Nah, he'd bring nothing to the table as a VP pick. Cabinet position for sure though.
Legit lol'd
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Democratic National Primary Debate #1 |Tokyo2016| Rise of Mecha-Godzilla
- Thread starter B-Dubs
- Start date
- Status
Nah, he'd bring nothing to the table as a VP pick. Cabinet position for sure though.
Legit lol'd
benjipwns
Banned
In hopes that she croakes or what?
Amentallica
Unconfirmed Member
Yea, no. I agree with your ideals but I think they hamper your ability to vote logically. Sorry.
Anton Sugar
Member
If I had to be married to a spouse I didn't love...eh, four years wouldn't be so bad.
Those people are morons. Hope that helps.
ErasureAcer
Banned
Party candidates usually run for another 4 years and aren't challenged in their party(see Clinton, Bush, Obama). If you hate the President Nominee from your party then if they lose you're not stuck with them for 8 years...as they're not in office. Your party gets to vote for someone better in 4 years. There's the best reasoning behind that.
Justices should be term limited and perhaps people won't be voting for stupid ass candidates they hate just so the party machine keeps running to nominate justices when the candidates for President who do so much more are crap. Dumb ass system.
PeskyToaster
Member
Id choose the one I prefer more so that someone else doesn't decide for me
benjipwns
Banned
No matter what you choose, other people are deciding for you.
Future PhaZe
Member
To me, Clinton represents what a sane, ideal 2015 conservative candidate would look like.
The current right is flat out dinosaur politics with dangerous ideas. I'll happily vote for Hillary over a republican, but anticipating a step back from a progressive standpoint from the Obama era really is something I'm in no way happy to accept.
The current right is flat out dinosaur politics with dangerous ideas. I'll happily vote for Hillary over a republican, but anticipating a step back from a progressive standpoint from the Obama era really is something I'm in no way happy to accept.
Amentallica
Unconfirmed Member
So your vote is based in a reality on a system that currently does not exist. Alright.
Not in the scenario presented
Veritigo_X
Member
People that say that are some of the most apathetic voters out there. They say they'd rather vote republican than Clinton, but what they'll actually do is stay home and not vote. Hell, even if Sanders wins the election they'd stay home during midterms. Only enough energy to get excited for politics every 4 years.
ErasureAcer,
I don't think pretty much anyone on Neogaf's left side of the aisle would be disappointed if Bernie Sanders won the nomination and went on to the general. I doubt many of them would be forced to 'hold their nose' and vote for him - they'd probably do it enthusiastically and happily.
I get the feeling that, with Sanders supporters, the opposite doesn't exactly hold true though. I've seen many of them who are like "well, my team didn't win - we're taking the ball and the bat and going home - you guys don't get to play any more!" It is my hope that the majority of them come to their senses come general election time (assuming Hillary is the nominee)
Lets just say that they decide NOT to vote for Hillary though, for whatever reason - it won't affect her numbers like you think. There just aren't enough of the rabid ones to make a legit difference re: voting for someone other than Hillary in the general. Remember there were Hillary supporters who voted for McCain rather than Obama in 08 because Hillary didn't get the nomination - and look how the election turned out. A few percent of rabid, angry people just aren't going to make enough noise to drown out the media (once this becomes a 2 person, 2 party race) hyping it up as, like they always do, a horse race. Bernie's people won't be able to gain any traction once Hillary is nominated - and I can't imagine a scenario where, if she IS nominated, he doesn't tell his supporters to rally around her and support her in the general.. especially given the alternative.
In my perfect world, the general would come down to Sanders vs. Trump as its the most extreme contrast of styles and political positions and would be a great gauge on where the electorate ACTUALLY stands on many issues - but this isn't a perfect world
I don't think pretty much anyone on Neogaf's left side of the aisle would be disappointed if Bernie Sanders won the nomination and went on to the general. I doubt many of them would be forced to 'hold their nose' and vote for him - they'd probably do it enthusiastically and happily.
I get the feeling that, with Sanders supporters, the opposite doesn't exactly hold true though. I've seen many of them who are like "well, my team didn't win - we're taking the ball and the bat and going home - you guys don't get to play any more!" It is my hope that the majority of them come to their senses come general election time (assuming Hillary is the nominee)
Lets just say that they decide NOT to vote for Hillary though, for whatever reason - it won't affect her numbers like you think. There just aren't enough of the rabid ones to make a legit difference re: voting for someone other than Hillary in the general. Remember there were Hillary supporters who voted for McCain rather than Obama in 08 because Hillary didn't get the nomination - and look how the election turned out. A few percent of rabid, angry people just aren't going to make enough noise to drown out the media (once this becomes a 2 person, 2 party race) hyping it up as, like they always do, a horse race. Bernie's people won't be able to gain any traction once Hillary is nominated - and I can't imagine a scenario where, if she IS nominated, he doesn't tell his supporters to rally around her and support her in the general.. especially given the alternative.
In my perfect world, the general would come down to Sanders vs. Trump as its the most extreme contrast of styles and political positions and would be a great gauge on where the electorate ACTUALLY stands on many issues - but this isn't a perfect world
Limited Edition
Banned
Vote for the one everyone else hates. If I have to suffer, so does everyone else dammit.
Trojita
Rapid Response Threadmaker
Again,
A lot of Hillary supporters believed that Hillary was going to wipe the other candidates (Bernie) on her shoe and we wouldn't even talk about them after the debate.
A lot of Bernie supporters thought he would come out completely outtalking Clinton on the issues.
Hillary held her own. She had a lot of stuff softballed to her though like not even having to answer the BLM question.
Hillary steamrolled the first half, there is no doubt. She floundered a bit in the second half and Bernie was much stronger on those latter subjects (which is no surprise).
I wouldn't paint the debate as a TKO for Hillary as a lot of media reports are painting it, but as mentioned they are more interested in getting reads.
A lot of Hillary supporters believed that Hillary was going to wipe the other candidates (Bernie) on her shoe and we wouldn't even talk about them after the debate.
A lot of Bernie supporters thought he would come out completely outtalking Clinton on the issues.
Hillary held her own. She had a lot of stuff softballed to her though like not even having to answer the BLM question.
Hillary steamrolled the first half, there is no doubt. She floundered a bit in the second half and Bernie was much stronger on those latter subjects (which is no surprise).
I wouldn't paint the debate as a TKO for Hillary as a lot of media reports are painting it, but as mentioned they are more interested in getting reads.
Conservative candidates often talk about women's reproductive rights, taxing the rich, enacting gun control laws and a better healthcare system for all?
What your saying is that a sane conservative candidate is a centre left democrat. Which is fine but it comes across as a put down on Hilary by creating a totally impossible standard - Sane conservatives would be centre left, so Hilary is a conservative!
(I mean come on, the woman went through the trenches in the 90s on healthcare. She was demonised for a decade as a hyper liberal left winger, and now suddenly she's a conservative?)
benjipwns
Banned
That's how everyone votes.
Was anyone else surprised by how much Hilary, Sanders, and O'Malley embraced Obama and said they would build on his legacy, not run away from it? It's such a refreshing change of pace from the midterms, when Dems can't run the fuck away fast enough from Obama, only to end up getting trounced in elections. It confuses voters, so I was glad to see the debate last night didn't go that way at all.
I think he's just saying that Hilary would be his ideal standard for a modern American conservative president.
I think he's just saying that Hilary would be his ideal standard for a modern American conservative president.
In my perfect world, the general would come down to Sanders vs. Trump as its the most extreme contrast of styles and political positions and would be a great gauge on where the electorate ACTUALLY stands on many issues - but this isn't a perfect world
Its not a perfect world, but not a predictable one either. I wouldn't count a Sanders vs Trump general out just yet. Just contrast today from 4 months ago when Hilary vs Jeb Bush was pretty much the most accepted outcome.
The Lamonster
Member
I think O'Malley won the night.
He didn't necessarily win the debate, and he's not necessarily my favorite candidate, but he did a great job and earned himself some recognition and I think on the Dem side it's now a three-person race instead of two or five.
