2016 US Presidential Election Thread - VII

[Mack_Again]

oh well Sanders was the nominee or even politician I have wanted for my entire life; you know, someone who care about ordinary citizens and democracy. He's sane and knows what actually benefits people; I am expecting that if US goes liberal, sufficient number of people in my country might follow that example (happened in Bush era in 2000s, when politicians started saying going Iraq or deregulations are good idea).

[BigMacPhisto]

I agree that the supers will line up behind Sanders if he wins in pledged delegates. I was worried that a few holdouts for the Clinton camp could tilt the balance in her favor, but that actually can't happen because Sanders winning the pledged delegate count would mean he would just need to win a bare majority (or even less depending on his pledged delegate lead) of superdelegates in order to clinch the nomination.

So, people's fears are unfounded unless there really are about 300 a-hole superdelegates that will refuse to budge and vote for Clinton regardless. Then we have a problem.

My take is pretty simple. You win the pledged delegate count by a single delegate and you're the nominee. End of. We can talk about needing to change the nominee if something happens by the time of the convention when we get there. But as it stands, the right and fair way is for the democratic process to be honored and for the winner to be the person who amasses more support from the voters.

[BigMacPhisto]

And if it does come down to it, the DNC will ultimately just remove the powers of the superdelegates if they have to. There's virtually no upside to Clinton becoming the nominee by promising jobs and goodies to a bunch of supers. It leaves the party with the crappier candidate based on polling and the one with more emotional baggage in exchange for disenfranchising the majority of the voters. Not going to happen.

If they do let it happen, it really could destroy Clinton's chances in the general. You'd have to be crazy to think most of the Sanders supporters are going to get in line behind her if she outright steals the nomination. There's nothing more frustrating in this world than telling someone they'll get something and then yanking out the rug at the last minute. Millions of people will have every reason to feel betrayed.

[LuckyNumber7]

Originally Posted by digitize

I have no doubt that the supers will line up being Sanders if he ends up with a majority of the pledged delegates. To call the supers "pledged" at this point is simply wrong. They've indicated whom they'll vote for, but they have every right to change. We saw this in 2008.

That said, I'm disinclined to take strong victories in a handful of Sanders-friendly states and extrapolate them too far forward.

But the race is close enough to have me slightly worried. I very strongly do not want Sanders to be the nominee.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

I had an argument about this on a different forum. Could you imagine the rage from the independent and middle left democrats who feel as though supers took away their nomination? It would be urging them to vote for Trump.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

I had an argument about this on a different forum. Could you imagine the rage from the independent and middle left democrats who feel as though supers took away their nomination? It would be urging them to vote for Trump.

I completely understand that these voters would feel betrayal, but I don't understand how any of these voters would be urged to vote for Trump?! It would be a complete dismissal of everything these voters stood for just 5 min prior. Do we believe these voters to be that uninformed or that petty? I would hope not.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[PhilsFan]

I don't trust American voters, so yes.

[Headache in a Suitcase]

I have nightmares of Sanders vs Trump/Cruz.

[LuckyNumber7]

Originally Posted by BVS

I completely understand that these voters would feel betrayal, but I don't understand how any of these voters would be urged to vote for Trump?! It would be a complete dismissal of everything these voters stood for just 5 min prior. Do we believe these voters to be that uninformed or that petty? I would hope not.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

Bernie Sanders has a sizable constituency of independent and turncoat voters just like Trump. Lots of his supporters like him for being "an outsider," "not part of the system," etc. etc.

The majority of them? Absolutely not. Enough to throw an election? Absolutely.

I feel like there's this notion that every Republican voter is a dumbass and every Democrat voter can't possibly be nearly as stupid. It wouldn't be a "complete dismissal" as you say. You overestimate the competence of many voters in general. Regardless of party or affiliation. The appeal of a Sanders candidacy shares a handful of characteristics of a Trump candidacy, and those characteristics are ripe for the picking right now.

No, I don't think they're very alike. Of course not. Just felt I'd toss that out there before this get misinterprets.

[LuckyNumber7]

Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase

I have nightmares of Sanders vs Trump/Cruz.

Could you imagine? A self hating Jew, Sanders, goes toe to toe with the "most pro-Israel guy on the stage," Adolf Hitler. What a spectacle that would be...

[BVS]

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

Bernie Sanders has a sizable constituency of independent and turncoat voters just like Trump. Lots of his supporters like him for being "an outsider," "not part of the system," etc. etc.

The majority of them? Absolutely not. Enough to throw an election? Absolutely.

I feel like there's this notion that every Republican voter is a dumbass and every Democrat voter can't possibly be nearly as stupid. It wouldn't be a "complete dismissal" as you say. You overestimate the competence of many voters in general. Regardless of party or affiliation.

Not at all. I know plenty of very intelligent Republicans(and they are appalled at their current party), and I know there are plenty of mindless Democrats. Are all Republicans stupid? No. Are all Trump supporters? Yes. I know; a very bold and dismissive statement, but there has never been a candidate in recent history where the writing on the wall has been clearer.

This idea of having an outsider is extremely appealing! I get that. But the idea that any outsider will do is dangerous. The notion that all "outsiders" are interchangeable is silly. Will Trump have some crossover? Sure. Enough to make a difference? No.

And if I'm wrong and somehow those on one side are suddenly attracted to authoritarianism, then this society gets what they deserve and fuck us for we've failed miserably.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[LuckyNumber7]

I mean, there are numbers and insight on this.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...illary-clinton

Just grabbed this article as an example and browsed it lightly, but I do believe it says something along the lines of 7% of Sanders voters and 8% of Trump voters could/would cross over.

Play a little numbers game. Each of those candidates have roughly half the vote, so those numbers drop to 3.5-4% of their voters, per party. That's without the Democratic Party turning away their voters, and that is still enough to change the results of an election.

[Irvine511]

My fear about Sanders is that there are things in his background and his "policies" that are going to make him a very tough sell to independents. He's still unknown to most of us, especially when you compare him to Clinton and Trump, who we've all gotten to know over the past 25-30 years. That's why their negatives are so high. We know them. We don't know enough about Bernie to hate him yet, but those days are coming especially when the GOP oppo teams get started.

Just one small case-in-point, coming from someone who identifies as mostly progressive and would never vote for a GOP candidate for president: our taxes are projected to go up by over $25k a year under a Sanders administration. That's assuming he gets it passed.

That's a lot of money. And I believe in things like single payer health care and "free" college.

Imagine how your more independent minded swing suburban districts (Fairfax County, the Philly suburbs) of pleasant married straight couples with two cars and kids are going to react to the one thing that has always and will always scare Americans: significantly higher taxes. This isn't getting rid of the ruinous Bush tax cuts and going back to Clinton-era levels of taxation. This is going somewhere else.

If I'm having a tough time swallowing that pill, imagine others who aren't childless married gay urban progressives.

Hillary's general election appeal is that she can and will get Wall Street on her side, especially compared to the clowns on the right. And your taxes will stay about the same, they'll be slightly higher on the very rich.

Is Wall Street and the financial class pure evil? Maybe. But they're also a significant part of our economy, and have the money and clout to win elections (Obama won them over). And they don't want "a revolution."

Bernie may have diagnosed the problem and communicated it in an effective way. And promises of free college and single payer health care are lovely. But not so lovely that moderate suburban voters will happily cough up $25k more in taxes.

We know urban districts will go for the Democrat. We know the exurban/rural areas will go GOP, even with Trump. It's going to come down to the very same districts in swing states that have decided every election since 2000. And people vote their wallets. And I don't have as much faith in youth turnout as I do in black/Latino turnout.

[LuckyNumber7]

I disagree with your point about Sanders and independents. That's Clinton's issue, not his. He's doing well with them. I fear Clinton is going to struggle with them, due to lack of complacency with the status quo.

[cobl04]

Too much to catch up on, someone just tell me, I heard Sanders won some states recently, is he growing in his chacnes

[Mack_Again]

Originally Posted by cobl04

Too much to catch up on, someone just tell me, I heard Sanders won some states recently, is he growing in his chacnes

His chance of winning is certainly improving.

[LuckyNumber7]

Originally Posted by cobl04

Too much to catch up on, someone just tell me, I heard Sanders won some states recently, is he growing in his chacnes

Not really -- he's about to get pounded in New York. Perhaps he's back up to his pre-Ohio odds. He looked like toast, but now he seems to be back where he was.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

I disagree with your point about Sanders and independents. That's Clinton's issue, not his. He's doing well with them. I fear Clinton is going to struggle with them, due to lack of complacency with the status quo.

I think it will be tougher in the general and as he becomes more known -- the tax issue I just brought up will become a big liability. I think independents like the status quo. For the most part. That's why they are independents.

For the record, I would vote Sanders in the general.

[LuckyNumber7]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

I think it will be tougher in the general and as he becomes more known -- the tax issue I just brought up will become a big liability. I think independents like the status quo. For the most part. That's why they are independents.

For the record, I would vote Sanders in the general.

That's the thing though -- I don't think independents like the status quo. Sanders does really well in open states with them. Trump does really well, too.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

That's the thing though -- I don't think independents like the status quo. Sanders does really well in open states with them. Trump does really well, too.

We'll see, I guess. I don't think primaries are an accurate gauge of the general, but you could be right.

[BEAL]

I agree with Irvine. The Bernie Bros seem to be more about the ideas than the execution. I am all for his ideas and have been for some time....but the thought of an additional 25k in taxes a year......maybe we start a lil smaller on his ideas. Free isn't really free. Id rather work towards better healthcare than free college.

Irvine, where did you find your tax info? Is that just the average number for everyone or is it calculated by household numbers?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference