2016 US Presidential Election Thread - VIII - Page 47 - 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 05-19-2016, 07:36 PM   #921
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,313
Local Time: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BEAL View Post
So going by the polls shared on here.

Georgia

Bernie projects to beat Trump

But when Georgia voted, in an open primary;

Clinton won 71% of the vote. More than doubled Sanders in vote count

Now I don't expect Clinton to win Georgia in the General, but I think she's proven with the actual votes and primary wins that she is the best choice we have
The number of primary voters for one party is only a sliver of the general election count in any given state. Also, Georgia was roughly one of a dozen states that the Sanders campaign admitted to not even spending a dime in and I doubt Sanders even visited the area much if at all.
__________________

BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 05-19-2016, 07:46 PM   #922
Refugee
 
Bluer White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maine
Posts: 2,186
Local Time: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
Rendell has an interesting poll of his own.
Bill, and Ed, and Mrs. Weiner.....do not speak for THIS Clinton voter.

#genderequality
__________________

Bluer White is offline  
Old 05-19-2016, 08:15 PM   #923
Blue Crack Supplier
 
dazzledbylight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: in the sound dancing - w Bono & Edge :D
Posts: 34,830
Local Time: 06:51 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
Polling is a science and the numbers have spoken for themselves for months now while Clinton has had the worst favorability rating outside of Trump and Sanders has enjoyed the highest of anyone from the two major parties. People like the guy and a huge reason for the gap in how Sanders and Clinton fare in the polls involves the millions of non-Democrats that have supported Sanders this year. Sanders brings them in, Clinton draws them away.

And what is there to vet? Sanders has been an open, transparent and steady political figure for decades. If there was anything to really attack, Clinton would have exploited it (her 2008 run should tell you enough about that).

I love a good horse race as much as the next guy, but it's a shame that the Democrats had to give Donald Trump a nice window to win it all by nominating such a poor candidate. Clinton supporters just don't understand the importance of this election and it's a real shame.
(not on this thread to know if you r trolling or genuine, though I think sinceihave seensome if your posts and to a hink you r being genuine will answer accordingly)

I sure as hell KNOW how important this damn election is.

And yes I support Hillary. She's certainly not perfect. Still afraid Bernie will not defeat Trump. I like Sanders too, heard on Air America Radio - lunch w Bernie for several years. I consider myself a liberal-progressive.And an old school liberal: FDR, Elenor R, some of Theodore R" living wage proposals, Paul Wellstone, Ted Kennedy et all.

Bernie can be attacked as a socialist. Too many USA'ers don't know the distinctions between Democratic Socialism vs the more rigid, and even authoritarian types. Still too too many also still think Communism = Socialism.

And he's Jewish. Secular yes, but that usually doesn't make a difference for anti-jewish bigots.

I'll work seriously for either of them against Trump.

George McGovern was my first Presidential vote at 19 (was in the first group of 18 yr oldsto vote- it was local races not Federal elections in 1971. He lost 49 if not all 50 States!

And in 1968 (at 16) I refused to campaign for Humphrey (post Robert Kennedy's assasination) untilil a few weeks before Nov election...

...finally the more I heard about Nixon I that I better go volunteer! Humphreys Poll numbers started to go up in those last few weeks but not be nough in time ), probably because people like me thought Humphrey was too lackluster as a candidate, Lyndon Johnson's lapdog.
dazzledbylight is offline  
Old 05-19-2016, 08:46 PM   #924
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Hewson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your own private Idaho
Posts: 32,070
Local Time: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
I really think Justin Trudeau would have had an excellent shot at the presidency if only Canadians weren't unfairly left out of the election process.
They aren't left out...Ted Cruz gets to vote.

 
Fuck Ted Cruz
Hewson is offline  
Old 05-19-2016, 09:03 PM   #925
Blue Crack Supplier
 
dazzledbylight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: in the sound dancing - w Bono & Edge :D
Posts: 34,830
Local Time: 06:51 AM
]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluer White View Post
Does Trump have that 'whiter-than-white' Susan Sarandon yet ?
And, oh yeah, the last time I looked (a second ago) my skin was/is white.

Susan S is privileged enough to go on about revolution or nothing...

... but poor people of any color, people of color, the disabled, LGBT folks survival is at stake in terms of sone basic rights, safety and safety net issues (deccent food, housing
, health care etc), ?99.8% of Muslims, maybe ecumenical religious people as well could be is serious trouble.

And Trump deciding the Supreme Court, and having the Nuclear Codes?


Some of the most surreal experiences was going through the Air Raid Siren drills during the Cold War in NYC! The sound beginning to rise from all the sirens into a wailing howl all around you. It as terrifying even as you were sort of "used to it"
dazzledbylight is offline  
Old 05-19-2016, 10:20 PM   #926
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,205
Local Time: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
this is from 5/12/16, so it's a bit dated, but it should help us dispense with the notion that Bernie does better in open primaries:




Bernie does best in closed caucus states with large white populations.
Yes, but if you allowed the state of Vermont to vote in every primary and counted their votes twice, things would be different. Hater.
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 05-20-2016, 03:34 AM   #927
Blue Crack Addict
 
Vlad n U 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 28,370
Local Time: 10:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dazzledbylight View Post
Still too too many also still think Communism = Socialism.
That's not incorrect.
Vlad n U 2 is offline  
Old 05-20-2016, 06:57 AM   #928
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 06:51 AM
2016 US Presidential Election Thread - VIII

http://www.npr.org/2016/05/19/478705...ntent=20160519

Where are those principles now?


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
BVS is offline  
Old 05-20-2016, 08:15 AM   #929
ONE
love, blood, life
 
digitize's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: New York / Dallas / Austin
Posts: 14,076
Local Time: 05:51 AM
2016 US Presidential Election Thread - VIII

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad n U 2 View Post
That's not incorrect.

It's kinda funny - I often read Bernie Sanders' Dank Meme Stash on Facebook for the laughs, and occasionally I see people posting actually Marxist things, like Lenin quotes or "seize the means of production" type sayings. Once I even saw someone throw up a picture of Stalin with some alleged quote of his. It makes me chuckle, because I have to wonder if these people have actually looked at Sanders's platform. $15 minimum wage =/= "seize the means of production", regardless of the merits or lack thereof of either proposition.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
digitize is offline  
Old 05-20-2016, 08:52 AM   #930
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 7,233
Local Time: 11:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post
Sanders wants to shift things leftward...maybe make a $15 minimum wage part of the platform, and especially, an agreement to not enter the TPP or whathaveyou.

Meanwhile, rules changes. No more superdelegates. Open primaries in every state so that you can actually draw in millions who aren't Democrats into the process. After the success Sanders had running a far-left campaign, you can believe that someone running in 2024 will try and emulate that...and therefore we need to make sure that the party apparatus isn't doing everything in its power to block that, such as having hundreds of Super Delegates line up years in advance to support Clinton's VP for the nomination, etc. One person, one vote and anyone that wants to join in the process should be welcomed.

It's really not much to ask for and pretty much everything he's railed on about is something supported by a majority of the party's members. It's not much for Clinton to agree to and there's no real downside to doing so, but it's all up to her (along with the party to give enough voice to Sanders' supporters at the convention).

I understand what you're saying about adopting some things into the platform. But, I think that it's difficult in a way, because, by the time it's all said and done, Clinton will have over 3.5 million more votes. One of the reasons i voted for Clinton was because i feel her Minimum wage plan is much more well thought out, balanced and passable. Adopting Sanders ideas, would then negate the voice of the millions of more people that voted for her.

Superdelegate changes i think would be great. Maybe drop them to 5% of the total instead of 15%? something like that.
Open primaries are a horrible idea. It would actually have the opposite effect of bringing people into the party. The idea of a closed primary is to draw people into the PARTY. NOT let anyone vote for your parties nominee and just stay a republican or independent.

I think caucuses should be scrapped and they should all be closed primaries, BUT, make it so you can change to DEM, a week before voting or something.

I think now, to appease the most hardcore. She would have to have him as VP. Maybe Warren. that's about the only thing i can think.
womanfish is offline  
Old 05-20-2016, 08:55 AM   #931
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 7,233
Local Time: 11:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BEAL View Post
Debating polls this far out seems pointless. It will change, and drastically.

Trump has seen a surge in his polling because he is now the nominee of the GOP. Historically the candidate who wins the nomination sees a surge.

Once the dem side is sorted (meaning Bernie concedes), you'll start seeing Clinton's numbers rise as well.

