|
Nelson Mandingo posted:No Trump has the intangibles to win and can attack her from right and left. But he is very unpopular and she enjoys broad Democratic support. She has to convince undecideds Trump is gonna gently caress everything up, while not imploding. There are no real undecideds. It's all about motivation and interest to vote. People who are undecided right now but will vote in November are insignificant.
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 16:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 04:04 |
|
|
Raerlynn posted:You realize the concept dates back to an era where oligarchy wasn't just a word bandied around for political points, but was an actual, real thing right? Like the origin of this country is about the common man rejecting the educated rich people whose laws were deemed unjust because they were made without sure representation in the political process. If you want representation, you have it at the voting booth. Otherwise, you and I as people without JDs should have as much direct influence on the law as a rock. Trusting the common man is a stupid mistake. Doubly so given what they have just shown themselves willing to do in an attempt to save their own pathetic skins from globalization.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 16:35
|
|
|
Avian Pneumonia posted:What i'd really like to happen is for the establishment GOP to approach Sanders and say okay if we run one of our guys as a third party you can also run as a third party and we'll have a 4 way race. Please tell me all about how this will never happen and how Sanders really and truly basically can't ever be president and I should just start preparing myself for the fact that i'm going to have to vote for someone who supported the invasion of Iraq. If it makes you feel any better, this is the last time that'll be an issue. The next crop of Dem nominees won't have been in congress to vote for it.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:Perhaps- but the origin of our framework of government is not about "the common man" it's about elected elites protecting the hoi polloi from themselves. Culturally you're right that our history is flavored with populism but our actual institutions aren't that way. I would put forth the theory that jury nullification is actually a case of "working as intended". The thought being that if oppressive laws were passed against the will of the people, the jury could basically refuse to convict if a conviction was legal, but morally repugnant. Ideally you'd see that in cases like women being tried for murder on a miscarriage, but unfortunately like many institutions in our country, they can be misused as well (the aforementioned racism for example). Personally I'm of the opinion that it's positive possibilities greatly outweigh is negatives, but that's also because i believe that its more important for innocent people to go free then guilty people to go to jail. But again, that's my opinion. EDIT: rkajdi posted:If you want representation, you have it at the voting booth. I disagree. See: gerrymandering. rkajdi posted:Trusting the common man is a stupid mistake. Doubly so given what they have just shown themselves willing to do in an attempt to save their own pathetic skins from globalization Which is your opinion. You seem to prize stamping out injustice and preventing bad actors, which is a noble ideal. I personally believe that it's impossible to have a "perfect" system free from injustice and completely immune to bad actors. I'd rather we have systems in place to give the jury a role in finding if the circumstances around the crime violated the "spirit" of the law rather than its legal lettering. I fully understand why/how that has its drawbacks, but I weigh it against the possibilities juries railroading people to conviction because a prosecutor wants another notch in his belt. It's a tool. And like any tool, can be used for good or ill. So the question you need to ask is if it's worth it, and if you can convince society at large. I sincerely doubt you'll get a majority of this country to agree to cede more power to prosecutors and government officials. 2nd edit: quotes are hard. Raerlynn fucked around with this message at 16:55 on May 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
Mr Hootington posted:Why wouldn't she nominate a more socially and environmentally friendly Roberts? because such a person doesn't exist, for one
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
Raerlynn posted:You realize the concept dates back to an era where oligarchy wasn't just a word bandied around for political points, but was an actual, real thing right? Like the origin of this country is about the common man rejecting the educated rich people whose laws were deemed unjust because they were made without sure representation in the political process. The U.S. government was pretty explicitly constructed around the concept of strongly limiting the impact that the common man has on the political process in order to protect the status of the rich, landed elite and to suggest otherwise is pretty much buying into a myth. The government has morphed and evolved in a populist manner over time, but it absolutely was not constructed around the concept of the common man rejecting the educated rich.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:No Trump has the intangibles to win and can attack her from right and left. But he is very unpopular and she enjoys broad Democratic support. She has to convince undecideds Trump is gonna gently caress everything up, while not imploding. i want you to really, really try and visualize a person who hasn't made up their mind between trump and clinton at this point
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 16:41
|
|
|
Zelder posted:i want you to really, really try and visualize a person who hasn't made up their mind between trump and clinton at this point If there were a neither/redo option on the ballot in every state, I honestly feel it may take the plurality in a Trump v Clinton general. As it isn't, I'm picturing some combination of low turnout and a windfall year for third parties.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 16:47
|
|
|
Avian Pneumonia posted:What i'd really like to happen is for the establishment GOP to approach Sanders and say okay if we run one of our guys as a third party you can also run as a third party and we'll have a 4 way race. Please tell me all about how this will never happen and how Sanders really and truly basically can't ever be president and I should just start preparing myself for the fact that i'm going to have to vote for someone who supported the invasion of Iraq. Sanders wouldn't do that because he knows what the consequences of a GOP victory are and he knows that he can't win a race like that.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 16:48
|
|
|
Zelder posted:i want you to really, really try and visualize a person who hasn't made up their mind between trump and clinton at this point From what I've seen, there is a decent amount of the republican base that isn't sure if it will be able to hold it's nose and vote for a populist. Clinton has a good chance on picking those votes up, because government you disagree with is still better than the anarchy Trump would bring with him.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 16:50
|
|
|
Zeroisanumber posted:Sanders wouldn't do that because he knows what the consequences of a GOP victory are and he knows that he can't win a race like that. Sanders has sort of proved this election season he's not the biggest person at thinking beyond the end of the week politically. He also has that cult of personality being built around him, so all he has to do is start sniffing his own farts and he might be willing to do the self-aggrandizing move that could doom the republic.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:From what I've seen, there is a decent amount of the republican base that isn't sure if it will be able to hold it's nose and vote for a populist. Clinton has a good chance on picking those votes up, because government you disagree with is still better than the anarchy Trump would bring with him. I think this will be more popular than people think Most companies in the US can deal with tougher regulation and higher taxes with out much of a fuss. On the other hand ending free trade would be a cataclysmic shift in how companies operate and calls into question if they can even operate.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
Avian Pneumonia posted:What i'd really like to happen is for the establishment GOP to approach Sanders and say okay if we run one of our guys as a third party you can also run as a third party and we'll have a 4 way race. Please tell me all about how this will never happen and how Sanders really and truly basically can't ever be president and I should just start preparing myself for the fact that i'm going to have to vote for someone who supported the invasion of Iraq. As someone averse to voting for a candidate who supported the Iraq War myself, I thought about this, and even ignoring the "less than 270 EV goes to the house" rule, I'm fairly convinced that in a 4-way Clinton/Sanders/Trump/Establishment GOP race, there would be in fact a *better* chance for Trump to come up with a plurality of electoral votes, so I think it would be a bad bet. Just looking at the primaries I think you'd see Clinton and Sanders more evenly splitting the Democratic vote, while Trump walloped Establishment GOP Contender #28412 by larger margins. I can understand the house-votes-if-under-270 rule a bit, but it seems to me like it should only kick in if no one can reach a smaller number like 25% of the vote. This would promote more diversity in political opinion, which is of course probably exactly why the rule stands as it is.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 16:53
|
|
|
Someone tweeted that Kasich should run a general campaign just in OH and keep both Trump and HRC from 270, throw the election to the House and win the presidency there.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 16:56
|
|
|
Xae posted:Most companies in the US can deal with tougher regulation and higher taxes with out much of a fuss. I don't trust the vast majority of voters who get to elect the PUSA to have the kind of understanding you've described.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 16:57
|
|
|
zoux posted:Someone tweeted that Kasich should run a general campaign just in OH and keep both Trump and HRC from 270, throw the election to the House and win the presidency there. I despise Clinton but lol if losing Ohio is going to matter in this election. And the plus for all the rest of us is that we are spared hearing endlessly about Ohio this year.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
zoux posted:Someone tweeted that Kasich should run a general campaign just in OH and keep both Trump and HRC from 270, throw the election to the House and win the presidency there. It was a clever idea but I don't think this would prevent Hillary from getting 270 votes, even in a world were Kasich is a 100% lock in Ohio. It In reality, the move would just hand her Ohio on a silver platter.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
zoux posted:Someone tweeted that Kasich should run a general campaign just in OH and keep both Trump and HRC from 270, throw the election to the House and win the presidency there. This assumes Kasich could win Ohio in the general.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
Xae posted:I think this will be more popular than people think Exactly. As much as the Randites complain,even they know that more social equality just means they have to putt up with a black/LGBT neighbor and being slightly less rich. Ruining trade and wrecking the government would be the end of them getting money at all. And you can't overestimate the morale boost a Trump win would give the omega-tier whites in the US. Enough of the rich realize that those guys getting the reins of power would be the end of all things decent, and possibly the end of all things completely given that nuclear weapons are involved.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:00
|
|
|
Zelder posted:i want you to really, really try and visualize a person who hasn't made up their mind between trump and clinton at this point I'm picturing a haggard man arguing with a beach ball over whether he has enough rope
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
Zelder posted:i want you to really, really try and visualize a person who hasn't made up their mind between trump and clinton at this point A frightening number of people that I known are starting to grumble about voting for Trump now that Sanders no longer has any realistic path to the nomination. These are people who two months ago said they'd be happy to vote for any Democratic candidate. It's annoying as poo poo and I've basically stopped discussing the election with a ton of people because of it. Not Arzying or trying to suggest any kind of larger trend at all here, just saying that I know people who would fall into this category and it's... weird. Then again, I'd say they're less undecided and more desperately looking for a reason that voting for Trump would be "okay."
