2016 US Presidential Election Thread - VIII - Page 34 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-05-2016, 12:30 AM   #496
Vocal parasite
 
Axver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: 1853
Posts: 151,017
Local Time: 05:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kieran McConville View Post
Where Trump could be a worry is running left on economic populist grounds. He already has been when you parse the ugly nativism and racial animus. He is utterly shameless and the country club Republicans won't be much help to Hillary Clinton then.
If anybody thinks he won't pick up a small but vocal minority of Sanders voters, they're deluding themselves.

Look forward to every second rag running a shitty column about "why I supported Sanders and will now vote Trump".
__________________

__________________
"Mediocrity is never so dangerous as when it is dressed up as sincerity." - Søren Kierkegaard

Ian McCulloch the U2 fan:
"Who buys U2 records anyway? It's just music for plumbers and bricklayers. Bono, what a slob. You'd think with all that climbing about he does, he'd look real fit and that. But he's real fat, y'know. Reminds me of a soddin' mountain goat."
"And as for Bono, he needs a colostomy bag for his mouth."

U2gigs: The most comprehensive U2 setlist database!
Gig pictures | Blog
Axver is online now  
Old 05-05-2016, 12:39 AM   #497
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 10:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axver View Post
I'd like to take heart, but the amount of times we've expected Trump's demise only for him to keep going - hell, if nothing else I expected a contested convention even with the Indiana results coming in. I didn't think a contested convention would stop one of Trump or Cruz getting the nomination in the end (I'm still unsure which of them terrifies me more), but besides being some good political theatre it would prolong the Republican trainwreck and instability.

I'm now wary of what Trump may achieve in the national campaign, and we've got six fucking months to go too. No new results, just campaigning and pontificating. Fucking hell.

But wouldn't it be funny if Trump crashes and burns with an electoral college result along the lines of Mondale or McGovern or Goldwater. Shame that's probably impossible in today's politics.
Thanks for writing this, I have been thinking that a lot of people are upset because they were looking forward to the 'contested convention" and the GOP ripping itself apart. The truth is that is was never ever going to happen, looking at the polls taken before Cruz and Kasish got out Trump is up 20-30 points on them in NJ, CA and NEB he would have cruised to 1300-1400 delegates. The GOP insiders and nevertrumps were way over playing that hoping for a hail mary, but kept missing. Odd thing is on the polls Trump out performs and oddly Clinton under performs by about 5 points each way. Based on that what can happen???

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
The truth is nobody knows. You're right -- we were all saying that this nonsense would be over once the voting started.

I also think the weakness of the GOP field has been underplayed. And Trump does seem to play by a totally different set of rules.
I do agree, this election we are jamming good with weird and gilly.
The GOP field was not that weak at all, Rubio, Christie, Jeb, Walker, Kasish, come on now, be honest. The problem was the people are done with established politicians, that's why 3 outsiders rose to the top, with Hillary clinging on. Strange times, Biden would not have done as well as people think.
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
Old 05-05-2016, 12:40 AM   #498
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,256
Local Time: 12:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axver View Post
If anybody thinks he won't pick up a small but vocal minority of Sanders voters, they're deluding themselves.
Yeah, I've already seen a few Sanders supporters online talking about at least considering voting for Trump if Sanders doesn't get the nomination, if not outright encouraging other Democrats/liberals to vote for Trump over Clinton.

And my response to those people can be summed up like this:
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is online now  
Old 05-05-2016, 12:42 AM   #499
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Kieran McConville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Auto Dafoe
Posts: 9,600
Local Time: 04:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axver View Post
If anybody thinks he won't pick up a small but vocal minority of Sanders voters, they're deluding themselves.

Look forward to every second rag running a shitty column about "why I supported Sanders and will now vote Trump".
Expect some of that, for sure.
__________________
Kieran McConville is online now  
Old 05-05-2016, 12:51 AM   #500
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 10:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axver View Post
If anybody thinks he won't pick up a small but vocal minority of Sanders voters, they're deluding themselves.

Look forward to every second rag running a shitty column about "why I supported Sanders and will now vote Trump".


I appreciate you taking the time to weigh in from Oceania?? I think?

I could not carry on a decent conversation about your internal politics and I consider myself better informed than most Americans.
Trump won't get a lot of the young Sanders supporters. He will get many of the working class middle aged Americans that feel they have been sold out by the trade agreements that Bill and Hillary passed in the 90s. Sanders has hit a note on that, same note as Trump. Our elections turn on just a few states. What we call the rust belt, and coal country that typically goes Democratic, these people feel left behind by the Clintons and even Obama with his new trade deal. This is where Trump can flip a couple of states.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 05-05-2016, 12:55 AM   #501
Vocal parasite
 
Axver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: 1853
Posts: 151,017
Local Time: 05:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
I have been thinking that a lot of people are upset because they were looking forward to the 'contested convention" and the GOP ripping itself apart.
There was the "GOP ripping itself apart" factor, but to be honest as a political junkie I just enjoy really rare events occurring. It's unlikely to even get this close to a contested convention for a while, let alone one actually happen. I'm excited that Australia is almost certainly about to have a double dissolution election (where the entire Senate is up for re-election rather than just half) simply because there hasn't been one for three decades, not for any consideration of which parties it will benefit. I'd also look forward to the prospect of a contested Democratic convention, though if Bernie supporters think that's still half a chance they're kidding themselves.

Quote:
The GOP field was not that weak at all, Rubio, Christie, Jeb, Walker, Kasish, come on now, be honest. The problem was the people are done with established politicians, that's why 3 outsiders rose to the top, with Hillary clinging on. Strange times, Biden would not have done as well as people think.
Is it just that people are done with the "establishment"? I think the weakness was that those men were weak at persuading voters to support them. If you can't consistently get even 10%, you're weak.

Please clap.
__________________
"Mediocrity is never so dangerous as when it is dressed up as sincerity." - Søren Kierkegaard

Ian McCulloch the U2 fan:
"Who buys U2 records anyway? It's just music for plumbers and bricklayers. Bono, what a slob. You'd think with all that climbing about he does, he'd look real fit and that. But he's real fat, y'know. Reminds me of a soddin' mountain goat."
"And as for Bono, he needs a colostomy bag for his mouth."

U2gigs: The most comprehensive U2 setlist database!
Gig pictures | Blog
Axver is online now  
Old 05-05-2016, 01:03 AM   #502
Vocal parasite
 
Axver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: 1853
Posts: 151,017
Local Time: 05:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
I appreciate you taking the time to weigh in from Oceania?? I think?

I could not carry on a decent conversation about your internal politics and I consider myself better informed than most Americans.
Trump won't get a lot of the young Sanders supporters. He will get many of the working class middle aged Americans that feel they have been sold out by the trade agreements that Bill and Hillary passed in the 90s. Sanders has hit a note on that, same note as Trump. Our elections turn on just a few states. What we call the rust belt, and coal country that typically goes Democratic, these people feel left behind by the Clintons and even Obama with his new trade deal. This is where Trump can flip a couple of states.
It's a function of two things - the global reach of American power makes its politics relevant to us, and the fact that when I first went online most communities in which I was interested were heavily populated by Americans. If there was a political discussion online it was about the US. So today a lot of my online friends are American and its politics fills my social media feeds. My knowledge of UK politics, for example, is much weaker despite Australia and New Zealand's strong historical ties to that country. Of course, I think that's in part because American politics really is more entertaining in its quirks, characters, and - to us - its extremism.

What I don't quite get, though, is how American politics today turns on only a few states, as you say. Look at election maps from the 1960s-80s. There are states voting Democrat that never would today, and states voting Republican that never would today. I realise that this was a big time of transition, especially in the Democrats losing the south, but now also appears to be a shift within parties, a change in what they represent or stand for, and nobody's expecting the Republicans to lose certain states in their modern heartland unless they nominated the ghost of Osama bin Laden.

Hell, they could probably nominate Putin and win more states than Mondale did.
__________________
"Mediocrity is never so dangerous as when it is dressed up as sincerity." - Søren Kierkegaard

Ian McCulloch the U2 fan:
"Who buys U2 records anyway? It's just music for plumbers and bricklayers. Bono, what a slob. You'd think with all that climbing about he does, he'd look real fit and that. But he's real fat, y'know. Reminds me of a soddin' mountain goat."
"And as for Bono, he needs a colostomy bag for his mouth."

U2gigs: The most comprehensive U2 setlist database!
Gig pictures | Blog
Axver is online now  
Old 05-05-2016, 01:04 AM   #503
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 10:48 PM
If Hillary was in a nest with 15 other hatchings she may have gotten pushed out by the big noisy cuckoo bird too,
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 05-05-2016, 01:21 AM   #504
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 10:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axver View Post
It's a function of two things - the global reach of American power makes its politics relevant to us, and the fact that when I first went online most communities in which I was interested were heavily populated by Americans. If there was a political discussion online it was about the US. So today a lot of my online friends are American and its politics fills my social media feeds. My knowledge of UK politics, for example, is much weaker despite Australia and New Zealand's strong historical ties to that country. Of course, I think that's in part because American politics really is more entertaining in its quirks, characters, and - to us - its extremism.

What I don't quite get, though, is how American politics today turns on only a few states, as you say. Look at election maps from the 1960s-80s. There are states voting Democrat that never would today, and states voting Republican that never would today. I realise that this was a big time of transition, especially in the Democrats losing the south, but now also appears to be a shift within parties, a change in what they represent or stand for, and nobody's expecting the Republicans to lose certain states in their modern heartland unless they nominated the ghost of Osama bin Laden.

Hell, they could probably nominate Putin and win more states than Mondale did.
I do appreciate that is does seem odd that perhaps 3 but no more that 7-8 of the 50 states are only in play. I have lived on California my whole life and being the biggest state, 13% of the population we only see the candidates when they want money, and that is quite often. Being that I live in Newport Beach where there is a lot of money they all come here.

Every now and then the country seems to be getting on well, then we can have a more lop-sided election, Reagan's second term, and Clinton's second term.

Good luck with your national elections, sounds really interesting. I am sure I will read about it in my Los Angeles Times daily newspaper. A few years back when they had more overseas correspondents the coverage was better.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 05-05-2016, 08:38 AM   #505
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,357
Local Time: 01:48 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...imes&smtyp=cur

So as national polling is utterly useless, even though some will inevitably pull out a national poll anyways. They mean jack shit.

Currently Clinton destroys Trump. If he improves his polling by 5%, he still loses. He would need to improve his polling in key battle ground states by 10% to pull off a victory.

Impossible? No, as the link states Reagan did just that. So if you think Trump is Reagan, you've got that to hang onto.

But the odds say that this will be a blow out.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 05-05-2016, 08:54 AM   #506
ONE
love, blood, life
 
digitize's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Dallas and around the Texas Triangle
Posts: 13,962
Local Time: 12:48 AM
2016 US Presidential Election Thread - VIII

Quote:
Originally Posted by Axver View Post
I'd also look forward to the prospect of a contested Democratic convention, though if Bernie supporters think that's still half a chance they're kidding themselves.

There won't be a contested convention in any meaningful sense. A candidate will win on the first round of balloting - it's mathematically impossible for that not to be the case, given that there are only two candidates in the running.

In the real world, of course, the candidate who will win will be HRC. But even if we could not be so confident about that - hypothetically - the convention still wouldn't really be contested. The supers may vote as they please, but we'll have a good sense of how that will be heading into the convention. (Again, it will be for HRC. But, if there are mass defections to the Bernie side to the point of even supers from Clinton states #FeelingTheBern, it's unimaginable that that will be some sort of a convention surprise. We will know beforehand.)

So, there will be a first balloting, a candidate will win on that first balloting, and we will know exactly who that candidate is before the convention.

The only real question is this: how much does Bernie try to extract from HRC and the Democratic Party in exchange for a speech endorsing Clinton. Some of his supporters are fairly fanatical and making claims of #BernieOrBust at the moment. (Note that, had Bernie never run, they probably would have happily lined up behind HRC.) A speech where Bernie endorses HRC at the DNC would go a long way to prevent that, and HRC may give into some demands from Bernie to secure that. For instance, adopting his campaign reform platform might be reasonable. But if he makes demands like adding #BreakUpTheBanks to the Democratic Party platform in exchange for an endorsement speech, they may just tell him to eff off. Note, however, that all of this is really unrelated to how many delegates Bernie has.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
__________________
digitize is offline  
Old 05-05-2016, 09:08 AM   #507
ONE
love, blood, life
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Leicester, UK
Posts: 12,350
Local Time: 01:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axver View Post

Is it just that people are done with the "establishment"? I think the weakness was that those men were weak at persuading voters to support them. If you can't consistently get even 10%, you're weak.



Please clap.

I don't think that's necessarily true. Failure to launch doesn't equate to weakness. It's hard to break the mold if you're not hot when the doors open. Rand Paul was actually a polled favorite a year prior to it beginning. Then Christie. Then Bush, for a rather long time. None of those guys faired well because once you've hit your peak, if you lose it, there's no gaining it back. Ask Ben Carson.

I think what actually happened is that, when the gates opened, there was no good candidate left. It was junior boys Cruz and Rubio, and most people didn't know much about how much Rubio actually sucked until they got to know him.
__________________
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 05-05-2016, 09:20 AM   #508
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 01:48 AM
I think we also need to look at the Republican base and its composition to understand how Trump happened. As well as Republican leadership since Reagan. Perhaps working class whites realize that the Chamber of Commerce crowd doesn't have their best interests at heart. Abortion is still legal, and church/charity isn't going to pay your chemo bills. Or get you meaningful work. Cultural resentments -- and, to be honest, some of the more eye rolling developments of the cultural left of late -- might condition some voters to never vote Democrat, but voting Trump is as close as you can get to voting against the Republican Party that has failed these "Regan democrats" since Reagan.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-05-2016, 10:18 AM   #509
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,863
Local Time: 01:48 AM
The majority of Republicans who resent other cultures, in my experience, are people who spend very little time outside of their own world. Their communities are a vast majority white or highly segregated from generations of everyone staying with their own kind. Those who are poor are still poor because they feel abandoned by the political system (and those lucky ones who created a better life for themselves all legitimately worked very hard, and can't imagine that luck had anything to do with it). That there are still significant issues is a sign that something other, something they don't see in their everyday lives, is the cause. Sure, it's the politicians, but it's more than that. It's the things Trump is talking about. They don't encounter blacks or hispanics other than when someone is in the local news for committing a crime. They don't see Muslims except for when another terrorist attack is being reported on. Their experiences are so rare with these groups of people that their thoughts are painted almost solely by their limited exposure. And they've all got so much going on in their lives, very few of them have time to learn about how truly diverse all of these different cultures are across the world. They've got bills to pay and kids to raise.

That's why I find it hard to get angry with the typical right-winger. It's only the pundit class and those who actively sneer at legitimate discourse (like our online friend BobSaget77) who grind my gears.
__________________
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 05-05-2016, 10:51 AM   #510
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 4,181
Local Time: 06:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
My thoughts on Bernie, and I'm assuming that he's in it for ideology and not ego, is that he's staying in to keep her from drifting too much back to the center. She knows that only the most self-hating Bernie supporters won't vote for her in November. They won't vote for Trump. She wants them, of course, but they aren't her primary concern.

What she needs is the middle and the Chamber of Commerce Republicans. She knows he can't win on a coalition of working class whites, racists, and conspiracy theorists. She is going to make herself presentable to the Mitt Romney wing of the party who are going to hold their nose and vote for her. People talk about how much she is "hated" by the right -- but the people who are invested in actually hating her are the Trump voters. Sure, she's not a natural politician and can be grating, but no one thinks she's stupid or crazy or irresponsible.

Sanders wants his platform to be heard, and to his credit, he's far surpassed any other leftist candidate I can remember. I think it's a bit selfish to make her spend money in California, and if his attacks become helpful to Trump and therefore counterproductive to his message I'll lose patience with him.

For now, I'm choosing to believe that this is how Bernie is reading the tea leaves. He's keeping his platform alive so it isn't forgotten in her pivot to the center to claim the middle and maybe even middle right.

I could be wrong.

I like your benefit of the doubt to Sanders. It's commendable. BUT
At this point it is feeling very much more like Ego to me, and not just trying to further his position in keeping Clinton to the left.

I think the best way to explain this is to put to rest the false narrative that has been sold by Bernie, and swallowed hook line and sinker by most of his supporters. That lie is that these two candidates are lightyears apart in their platforms. That Clinton is some Republican light that is just as bad as voting in Trump or some other GOPer.

The facts:

Citizens United - Both fervently want to overturn it.

Immigration Reform - Both want to get something concrete passed with a path to citizenship. Here i would say Clinton is even more focused on this.

Wall St. Reform - Both want stricter regulations. Again, Clinton has showed more in depth plans to regulate more deeply into all Wall St. institutions, where Sanders has mostly just repeated claims to break up the banks! Something that is already doable under Dodd Frank if banks don't meet the standards set.

Infrastucture - Both want large new investments into this

Renewables - Both have plans to greatly increase our position with renewables and to lessen our use of fossil fuels. Sanders is to the left on fracking, but this again brings up one of my main issues with him, is that he shouts to just so No to fracking, NO to drilling, No to coal, where Clinton is thinking about a realistic transition, when the reality is that currently renewables are only about 6% of our power source.

Guns - Clinton obviously a much more out front supporter of fighting the NRA and getting gun legislation passed. She's on his left here.

Minimum wage - Both want huge increases in minimum wage. Bernie wanting 15 Federally, and Clinton 12 federally, and 15 or more in high cost metro areas as they see fit. This again is where Clinton makes MUCH more sense to me. As the cost of living in Manhattan and Boston and LA are enormously higher than say, Elk River Minnesota. This is why a split plan, of 12 Fed, and 15 Metro is more logical and more doable.

Equal Pay, family leave - Both are strongly for this, and again would say Clinton is even more "out front" on these issues than Sanders.

Women's Choice - Both obviously for this, but again, Clinton has a more proactive strength on this issue.

College - Both want big changes here. For reasons i wont fully get into, i again think Clintons plan is better, for the simple fact that I think it could get passed. Free community college and debt free college is still a huge undertaking and would be a huge liberal win if it can be done.

Social Security - Both want to strengthen and extend. Sanders at this point has a more concrete plan he is touting, while Clinton has different ideas to reach the same goal, but she does need to get herself together on this point.
Either way, both better than GOP alternatives.

Healthcare - Obviously Bernie is to the left hear. But again, it comes down to the current reality. If ACA can really be improved and get to full coverage, it will be great for now. I think we all can agree, single payer will take much longer to get instituted, and will probably be a multi presidential effort over decades. Again, both are better than GOP.


I'm sure I'm missing a bunch, but these are the big ones. Of course, just the importance of the SCOTUS picks, should be enough to make everyone vote blue no matter what.

How anyone could look at these main issues and be a #bernieorbust person, just boggles my mind, and really shows me that they are being willfully ignorant.

Sadly, I think Bernie has bought into this whole false narrative, and standing in front of large rallies has given him the ego to keep banging at Clinton hard, instead of easing up on her personally and still just sticking with his issues as we get to June.

Hopefully, he will come around in the end. I hope so...
__________________

__________________
womanfish is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com