And wait for the debates as well. Trump can do well 1v16, but 1:1 he's going to struggle and struggle bad.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

Exactly right. Every one of these polls are nonsense right now. After the conventions and running mates are chosen, and then maybe after the first debate. That is when we can have some actual meaningful numbers.
womanfish is offline  
Old 05-20-2016, 09:05 AM   #932
Blue Crack Addict
 
Vlad n U 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 28,370
Local Time: 10:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitize View Post
It's kinda funny - I often read Bernie Sanders' Dank Meme Stash on Facebook for the laughs, and occasionally I see people posting actually Marxist things, like Lenin quotes or "seize the means of production" type sayings. Once I even saw someone throw up a picture of Stalin with some alleged quote of his. It makes me chuckle, because I have to wonder if these people have actually looked at Sanders's platform. $15 minimum wage =/= "seize the means of production", regardless of the merits or lack thereof of either proposition.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
I mean, after all, it is just a meme page.

Similarly, I do get a kick out of seeing some Bernie-supporting commentators on Jacobin magazine's Facebook articles take issue with the notion of socialism being anti-capitalist in its definition, followed by 'but the Nordic countries are really great why can't be that type of socialist'.
Vlad n U 2 is offline  
Old 05-20-2016, 09:14 AM   #933
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 7,233
Local Time: 11:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad n U 2 View Post
That's not incorrect.

No, this is absolutely correct.
No, it doesn't mean that to liberal Dems, or even most left-leaning ones. BUT, conservative Dems, and everyone to the right of that will really, really be skeptical, if not downright scared and hateful of someone with the socialist title.

Here is the thing. Right now, not one negative ad has been run against Sanders.

Imagine nearly a billion dollars worth of ads saying:

What do we really know about Bernie Sanders.
A Proud Socialist! Declaring he wants to rid America of our personal freedoms and capitalist foundations. (Insert some random out of context soundbite from Sanders)

He and his wife "honeymooned" in Communist Russia and he still praises and supports Communist dictator Castro (Insert video of him praising Castro)

His plan includes taking away all of your rights to privately chose healthcare from a doctor of your choice, expanding the government by nearly 50%!, increasing taxes on all Americans, with our job creators being taxed at a total rate of over 70%.

Sanders doesn't want to be president of the America we know and love. He wants to tear our very country down and build up a socialist empire.
(Insert another video of some out of context ranting)

Vote Trump to ensure a strong American future.

and scene

Played over and over again. That squishy middle of the electorate will flee to Trump, I guarantee you.
womanfish is offline  
Old 05-20-2016, 09:28 AM   #934
Vocal parasite
 
Axver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: 1853
Posts: 152,977
Local Time: 09:51 PM
I disagree with a lot of people in this thread, but - I'm not sure you realise that Vlad is not an electoral pragmatist.
__________________
"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 05-20-2016, 09:42 AM   #935
Blue Crack Addict
 
Vlad n U 2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 28,370
Local Time: 10:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by womanfish View Post
No, this is absolutely correct.
I wasn't disagreeing. Equating communism with socialism is actually accurate, though not quite in the same way that fearmongerers would suggest.


Quote:
No, it doesn't mean that to liberal Dems, or even most left-leaning ones. BUT, conservative Dems, and everyone to the right of that will really, really be skeptical, if not downright scared and hateful of someone with the socialist title.
Of course they would be, it goes without saying. I'm not bothered by right wingers being upset at the 'socialist' label.

Quote:
Here is the thing. Right now, not one negative ad has been run against Sanders.

Imagine nearly a billion dollars worth of ads saying:

What do we really know about Bernie Sanders.
A Proud Socialist! Declaring he wants to rid America of our personal freedoms and capitalist foundations. (Insert some random out of context soundbite from Sanders)

He and his wife "honeymooned" in Communist Russia and he still praises and supports Communist dictator Castro (Insert video of him praising Castro)

His plan includes taking away all of your rights to privately chose healthcare from a doctor of your choice, expanding the government by nearly 50%!, increasing taxes on all Americans, with our job creators being taxed at a total rate of over 70%.

Sanders doesn't want to be president of the America we know and love. He wants to tear our very country down and build up a socialist empire.
(Insert another video of some out of context ranting)

Vote Trump to ensure a strong American future.

and scene

Played over and over again. That squishy middle of the electorate will flee to Trump, I guarantee you.
I ... I don't particularly care about this? If Sanders was in that position I wouldn't be particularly worried about how Trump would decide to paint him in campaign ads. It would be a fight that cannot be avoided.
Vlad n U 2 is offline  
Old 05-20-2016, 09:58 AM   #936
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
womanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: moons of Zooropa
Posts: 7,233
Local Time: 11:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vlad n U 2 View Post
I wasn't disagreeing. Equating communism with socialism is actually accurate, though not quite in the same way that fearmongerers would suggest.




Of course they would be, it goes without saying. I'm not bothered by right wingers being upset at the 'socialist' label.