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
Kasich is out. All aboard the Trump train!
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
CNBC running a headline saying that Kasich will suspend his campaign today
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
MrChupon posted:It was a clever idea but I don't think this would prevent Hillary from getting 270 votes, even in a world were Kasich is a 100% lock in Ohio. It In reality, the move would just hand her Ohio on a silver platter. Oh it's an extreme edge case only possible under a weird map but Kasich loves extreme edge cases.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
Avian Pneumonia posted:What i'd really like to happen is for the establishment GOP to approach Sanders and say okay if we run one of our guys as a third party you can also run as a third party and we'll have a 4 way race. Please tell me all about how this will never happen and how Sanders really and truly basically can't ever be president and I should just start preparing myself for the fact that i'm going to have to vote for someone who supported the invasion of Iraq. If someone tried to talk Bernie into running independent he'd laugh himself into a coronary. He's an outsider in his own party, yes, and anyone who runs for Presidency needs a touch of egomania, true, but unlike Trump, Sanders is actually in the race for reasons other than himself and he's not going to do anything that'd risk benefiting the opposition party just so he can hang in the election a little longer. He'll concede, then he and Hillary will throw some dog treats to distract the press and quietly discuss where to move forward from here.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:04
|
|
|
Zelder posted:i want you to really, really try and visualize a person who hasn't made up their mind between trump and clinton at this point My mother-in-law. She finds Trump utterly repugnant, but has absorbed the past 20 years of anti-Clinton talking points verbatim, and lived through Senator Clinton while not living in NYC. My spouse and I talked her into listening to and agreeing with Sanders on a lot of points, but she hates Clinton, absolutely loathes her on a deep, personal level. But she's also disgusted by basically everything Trump has said about women, immigrants, the poor, his ex-wives, his sex life... edit: I don't think old Catholic ladies from Upstate are a big demographic, though, and I expect she'll either stay home, or over the next couple months learn to hold her nose and vote Clinton over the Trumpster fire. One of the oddest things is that she has trouble articulating what she doesn't like about Clinton beyond "I don't trust her" and "I didn't like her as Senator". She was a dyed in the wool Republican for most of her life, but the past few years have made her reconsider a lot of things. Toph Bei Fong fucked around with this message at 17:09 on May 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:04
|
|
|
MrChupon posted:It was a clever idea but I don't think this would prevent Hillary from getting 270 votes, even in a world were Kasich is a 100% lock in Ohio. It In reality, the move would just hand her Ohio on a silver platter. yeah. kasich won 47% of the GOP vote, trump won 36%. if those numbers stay constant but hillary gets the entire dem vote then even with the 2:1 R:D turnout we saw in the primary, which would certainly not hold in the general, then hillary would win of course kasich wouldn't get such high numbers in the general but he could possibly spoil trump's bid
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:A frightening number of people that I known are starting to grumble about voting for Trump now that Sanders no longer has any realistic path to the nomination. These are people who two months ago said they'd be happy to vote for any Democratic candidate. It's annoying as poo poo and I've basically stopped discussing the election with a ton of people because of it. These scum seem to only exist among the facebook young white crowd (i.e. losers who wanted to push ahead of minorities under the guise of "socialism"), with a few stragglers among the unemployed losers of the globalization game. Nobody else is dumb enough to go from Sanders to Trump. I find that most of the Sanders supporters are willing to fall in line. The proper answer is ridicule until the give it up, same as you'd do for the standard MAGA mouthbreather.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:These scum seem to only exist among the facebook young white crowd (i.e. losers who wanted to push ahead of minorities under the guise of "socialism"), with a few stragglers among the unemployed losers of the globalization game. Nobody else is dumb enough to go from Sanders to Trump. I find that most of the Sanders supporters are willing to fall in line. The proper answer is ridicule until the give it up, same as you'd do for the standard MAGA mouthbreather. Most of the people I'm talking about here are mid-to-late thirties (white, of course) working professionals.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:A frightening number of people that I known are starting to grumble about voting for Trump now that Sanders no longer has any realistic path to the nomination. These are people who two months ago said they'd be happy to vote for any Democratic candidate. It's annoying as poo poo and I've basically stopped discussing the election with a ton of people because of it. "We need an outsider, not the same ol' group."
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:08
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:If someone tried to talk Bernie into running independent he'd laugh himself into a coronary. He's an outsider in his own party, yes, and anyone who runs for Presidency needs a touch of egomania, true, but unlike Trump, Sanders is actually in the race for reasons other than himself and he's not going to do anything that'd risk benefiting the opposition party just so he can hang in the election a little longer. All people who aspire to greatness are in it for themselves. The self-aggrandizement is practically a requirement to try for public office. Bernie-kun is just as much of a broken person as everyone else in politics, despite the love he gets from the loser set.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:08
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:A frightening number of people that I known are starting to grumble about voting for Trump now that Sanders no longer has any realistic path to the nomination. These are people who two months ago said they'd be happy to vote for any Democratic candidate. It's annoying as poo poo and I've basically stopped discussing the election with a ton of people because of it. i'm guessing you know a bunch of young white dudes? edit: nvm you already answered this
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:09
|
|
|
AHAHAHAHAHA KASICH QUIT
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:Most of the people I'm talking about here are mid-to-late thirties (white, of course) working professionals. ah, generally leftist moderates who have tricked themselves into thinking they were more liberal than they actually are while they were broke/students these are the people who will deffo be saying "you'll understand when you're older" at young people soon
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
It's actually going to own watching the hysterical NeverTrumpers talk themselves into voting for him in the thinkpieceosphere over the coming months,
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:Most of the people I'm talking about here are mid-to-late thirties (white, of course) working professionals. It's almost like most stereotypes don't hold up under scrutiny.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:12
|
|
|
For the record I called that Trump would dominate The GOP nomination all the way back in August of last year, and things have more or less worked out about in line with how I expected. I make that statement because I want to emphasize that despite having called this situation almost a year ago, I am equally as confident that Trump will lose the in the General. Hard. Trump and Hillary are really working towards two very different goals here. Hillary is hell bent on being the next president of the United States and is designing her organization and her strategy exclusively around that. Trump is portraying a strong man character who is leading a populist movement, Trump isn't actually trying to become president. While I doubt very much that Trump or his campaign possesses the level of self-awareness to recognize this, I feel very strongly that it's easily demonstrated that Trump is actually just in this for the attention, not to accomplish the goal of becoming POTUS. The difference in outlook caused by these two approaches to the campaign is what makes the outcome more or less inevitablr, Hillary Clinton is focused on achieving the goal, Trump is focused on being the manifestation of what the outraged right-wing in this country wants in a leader. While Trump will absolutely do horrific damage to our country and culture on his way out, he simply cannot win this fight because he isn't fighting to win. He is fighting to please his audience, or the audience that has absolutely no concept of nuance, or strategy. I really do not expect Trump to swing towards moderatation, although he may claim to be doing so once or twice, if he does it will only last about 10 minutes before Trump is right back at his old tricks. Trump knows one way of doing things, and while he is indeed a Machiavellian manipulator, because of his own narcissism, he does have limitations in the tactics he is able to employ. Wild trumps tool set is extremely effective for what he has been doing so far, the nature of his psychological toll set lends itself only towards a narrow range of tactics. He is a hammer and he can only treat things like a nail, and although he is an excellent Hammer, he'll never be able to do something that requires more then simply slamming something with as much force as possible. There is nothing in Trump's world or his personal circle right now that would be able to sell him on becoming some sort of moderate and staying there. Trump simply is never going to meaningfully moderate, and his movement is only going to continue to become more aggressive and more extreme. Personally I'm only really concerned with the damage that giving this many angry people validation for their beliefs is going to do, as many of them are going to now feel they have social sanction to be much more publicly aggressive with their hatred and bigotry. I'm also concerned with what will happen wants Trump inevitably loses, his movement is already pattinh itself on the back and declaring itself the winner. Many Trump supporters have essentially convinced themselves that they are living right now in the time of the prophesized uprising of the true conservative silent majority. They aren't making any plans whatsoever for the possibility of trump not being president, their entire worldview is becoming wrapped up in the inevitable Trump presidency and what it will mean for America. When Trump Falls, it will be a psychological blow to his followers that will be difficult to explain. But they are going to all suddenly lose not only their enture worldview, but their sense of hope for the future. It will be a very dangerous time for American culture, especially with the militia movement out there looking for payback for the humiliation it suffered at Malheur. Prester Jane fucked around with this message at 17:20 on May 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
trump's path to victory basically involve making more white people.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:14
|
|
|
Literally, Trump's path to victory could be two-fold: 1. Get out the "Angry White Person" vote 2. Depress the "Everyone Else" vote. If he can disenfranchise enough people while motivating his base (which he's done very well so far), he'll have a shot at winning.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 04:04 |
|
|
Just a quick reminder that the GOP's presumptive nominee is a guy who has publicly championed extreme fringe conspiracy theories: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/411247268763676673
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 17:19
|
|
