2016 US Presidential Election Thread - VII

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
I mean, there are numbers and insight on this.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ters-consider-donald-trump-no-hillary-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.
 
2016 US Presidential Thread - VII

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.
 
Last edited:
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 said:
Too much to catch up on, someone just tell me, I heard Sanders won some states recently, is he growing in his chacnes
Click to expand...


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.
 
2016 US Presidential Thread - VII

LuckyNumber7 said:
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.
Click to expand...



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.
 
Irvine511 said:
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.
Click to expand...


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.
 
LuckyNumber7 said:
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.
Click to expand...



We'll see, I guess. I don't think primaries are an accurate gauge of the general, but you could be right.
 
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
 
I still think that Hillary is the better bet against Trump (rather than Sanders), but I wouldn't discount the irrational anti-Clinton hatred among the right.

Case in point: I was at my parents over the Easter weekend, and there was plenty of ridicule pointed towards Trump from both of my very conservative parents. It was all fun and games until my dad said, completely seriously "he just may end up being the best choice for the country though." When I said that he would absolutely be the worst choice for the country, he said, incredulously, "you would vote for Hillary over Trump???"

To which I answered "gladly!" And then he brought up the traditional talking points of "she's power hungry" (And Trump isn't???) and "people have died because of her! (aka, BENGHAZI!!!1!)"

:banghead:
 
Last edited:
cobl04 said:
Too much to catch up on, someone just tell me, I heard Sanders won some states recently, is he growing in his chacnes
Click to expand...

No.
He did well in the states over the weekend, just as polls and other statistics had predicted (since the states used a caucus system and were largely white). For following the election I get a lot of info from this site: ElectoralVote

Especially the March 28 update was interesting.
ElectoralVote
Here, the sitemaster(s) discussed the delegates Sanders won (about 66 more than Clinton, reducing Clinton's lead of pledged delegates to about 237). Plus, making a prediction based on statistics/demographics for the primaries in April, he predicts that Clinton will again increase her lead with another 87 delegates).

In short, Sanders is doing very well, much better than initially predicted. But he will not be able to deny Clinton the nomination.
 
Diemen said:
I still think that Hillary is the better bet against Trump, but I wouldn't discount the irrational anti-Clinton hatred among the right.
Click to expand...

True. But there's apparently also a lot of anti-Trump hatred among the right. Some very conservatives would rather vote Hillary as much as it hurts their pride than vote Trump. All just to save the Republican party (and yes, that means losing the election).

And with all of those sexist remarks by Trump Hillary might even become more appealing to Republican women. Of course, she won't win them all over, but with even a small percentage it'll become impossible for Trump to win. There are not enough old(er) white men in the U.S.A. to win the presidency.
 
Republicans will just stay home. They won't vote for Hillary. Maybe if you work in DC and your gravy train lobbying job is in jeopardy if Trump elected then you vote Hillary.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Irvine511 said:
I had to take this and extrapolate a little bit, but it's probably ballpark accurate.

How the candidates' tax plans will affect you, in 4 charts - Vox
Click to expand...

I actually just threw up in my mouth a little when I calculated how much more per month we would have to pay in a Sanders administration (assuming he gets things passed, of course).

I mean... this kind of taxation would have huge ramifications on how we live. We would be forced to move, for one. You think income inequality in major cities is bad now... Sanders plan would make them worse. Major cities like NYC, DC, SF, Boston, etc would be either wealthy or poor. The in between that's already being squeezed would have no choice but to look elsewhere.
 
BEAL said:
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.
Click to expand...
The appeal of Sanders is that it feels like he's the only one of the four who understands that income inequality is the real issue, that it's the cause for many of the other issues that plague this country. Yes, Obama did a lot to fix the mistakes of the previous administration. But people in their 20s are still struggling financially under the weight of the economy the previous generation fucked up.

I'll use myself as an example. I'm in pretty good financial shape for someone aged 25. I make enough money to have moved out of my parents' home, albeit with a couple of roommates. But I don't really save any money, I don't have my own health insurance and if I turned 26 today I would have to get an ACA health plan. Beyond saving very little money in general, I have saved nothing for retirement, as I do not have a 401k or any benefits at my current job. I haven't been to a dentist or orthodontist in five or six years. And then I have my parents bitching at me about all of that, as if it's my fault that there aren't a ton of opportunities out there.

So there is comfort in the idea that someone is actually saying what we all know to be true. There is a feeling amongst my generation (and I'd venture to say it's pretty accurate) that while the boomers pay lip service to inequality, that many of them haven't had to live the consequences. My parents went to a state school just like me, and had no debt and each found gainful employment within six months of graduation. That's not how the world works anymore, but I have to hear all the time about how woefully unprepared I am for my future.

Bernie's plans aren't particularly practical. I'm pretty comfortable in acknowledging that. But it doesn't make me feel anymore comfortable with the idea of Clinton, who is further right than Obama, who isn't particularly left wing in the first place. I worry about her interest in income inequality and labor issues. I question her foreign policy (as well as Obama's).

There is very little to like in this election.
 
Headache in a Suitcase said:
I actually just threw up in my mouth a little when I calculated how much more per month we would have to pay in a Sanders administration (assuming he gets things passed, of course).

I mean... this kind of taxation would have huge ramifications on how we live. We would be forced to move, for one. You think income inequality in major cities is bad now... Sanders plan would make them worse. Major cities like NYC, DC, SF, Boston, etc would be either wealthy or poor. The in between that's already being squeezed would have no choice but to look elsewhere.
Click to expand...



so, the argument might be that what you now pay for in health care you wouldn't because you'd be covered by national health insurance, and your kids would go to college (state college) for free. also, by having such things taken care of, perhaps you'd take more career risks? start a business? perhaps others would do the same and we'd see a greater entrepreneurial culture?

but, still. it's hard (for me at least) to figure out how my life would change with taxes so much higher. i'm sure there would be benefits, but it's difficult to see beyond having so much less in my bank account. i'd like to be open minded about it.

i'm still smarting from having to pay more in taxes because i got married.
 
In other news, Trump's campaign manager Corey Lewandowski has been arrested for battery and is going to be defended by Kendall Coffey, who had to resign from the US Attorney's office for biting a stripper.
 
PhilsFan said:
In other news, Trump's campaign manager Corey Lewandowski has been arrested for battery and is going to be defended by Kendall Coffey, who had to resign from the US Attorney's office for biting a stripper.
Click to expand...


Poor Onion, what WILL they do?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
 
Irvine511 said:
so, the argument might be that what you now pay for in health care you wouldn't because you'd be covered by national health insurance, and your kids would go to college (state college) for free. also, by having such things taken care of, perhaps you'd take more career risks? start a business? perhaps others would do the same and we'd see a greater entrepreneurial culture?
Click to expand...
Based on how much I have deducted from my paycheck for my Romneycare/Obamacare plan that has seen about a 120% premium increase since the inception of Romneycare here in MA, I think I might enjoy feeling the Bern. The tax increase on me would be significantly less than the offset of actual free health insurance (it would never pass even if Bernie got in, but its a nice dream for him). Couple it with free tuition for my kid in 6 years time and I may just plop a Sanders sign on the lawn. (OK not really)

i'm still smarting from having to pay more in taxes because i got married.
Click to expand...

A wise man once said "be careful what you wish for"...pretty sure that man worked for the IRS. :wink:
 
Just think if we reallocated funds for our military budget towards social programs????
 
Irvine511 said:
so, the argument might be that what you now pay for in health care you wouldn't because you'd be covered by national health insurance, and your kids would go to college (state college) for free. also, by having such things taken care of, perhaps you'd take more career risks? start a business? perhaps others would do the same and we'd see a greater entrepreneurial culture?

but, still. it's hard (for me at least) to figure out how my life would change with taxes so much higher. i'm sure there would be benefits, but it's difficult to see beyond having so much less in my bank account. i'd like to be open minded about it.

i'm still smarting from having to pay more in taxes because i got married.
Click to expand...

And if you work for, or your spouse works for, a company with great at benefits... you're completely fucked.

I'd love to be open minded about it as well, but frankly... fuck college. We put too much emphasis on the current college structure and how everyone needs to go to get ahead. The entire system needs to change. A bigger emphasis on trade schools and on the job training needs to happen, among other things.

My more immediate concern is the idea that I'm paying more for daycare for a 16 month old than 2 students at state college combined.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
NBA 2023-24 Thread
10 11 12
Replies
333
Views
10K
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
womanfish
**Political Junkies** 2020 US Election Predictions
Replies
1
Views
611
Headache in a Suitcase
Headache in a Suitcase
T
  • Locked
The End is Nigh: US Presidential Election Thread Part XVI
32 33 34
Replies
1K
Views
43K
LuckyNumber7
LuckyNumber7
Axver
  • Locked
2016 US Presidential Election Thread XIII
32 33 34
Replies
1K
Views
38K
BEAL
BEAL
Oregoropa
  • Poll
US Presidential Election Poll
2
Replies
52
Views
4K
LuckyNumber7
LuckyNumber7

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom