2016 US Presidential Election Thread Part X - Page 49 - 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 07-22-2016, 11:06 PM   #961
ONE
love, blood, life
 
iron yuppie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,729
Local Time: 05:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Other than Obama, when has this not been the case?
Which is a reason for it to continue in the future?
__________________

iron yuppie is offline  
Old 07-22-2016, 11:14 PM   #962
More 5G Than Man
 
LemonMelon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hollywoo
Posts: 68,662
Local Time: 03:56 PM
2016 US Presidential Election Thread Part X

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post
Wrong. He has stated that he is personally against abortion, but has stated that as a public official he will not fight against abortion laws, and his record backs that up.

So he's... hesitantly pro-choice? Or no?

Hell, thinking about abortion doesn't give me my jollies either. I want to limit abortions as much as possible through education and safe sex practices. I can respect someone who hates abortion but recognizes the necessity of leaving the option available.
__________________

LemonMelon is offline  
Old 07-22-2016, 11:32 PM   #963
45:33
 
cobl04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: East Point to Shaolin
Posts: 58,565
Local Time: 08:56 AM
So can someone tell me more about this Kaine bloke? Is he in the Dems' right faction?

Quote:
Originally Posted by namkcuR View Post
For those of you outside the U.S., another thing you have to understand about Warren(and some other other senators that were being considered, Sherrod Brown and Corey Booker among them) is that they're all senators from states with Republican governors. If a senator becomes a vp pick, they vacate their senate seat, and a replacement for the seat is appointed by their state's governor.

So picking Warren or Brown or Booker would've essentially been giving a senate seat away just as we're trying to regain a majority in the senate this election cycle. We're not going to have the house of representatives for a while, so it is absolutely crucial that we at least do everything can to get the senate back, and that means not willfully throwing senate seats away.
Ah okay, didn't know that, cheers
cobl04 is offline  
Old 07-22-2016, 11:46 PM   #964
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,856
Local Time: 06:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by iron yuppie View Post
Which is a reason for it to continue in the future?


So a white male candidate is by definition unacceptable?
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-23-2016, 12:06 AM   #965
ONE
love, blood, life
 
iron yuppie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,729
Local Time: 05:56 PM
Unacceptable is a strong term. But two such candidates on a Democratic ticket isn't ideal, no. Just as the minuscule representation of women in Congress isn't ideal.
iron yuppie is offline  
Old 07-23-2016, 01:10 AM   #966
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,676
Local Time: 05:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by iron yuppie View Post
Unacceptable is a strong term. But two such candidates on a Democratic ticket isn't ideal, no. Just as the minuscule representation of women in Congress isn't ideal.

Uh... but there aren't two white males on the democratic ticket?
Diemen is offline  
Old 07-23-2016, 02:02 AM   #967
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,978
Local Time: 06:56 PM
2016 US Presidential Election Thread Part X

Quote:
Originally Posted by iron yuppie View Post
Are you suggesting there are no qualified minority politicians on either side?

I think you've read plenty of what I've posted here to know I'm not suggesting that. And I think my post just there was very clearly not suggesting that at all.

I'm suggesting that there are several qualified people on both sides, and most of them are white men. Because most politicians are white men. The likelihood that Clinton finds diversity in her candidacy pool is not big enough, and you can't just expect her to pick someone simply because they're racially diverse. Lots of people are qualified by prior standards, but that doesn't necessarily make them a great fit for Clinton's ticket.
LuckyNumber7 is offline  
Old 07-23-2016, 07:26 AM   #968
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2girl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: slovenija
Posts: 21,081
Local Time: 12:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonlit_Angel View Post
I don't know who all here watches Colbert's late night show, but Jon Stewart popped up (for the second time this week), and hoooooooooly shit, he just gave one HELL of a blistering rant that I wish to God we could play over and over and over and over again for the GOP. It was so damn cathartic.
This is still awesome too

U2girl is offline  
Old 07-23-2016, 08:39 AM   #969
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,856
Local Time: 06:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by iron yuppie View Post
Unacceptable is a strong term. But two such candidates on a Democratic ticket isn't ideal, no. Just as the minuscule representation of women in Congress isn't ideal.


You could think of Tim Kaine as white male tokenism. That's the group that she has the most problem with.

It's a sign of progress, maybe? That it's no longer 1980 and this group that has dominated all of American political life is now one of many competing groups needing to be pandered to in order to create a broad coalition that can win in November. It's a reflection of our growing diversity.

Anyway, the more I read the more comfortable I am. It is boring, but that may be the point. And Kaine is well regarded in one of the best run, most successful states in the country.

I know a lot of Romney voters who likely made up their minds to vote for HRC -- these would be people who generally support conservative economics and like their taxes low, but aren't socially conservative nor does it comprise a large portion of their cultural identity. This is a credible ticket. The other side has no credibility, it just wants to see the world burn.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-23-2016, 08:50 AM   #970
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 06:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Do we want to live in a world where someone with solidly progressive credentials is deemed boring because they don't spew venom?

I don't like the fact that I find him boring. Maybe the problem is me?
You're fixating on the boring descriptor as if it's the only issue some of us have with him. The fact that he is boring is not in and of itself a dealbreaker (I mean who would describe Mike Pence as intriguing - will be dullest VP debate ever). But in an election where turnout will probably be very important and where the Republican lunatic for all his lunacy is genius at having people turn out who have never voted before while the Democratic candidate is a "hold your nose" candidate for many, going with boring is another head scratcher.

Yes, he has experience and appears to be steady but he was an absolutely terrible DNC chairman (did we all get amnesia and forget the disastrous 2010 midterms for the Dems), which is the first huge red flag I had about him. Keep in mind this was another important election where turnout mattered and who turned out? Tea Party lunatics. His record on abortion rights I don't particularly like, and while he has a solid PP/NARAL rating now, that was not always the case and NARAL did blast him in Virginia as I recall during his governorship for funding pregnancy crisis centres (read between the lines as to what those were). I don't care about TPP, in fact I support TPP so his support of it does not raise concern for me like for many who are further left than I am.

Ultimately a VP doesn't matter for bringing in votes, doesn't really matter in terms of policy, but what I can't stand about it is that he will be the best positioned person to run for the Dem nomination in 8 years if Hillary wins and stays in power for both terms. And that's really unfortunate. In a time of prosperity Al Gore gifted us W.
anitram is offline  
Old 07-23-2016, 09:09 AM   #971
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,856
Local Time: 06:56 PM
They obviously made the calculation that wrestling the center to their side is more important than turning out the base. I'm sure there are people better trained than you or I who run lots of numbers and came up with this calculus. We may not like it, but it's obviously how they are running their campaign. You are right in that the big unknown is whether or not Trump can turn out people who have never voted before, and this ticket isn't designed to do the same with the left. I think the decision was made that presidential elections are won by fighting for the center, and midterm elections are won by the base.

What Kaine does offer is the white guy, Catholic endorsement -- these are the people we're all so worried about in PA and OH. He may be able to make the case to that demographic in these important states. And picking off small numbers of these guys would probably held a greater electoral return than exciting urban progressives who will ultimate have to choose between more moderate progress or The Dark Knight. I'm sure some will stamp their feet and stay home, but likely not enough to offset gains made in the middle.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-23-2016, 09:15 AM   #972
Vocal parasite
 
Axver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: 1853
Posts: 152,977
Local Time: 08:56 AM
I was going to make some pithy comment about the perks of compulsory voting, but then it occurred to me: how consistent is turnout throughout the US? Are there some states where turnout is notoriously poor, or by contrast any where 70% would be viewed as horribly low?
__________________
"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 offline  
Old 07-23-2016, 09:32 AM   #973
ONE
love, blood, life
 
iron yuppie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,729
Local Time: 05:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diemen View Post
Uh... but there aren't two white males on the democratic ticket?
I wasn't talking about this specific ticket, but rather to what I took Irvine's point to be, that diversity on a ticket isn't something to be prioritized. And maybe I misread him on that.
iron yuppie is offline  
Old 07-23-2016, 09:33 AM   #974
ONE
love, blood, life
 
iron yuppie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,729
Local Time: 05:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Ultimately a VP doesn't matter for bringing in votes, doesn't really matter in terms of policy, but what I can't stand about it is that he will be the best positioned person to run for the Dem nomination in 8 years if Hillary wins and stays in power for both terms. And that's really unfortunate. In a time of prosperity Al Gore gifted us W.
This is a good point. Is Tim Kaine really the future of the Democratic Party?
iron yuppie is offline  
Old 07-23-2016, 09:45 AM   #975
45:33
 
cobl04's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: East Point to Shaolin
Posts: 58,565
Local Time: 08:56 AM
It's a wild election. You've got the Dems who are decidedly Centrist and then a Rep nominee who isa populist and nothing more.
cobl04 is offline  
Old 07-23-2016, 09:59 AM   #976
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,856
Local Time: 06:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axver View Post
I was going to make some pithy comment about the perks of compulsory voting, but then it occurred to me: how consistent is turnout throughout the US? Are there some states where turnout is notoriously poor, or by contrast any where 70% would be viewed as horribly low?


In a presidential election year, voter tun out has been somewhere between 52 and 58% since 2000.

I'm not sure about compulsory voting, but I think having it on a regular workday on a Tuesday in November is idiotic. Move it to a weekend or make it a national holiday.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-23-2016, 10:01 AM   #977
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,856
Local Time: 06:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by iron yuppie View Post
This is a good point. Is Tim Kaine really the future of the Democratic Party?


If one believes in the Clintonian model -- moderate governors from the south -- then yes.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-23-2016, 10:21 AM   #978
Vocal parasite
 
Axver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: 1853
Posts: 152,977
Local Time: 08:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
In a presidential election year, voter tun out has been somewhere between 52 and 58% since 2000.

I'm not sure about compulsory voting, but I think having it on a regular workday on a Tuesday in November is idiotic. Move it to a weekend or make it a national holiday.

That wasn't quite my question though. I'm familiar with the overall turnout, but I would be surprised if that is pretty even nationwide. Are there specific states that reliably get turnout in the sixties, even seventies, or states that would be lucky to crack the mid-forties? I'd expect some regional variation, and moreover I would assume the battleground states that receive frequent visits from candidates and huge investment by parties to show comparatively better turnout figures than small states that are a foregone conclusion. If battleground states do not get better turnout, that to me would suggest much of the investment in them is ineffectual.

But I do wholeheartedly agree with you that a regular Tuesday is an absurd choice of day. Likewise I find the UK's use of Thursday to be unjustifiable but at least they leave the polls open very late to try to accommodate people on all schedules.
__________________
"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 offline  
Old 07-23-2016, 10:40 AM   #979
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,856
Local Time: 06:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axver View Post
That wasn't quite my question though. I'm familiar with the overall turnout, but I would be surprised if that is pretty even nationwide. Are there specific states that reliably get turnout in the sixties, even seventies, or states that would be lucky to crack the mid-forties? I'd expect some regional variation, and moreover I would assume the battleground states that receive frequent visits from candidates and huge investment by parties to show comparatively better turnout figures than small states that are a foregone conclusion. If battleground states do not get better turnout, that to me would suggest much of the investment in them is ineffectual.

But I do wholeheartedly agree with you that a regular Tuesday is an absurd choice of day. Likewise I find the UK's use of Thursday to be unjustifiable but at least they leave the polls open very late to try to accommodate people on all schedules.



This breaks it down:

http://bipartisanpolicy.org/library/2012-voter-turnout/

Looks like turnout is a bit higher than I initially thought. State breakdowns are interesting ... I only looked it over briefly and couldn't find much in the way of trends.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 07-23-2016, 11:21 AM   #980
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 06:56 PM
My problem with Kaine is his economic views, but the Democratic Party long since resigned itself being the Wall Street Party Who Happen to Have the Right Social Views, so I really can't be surprised.
__________________

PhilsFan 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 05:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×