|
CubsWoo posted:It would be a lot bigger if it were Warren instead of Clinton. Hillary will have been a national public figure for about 25 years come election time - I don't think there are too many voters that have no opinion of her either way but would also go to the polls and vote Clinton simply for the sake of history. Nor are there many voters who would overlook what they don't like about her just because she's a woman. The vast majority of people who would cite her gender as the main factor for their vote were probably going to vote the Democratic candidate anyway. Hillary's been a "national figure" for 25 years but outside of her SoS stint she hasn't been on anyone's mind in the past 15 years unless you're from New York. That's long enough for anyone under the age of 30 to not know who she is until now.
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2014 05:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 01:51 |
|
|
CubsWoo posted:If you were born after 1991 or so, sure. If you were 18+ in 2008, you may remember (and both her primary opponents and her general election opponent won't let you forget) that she was Obama's main primary challenger and they both landed some stiff punches to each other in primary ads during a very bitter challenge. She has the unenviable position of being vulnerable on both sides re: Obama - you can run ads targeting Obama voters showing how she felt about him during the primary, and you can run ads targeting anti-Obama voters showing her solidarity with Obama as SoS and afterward. These two points contradict each other. If you were 18 in 2008 you were a fickle voter and probably weren't turning out anyway. There's no reason to assume people would remember stuff from 8 years ago now.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2014 14:23
|
|
|
Pervis posted:Comcast even said no to the Netflix caching servers, which also would have relieved any congestion and probably for vastly cheaper, which typically is something that any ISP would be happy and willing to do. Netflix being treated from any other CDN service is not reasonable. You're wrong, this is exactly what Comcast is being paid for.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2014 23:08
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:Bernie's NPR interview was ... not encouraging. Not the worst NPR interview of this month though.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Why do people think he's running seriously for President? Even if you're only doing it to "bring a message" or whatever it probably shouldn't be "let's pretend that race doesn't exist, signed A Wyatt Mann".
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 02:06
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:It's 30% Franco-American! I didn't think Vermonters were that fascist.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 03:28
|
|
|
fade5 posted:Arkansas is a bit of a wild card given that Hillary and Bill are from there, with the counter-point being that Arkansas has swung heavily Republican since 1992/1996. 2016 might show whether the "home-state advantage" is truly dead or not. Doubly so if Christie is the nominee.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2014 01:37
|
|
|
aslan posted:And both of them were elected well over "a couple decades ago." Well, if you exclude Reagan you have a sample size of 4. But that's ignoring that Carter was a specific reaction against Washington insiders and Reagan was in that same vein (albeit from the other side).
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
Naet posted:I have a hard time believing that a college education means much to voters considering how anti-intellectual we are as a society. We're not.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2014 16:44
|
|
|
The X-man cometh posted:Box turtles live up to 35 years. I don't think Mitch McConnell wants to run though.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
Antti posted:It's morbidly amusing (not being stuck in America might help here) that the Ferguson unrest has nothing on the 1960s but the conservative reaction to it is and will be just as hysteric as it was back then. It's fairly similar in intensity to 1940s race riots, however. Though the main difference there is that roving bands of white people started a fair number of those.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2014 20:03
|
|
|
duz posted:As opposed to now when the bands of white people causing riots are dispatched from police control? Yes, because those were a factor in the 40s too.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:Also, how will the decline in energy prices effect Perry? Probably not a lot; he'll be out of office by the time you really feel the impact. It would probably be less effective to mention Texas in a year and a half compared with now if the price keeps dropping though.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:I don't think they would oppose that per se, except that these sorts of factory closures tend to leave older people badly positioned to seek new jobs as (generally speaking) these factory jobs are often the centerpiece of a community and, while there may be opportunities elsewhere, they require training and relocation that may be out of the question for a 50-year-old blue collar worker who would have to start earning seniority all over again. Never mind gutting the communities that depend on them. It seems like reasonable welfare/unemployment programs would deal with that, though.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2014 03:31
|
|
|
sullat posted:Also, manufacturing jobs were kind of the bedrock of unions and the middle class for several decades. Even though those jobs are probably gone forever, at least waxing rhapsodic about bringing them back makes for good talking points. Although I suppose the transition of support jobs (call centers, tech support, medical imaging, lab work, programming, etc) overseas is definitely something to be concerned about since those jobs are still around and are kind of important white-collar middle class jobs. Outsourcing lab work is one of those things where the market will correct itself because there's a reason why it's cheaper over there.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2014 03:54
|
|
|
sullat posted:You want the market to correct itself before or after the flood of malpractice suits? In terms of say, drug research, well, the big pharma wants specific results, so if it can get yes-research cheaper overseas than it can here, well, there's really no incentive to move back. Yes, that was the joke. The obvious solution there is to have the FDA not allow research from a non-reputed source (which is fairly trivial to maintain).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
KIM JONG TRILL posted:I'm fully cognizant that Sanders potential candidacy has a less than zero chance of ultimately succeeding, but if it can just get medicare for all into the political lexicon that would be fantastic. I don't think healthcare is going to be another topic until all the employer plans get disbanded due to the Cadillac Tax (so probably another decade or so).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2014 14:00
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:But they can't get disbanded because of the employer mandate. No, you'll just have to live with your barely affordable bronze plan. Paying that fine might be cheaper than the tax (a 40% tax on health insurance).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
Alter Ego posted:How is the answer to this anything but Lyndon Johnson? Because he has a passing resemblance to Tom Hanks?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:Lincoln had one hell of a high-pitch voice. Supposedly Spielberg & DDL got it fairly accurate from what historians have found: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uREttlxHBjg
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
Nameless_Steve posted:The next Democrat's VP slot will be worth only half of the usual bucket of warm piss. The Republicans had the Presidency for all but 8 out of 44 years in the Reconstruction era/Gilded Age. If you give Dubya as that 8, that's a thing that is arguably ongoing today.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 23:32
|
|
|
Nameless_Steve posted:VP slot is a good launching point for Republicans, sure. It only happened once for Republicans too.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Bush I, Nixon. That's off the top of my head, there may be more. Those are the only two and Nixon doesn't really count as he was MIA for 8 years.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
Nessus posted:
Won't happen because politicians support their own interests before the party interests and that would vastly dilute their national influence.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
Hedera Helix posted:I'm worried that the tech bubble will pop before the 2016 elections, sending us back into recession, which will promptly be laid at the Democrats' feet. Even if the crash doesn't come until after the election, and Clinton is elected, what's stopping it from fouling up her reelection campaign in 2020? There's indication that it's relatively isolated for a bubble so even if there are downturns it won't effect the economy at large that much. Also the ones that are most likely to get hurt by it are the ones that effectively don't exist anyway (i.e., the startups that rely on billions of VC money, not Google).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
Nameless_Steve posted:Tech bubble? There's no tech bubble. Uber quite clearly would not exist without billionaires wanting to pump money into it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2014 01:55
|
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:Carter was one hell of a president Brought out the Bible thumpers to be sure.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2014 04:34
|
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:So, what do we change the thread title to if the (R) primary starts and Jeb or Mitt have it locked down from the start? Because right now I don't know if they're really gonna feel like they need any redefining. 2012 was still entertaining even though this was still true.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2014 06:59
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:Oh look, another poster who slept through the Bush years He's literally an accelerationist.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2014 00:47
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:I think Jeb's team will have learned the necessary lessons from Romney '12 and will stay moderate on the things Jeb is moderate on. He won't be on immigration and there's a decent chance he takes the bait on Cuba like Rubio did.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
skaboomizzy posted:I suppose medical marijuana supporters in FL can count on a bump from 57% to 60% in a Presidential election year, but I'm sure Governor Skeletor and the Tea Party legislature will just demolish its effectiveness. The only reason it failed in 2014 was that it was tied to Crist and a donor wanted Scott in power so he could build a casino. And still it only failed by 3%.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:If more Democrats like the people you are posting as a caricature of actually paid attention to it then perhaps the Democrats could provide an alternate coherent economic vision to "like the way the Republicans manage it, but less bad". Literally all Obama has been harping on for like 3 years now has been about raising the minimum wage and putting lots of money into rebuilding infrastructure. Yes, you can argue that he's only doing this because he doesn't have the means to, but to say that there's not an alternative plan proposed is absurd. (unless your definition of alternate is Literally Socialism)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2015 06:30
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
eternalname posted:Clinton and Obama were on pretty bad terms during 2008, but I'm 100% certain bill would be for whatever he perceives will help Hillary win. He's a pragmatic guy when it comes down to it. There's also talk that Bill being so active during 2012 was so Obama would do the same in 2016.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2015 05:14
|
|
|
Gyges posted:
Not as long as he's running, at least outside of his campaign.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
joeburz posted:Considering he got the nomination without even putting out more than a year of his taxes, it seems the ones voting for him don't give a poo poo. He won the nomination mostly because he outspent his competition. It's clear that in the general race his refusal contributed to his scummy businessman image.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:For what it's worth I've seen zero Carson supporters amongst the campuses I've dropped by, whereas there was at least SOME support for Ron Paul. I've seen a ton around here (disclaimer: crazy conservative college campus) but it's primarily from religious people rather than the atheist Paul types.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:To be fair, Hillary has a defacto powerful position within the community by default and no Republican will shake that, but if any of them could, it would be him. 'Fair minded' folks care what the Prez candidate has to say. If you're already mad some podunk congressman said a thing, you already made up your mind. I agree that Jeb is their best bet of all their choices, but I also think that Hispanics are much more solidly partisan than they were a decade ago.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2015 04:32
|
|
|
Chalets the Baka posted:Have they? From my perspective everyone is shifting more and more to the right, doubling-down on supply-side trickle-down bullshit regardless of affiliation. Go watch the State of the Union.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 01:51 |
|
|
baw posted:Also remember that the State of the Union address doesn't matter. I mean it is fairly important if you're discussing rhetoric.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2015 17:28
|
|