not 2015 for a whole legion of reasons. Please, please stop equating the two, because Donald Trump doesn't have a tenth of the draw Ronald Reagan did. Reagan lost in 1976 just like Trump will lose now  So long as Democrats don't elect some sort of Carter-like figure, they should be fine....
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Hillary needs like 3 states, baseline, to get to 270. If the Republicans split their vote share (no one who votes for Cruz/Trump was going to vote for Hillary anyway) then there's zero chance that they could prevent her from getting to 270. In fact, the odds would be that more likely for her to WIN some of those states that you're talking about because you're just splitting the same pool. Trump/Cruz would only split the presidential vote. Everyone voting for them is still going to vote Republican for both the Senate and their House district. The only concrete benefit derived for Hillary would be arguing for a mandate. Which the Republicans would never honor anyway and will instead point to Trump/Cruz splitting the ticket to instead argue that she's a loser who lost and Conservatism wins again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:16
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Trump/Cruz would only split the presidential vote. Everyone voting for them is still going to vote Republican for both the Senate and their House district. The only concrete benefit derived for Hillary would be arguing for a mandate. Which the Republicans would never honor anyway and will instead point to Trump/Cruz splitting the ticket to instead argue that she's a loser who lost and Conservatism wins again. The point is that it would damage the party to the point of crippling it and throw their ability to support down ballot races into chaos.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:I'd have to look, but there's actually data on this where something like 20-30% of people polled in 2015, said they thought he was Muslim. Yes which means the poster above only talks to nut jobs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 03:59 |
|
|
computer parts posted:Also, aren't the majority of people in Metropolitan Atlanta black? :shh: The atlanta metro is uselessly large as a statistical area. There are areas of the atl metro where less than 5% of the population is black. BI NOW GAY LATER posted:I'd have to look, but there's actually data on this where something like 20-30% of people polled in 2015, said they thought he was Muslim. mlmp08 posted:Setting aside this useless anecdotal data, do you just run around all day asking every person if Obama is a Muslim? Or is it just that only crazy people ever feel the need to talk about his faith, and they think he's a secret Muslim?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 21:20
|
|