I ... I don't particularly care about this? If Sanders was in that position I wouldn't be particularly worried about how Trump would decide to paint him in campaign ads. It would be a fight that cannot be avoided.

I am not worried about right wingers thoughts on socialism/communism either. That is a lost cause. But even this year, i think the fight is always won by getting those people in the middle. Usually they are the least engaged, and informed. So they believe what is fed to them. I think they would be very wary of Sanders and that along with Sanders shaky support with minorities could lead to a Trump win.

Anyway, you are right. It is going to be a big fight, no matter who is the nominee. It's gonnna get crazy.
womanfish is offline  
Old 05-20-2016, 10:16 AM   #937
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,473
Local Time: 07:51 AM
i wonder what Sanders' demands would be if he were only losing by 2m votes.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-20-2016, 12:36 PM   #938
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,313
Local Time: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by womanfish View Post
I am not worried about right wingers thoughts on socialism/communism either. That is a lost cause. But even this year, i think the fight is always won by getting those people in the middle. Usually they are the least engaged, and informed. So they believe what is fed to them. I think they would be very wary of Sanders and that along with Sanders shaky support with minorities could lead to a Trump win.

Anyway, you are right. It is going to be a big fight, no matter who is the nominee. It's gonnna get crazy.

That is completely wrong.

1) Sanders is the one who is actually drawing people in the middle, both based on polling and the fact that millions of those people are actually showing up to vote for the guy in the primaries.

2) Sanders doesn't have "shaky support" with minorities. They're just voting for Clinton for their own reasons - a lot of it being name recognition. Again, his favorability within the party is practically hitting the ceiling. Minorities would have no problem voting for the guy if he where the Democratic nominee.

People need to stop pretending like the idiosyncratic nature of a small group of primary/caucus voters represents how a much larger voting base in a particular state will happen to vote, especially when resources weren't spent evenly whatsoever from one state to the next (such as the Sanders campaign not spending a single dollar in at least a dozen states). Is Clinton now doomed to lose Vermont and Washington in the general election because she got whomped there? Of course not.

I still think the public's general reaction to the Socialist label would be one big "so what?" and the advertisements would be entirely ineffective. If it were so damaging, we wouldn't see Sanders holding such high favorability ratings with both the general public and within his own party. This is 2016, not 1956. Hell, Republicans used that very line of attack against Obama and gained no real traction with it.
BigMacPhisto is offline  
Old 05-20-2016, 12:41 PM   #939
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,232
Local Time: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto View Post

I still think the public's general reaction to the Socialist label would be one big "so what?"

You keep saying this, but what are you basing this on? Do you not remember 2008?

Yes, people are scared by it, even within the Dem party.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
BVS is offline  
Old 05-20-2016, 12:46 PM   #940
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
BigMacPhisto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,313
Local Time: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by womanfish View Post
One of the reasons i voted for Clinton was because i feel her Minimum wage plan is much more well thought out, balanced and passable.
1) She had no problem jumping on the bandwagon when New York state recently passed a $15 minimum wage.

2) People need to stop holding onto the myth of incremental progress. There's been multiple editorials from bright minds bringing up the point that getting things through congress actually tends to happen exceedingly fast for the left, but only when they have these short windows of actually holding the congress (and better, the Presidency as well). Failures in health care reform in the 90s, for example, have nothing to do with ObamaCare which itself can be traced back to a push for health care reform that began in congress (which the Democrats controlled) right before the 2008 primary season.

$12 an hour will never pass with Republicans in there, but $15 can easily pass if Democrats hold Congress and the Presidency, especially since it's what these officials constituents will demand. Plus, $15 an hour will be worth like $13 anyway in today's dollars by the next time Democrats have that sort of control. I'm a proponent of thinking big if something can reasonably be passed by a Democratic congress and that there's absolutely zero advantages to attempting legislation that might get Republican votes when we all know that never happens. Case in point? Roughly the first five years of Obama's Presidency before he wised up and too this hard line stance of pushing things through the executive branch.

You can debate your own economic merits of the $15 wage although it really won't be too big of an adjustment for this country given the studies we've seen on it. There will be job losses in some industries/areas, but the collective benefit in income (particularly for the service industry) would do a lot to really get the economy moving again as none of these people are really able to spend much with their current checks. But actually getting passed? That's a cake walk once Democrats have control. I imagine it would happen almost immediately, even, although they might step up the rate increases year-by-year and have $15 occur like six years down the road or whatever.
__________________

BigMacPhisto 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 06:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×