He didn't necessarily win the debate, and he's not necessarily my favorite candidate, but he did a great job and earned himself some recognition and I think on the Dem side it's now a three-person race instead of two or five.
What, exactly, do you think Social Security is?
Who pays for our roads? Who pays for our military? The wages of federal workers? Unemployment benefits? Food stamps?
Did we bail out banks and GM? In capitalism, when you fail you fail and when you succeed you succeed - did you or did you not share some of your wealth with these corporations so society didn't implode?
The real question is, what are you talking about?
Amentallica
Unconfirmed Member
I didn't dispute that everyone votes the way he described. I implied that his vote is not based on what he described to be reality.
benjipwns
Banned
Sanders v. Cruz would be a more polarized partisan matchup of the available candidates.In my perfect world, the general would come down to Sanders vs. Trump as its the most extreme contrast of styles and political positions and would be a great gauge on where the electorate ACTUALLY stands on many issues - but this isn't a perfect world
ha, it's true
You are given two choices for a spouse. You like one more than the other but honestly neither really do it for you. You'll be forced to marry one either way and if you refuse to choose someone else will pick for you. What do you do?
You're right - but I think Trump's bombastic nature does seem more in line with the real BASE of the Republican party.. although admittedly, Cruz's policies might line up a bit more with them. I just don't see Donald being able to pivot to a more centralized position on much of anything for a general - but I see Cruz easily able to handle the pandering aspect of politics. I also think Cruz is a lot smarter than Trump.. but Trump's got that whole 'street smarts' thing going for him that the Republicans love.
CharlieDigital
Banned
As I said earlier, I think that Webb and Chaffee actively hurt the Democrats by looking so incompetent on stage.
For the good of the party and not wasting their own time, they should drop out.
Future PhaZe
Member
This.
ShadowKingpin
Member
I want to try and understand something...
How does the Media claim a winner that is opposite from the public view in the online polls? I know, I'm a Bernie supporter and curious how this process is done. There has to be something that I am missing in understanding this process.
How does the Media claim a winner that is opposite from the public view in the online polls? I know, I'm a Bernie supporter and curious how this process is done. There has to be something that I am missing in understanding this process.
Veritigo_X
Member
Trump's live tweeting thing was a total flop. I'm glad I wasn't following it live because it looks like it provided no entertainment value. He mostly just retweeted other people's opinions.
Online polls aren't scientific...at all. I voted 5 times for Chafee in one and only stopped because I was bored. Someone more inclined could write a bot to vote 10,000 times if they wanted.
Online polls aren't scientific...at all. I voted 5 times for Chafee in one and only stopped because I was bored. Someone more inclined could write a bot to vote 10,000 times if they wanted.
Online polls are in no way scientific.. that's the primary issue. I think they're proclaiming Hillary the 'winner' because she didn't really do anything that affects her massive frontrunner status right now. She maintained - and that's really all that's needed in a 'debate' such as this when her polling position is so strong.
Online polls are completely unreliable. They rely on cookies to identify people who've previously voted (if they even try), which are easily defeated by anybody who cares to try.
Basically the only thing they even kind of measure is candidate support intensity, weighted towards younger voters. So not a big surprise that Bernie would win them. If you put Bernie in the online polls after the GOP debates, he'd probably win those too.
Krauser Kat
Member
can we mind switch Omalley and Sanders. Sanders ideals and platform in an attractive body and body would be a much easier sell then what is going on right now.
Chafee's went from being the "Metric System Conversion" guy to "I vote on things on my first day without looking at them" guy.
Jim Webb is now the Vietnam flashback guy.
O'Malley is already Carcetti. They should just replace him next debate with Petyr Baelish and see if anyone notices.
Online polls are bullshit that's why. They aren't scientific or indicative of the real world. They can be too easily spoofed and many voters are either computer illiterate or don't know where to go to vote in such a poll, which makes getting a good sampling impossible.
