2016 US Presidential Election Thread XIII

[corianderstem]

I saw people talking about it on Twitter when it happened, and I was all "Oh cool, I love that song, I hope she records it for real."

Then I saw the actual clip on John Oliver's show, and I was all "Holy shit, that was hilarious, awkward and awesome."

[BEAL]

538 has talked about it, but North Carolina is really a key state. If Clinton wins that one (and polls have gone back into her favor), the election is pretty sealed for her (not that it wasn't, but some of us still hold onto that anxiety of Trump actually winning).

Still can't believe my home state of Iowa is looking to vote him in. This was a state that was either first, or one of the first to allow SSM. How did that ever pass?

I think the polls will continue to go toward Clinton, but seems like when the dust settles from a convention or debate, the line starts to creep back towards Trump.

If the next two debates go towards Clinton, there's just not enough time to reverse before election day

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto

Right, so the comedians like John Oliver that incessantly joked about the awkwardness of that interview are being offensive as well?

She had her trapped her in a room and then awkwardly starts singing a song to Clinton that would make anybody feel uneasy given its content and then proceeds to touch her. If that isn't weird (which is the opinion held by literally everybody), I don't know what is.

Keep grasping at straws. Build your safe space.

True progressives would have gotten the joke.

[DaveC]

Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase

True progressives would have gotten the joke.

[Axver]

Originally Posted by DaveC

perfect.

but no, i wasn't joking. don't talk shit about mary j.

Mary J. BILGE amirite?

[BVS]

Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase

True progressives would have gotten the joke.

You wouldn't understand


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[BigMacPhisto]

Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase

True progressives would have gotten the joke.

Normally, I would have considered it as such, but on this forum lately? Who the hell knows anymore.

[deep]

Y r u not banned

[LuckyNumber7]

That was deep

[DaveC]

http://www.reddit.com/r/im14andthisisdeep/

[Irvine511]

[QUOTE=BEAL;8108670

Still can't believe my home state of Iowa is looking to vote him in. This was a state that was either first, or one of the first to allow SSM. How did that ever pass?

[/QUOTE]



A high percentage of white men without college degrees. That's Trump's base.

NC and VA have become highly educated states over the past 10-15 years, enough to occasionally overcome their Confederate roots.

[BigMacPhisto]

For what it's worth, Trump is doing significantly worse with whites than Romney overall. He'd probably be leading right no if he had Romney's advantage among whites. Basically, the more on-the-fence white voters hear from Donald Trump, particularly those with degrees, the more they end up gravitating towards some other candidate.

[corianderstem]

I think this belongs here as much as the other part of the forum.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2gJNOZr564

[U2DMfan]

There are a lot of axioms in American politics but one of the most true is that nobody votes on the VP candidates. It literally does not matter what they said or did in that debate - especially in how completely whitebread they are - and contrasted to their 100% Name Recognition running mates.

Nobody cares. The people most geeked out about that VP debate are people already engaged and relatively informed (read: not undecided about this one). Sarah Palin proved it doesn't even matter if you're unfit to be President - nobody cares about VP.

Most all of us will struggle to remember Mike Pence's name in 5 years.

"Oh yeah, I forgot all about that guy."

[Axver]

Originally Posted by U2DMfan

There are a lot of axioms in American politics but one of the most true is that nobody votes on the VP candidates. It literally does not matter what they said or did in that debate - especially in how completely whitebread they are - and contrasted to their 100% Name Recognition running mates.

Nobody cares. The people most geeked out about that VP debate are people already engaged and relatively informed (read: not undecided about this one). Sarah Palin proved it doesn't even matter if you're unfit to be President - nobody cares about VP.

Most all of us will struggle to remember Mike Pence's name in 5 years.

"Oh yeah, I forgot all about that guy."

Off the top of my head I genuinely cannot recall Romney's running mate right now.

[cobl04]

All it did for me was reinforce how woefully inept Trump is. Pence may be a bad dude but holy shit he seemed like Gandhi compared with Trump.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[BigMacPhisto]

Great article.

Third-Party Voters Know What They Want - The New York Times

[digitize]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

A high percentage of white men without college degrees. That's Trump's base.

NC and VA have become highly educated states over the past 10-15 years, enough to occasionally overcome their Confederate roots.

North Carolina and Ohio have been fascinating this election. It seems quite possible that the former will break for Clinton while the latter breaks for Trump; at the very least, North Carolina will probably turn out to be the bluer of the two.

This makes sense in the context of Trump being the GOP candidate. But I have to wonder if it is the start of a sort of realignment where Republicans really take the white, working class base that the Democrats used to rely on in the Midwest while the urbanized parts of the south - the New South - goes more to the Democrats, based on a combination of well-educated whites and minorities of all backgrounds. Virginia was first here, North Carolina second. Georgia is next, and Texas is the big prize.

This would fit with a bigger realignment in general of politics along the lines of open vs. closed to the world. If the GOP keeps harping on protectionist themes along with immigration, this'll be more likely. Of course, the DNC is acting fairly protectionist at the moment too, but at least open on immigration, and it wouldn't shock me to see the GOP become the more clearly-protectionist party.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[Hewson]

Originally Posted by Axver

Off the top of my head I genuinely cannot recall Romney's running mate right now.

Current Speaker of the House Paul Ryan

[Hewson]

Originally Posted by U2DMfan

There are a lot of axioms in American politics but one of the most true is that nobody votes on the VP candidates. It literally does not matter what they said or did in that debate - especially in how completely whitebread they are - and contrasted to their 100% Name Recognition running mates.

Nobody cares. The people most geeked out about that VP debate are people already engaged and relatively informed (read: not undecided about this one). Sarah Palin proved it doesn't even matter if you're unfit to be President - nobody cares about VP.

Most all of us will struggle to remember Mike Pence's name in 5 years.

"Oh yeah, I forgot all about that guy."

I think "nobody cares" is under selling a bit. I think its more like, a good VP pick doesn't really help or hurt you but a poor choice can hurt you.
Most of the time the public pays little attention to the VP candidates, but there are a couple of exceptions where the pick can be a factor in the election, but a negative factor for the top of the ticket. See Palin, Sarah.
Not saying McCain wins with a better VP pick in 2008, but he probably has a stronger showing.