Anton Sugar
Member
Sanders is never gonna win with that hair.
benjipwns
Banned
How does anyone claim a winner in a "debate"? It's all individual opinion.
I, for example, think Lincoln Chafee was second. Because it was, after all, his first Presidential debate. And Jim Webb won, because I too hate people who throw grenades at me.
Online polls mean absolutely zero from a statistics standpoint because they are not controlled samples. They mean nothing.
Interfectum
Gold Member
For those who missed it, great close for O'Malley: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdvD-4XI2w4
Republicans should watch this and feel embarrassed for themselves and the party they support.
Republicans should watch this and feel embarrassed for themselves and the party they support.
ErasureAcer,
I don't think pretty much anyone on Neogaf's left side of the aisle would be disappointed if Bernie Sanders won the nomination and went on to the general. I doubt many of them would be forced to 'hold their nose' and vote for him - they'd probably do it enthusiastically and happily.
I get the feeling that, with Sanders supporters, the opposite doesn't exactly hold true though. I've seen many of them who are like "well, my team didn't win - we're taking the ball and the bat and going home - you guys don't get to play any more!" It is my hope that the majority of them come to their senses come general election time (assuming Hillary is the nominee)
Lets just say that they decide NOT to vote for Hillary though, for whatever reason - it won't affect her numbers like you think. There just aren't enough of the rabid ones to make a legit difference re: voting for someone other than Hillary in the general. Remember there were Hillary supporters who voted for McCain rather than Obama in 08 because Hillary didn't get the nomination - and look how the election turned out. A few percent of rabid, angry people just aren't going to make enough noise to drown out the media (once this becomes a 2 person, 2 party race) hyping it up as, like they always do, a horse race. Bernie's people won't be able to gain any traction once Hillary is nominated - and I can't imagine a scenario where, if she IS nominated, he doesn't tell his supporters to rally around her and support her in the general.. especially given the alternative.
In my perfect world, the general would come down to Sanders vs. Trump as its the most extreme contrast of styles and political positions and would be a great gauge on where the electorate ACTUALLY stands on many issues - but this isn't a perfect world
I think you're right, that more Bernie supporters will say they won't vote for Clinton than more Clinton supporters will say they won't vote for Sanders. I think a part of that though is because Clinton supporters don't really have to consider the alternative. They are pretty confident Clinton will win so many don't even realistically entertain the idea of a Sanders victory. I would be curious to see if this would change if somehow Sanders pulled off a miracle. I bet we would have many bitter Clinton supporters.
My point is, there will be bitter supporters on both sides either way but I'd like to think that most supporters will ultimately vote for one or the others and the petty or salty people won't make much of a difference anyway.
Bernie will obviously urge his supporters to vote for Hillary, if only because of the Supreme Court nominees, and because they vote the same like what, 94% of the time?
The supporters of his who don't heed this would have never voted for her anyway, so who cares.
benjipwns
Banned
Davey Cakes
Member
I'm a Bernie supporter, but I also align with Hillary on many issues. It was great to hear from them both. Strong first half for Hillary, stronger second half for Bernie.
O'Malley sounded pretty sensible most of the time.
I actually wish Webb and Chafee, even as the "lesser" debaters, got more time to speak. It's nice to hear a diversity of opinions, though Webb was a bit out of place.
I will say I have NEVER facepalmed as hard as when Chafee gave that response about Glass-Steagall. Unbelievably embarrassing.
That said, the guy deserved more than 9 minutes of talking time.
O'Malley sounded pretty sensible most of the time.
I actually wish Webb and Chafee, even as the "lesser" debaters, got more time to speak. It's nice to hear a diversity of opinions, though Webb was a bit out of place.
I will say I have NEVER facepalmed as hard as when Chafee gave that response about Glass-Steagall. Unbelievably embarrassing.
That said, the guy deserved more than 9 minutes of talking time.
Mighty Chin
Banned
Pinko Marx
Banned
At this point I wouldn't even be mad if O'Malley came from behind and took the nom. But The Bern is my man.
Chafee seems like a nice guy and I actually felt kind of bad for him when he gave that response, but the only way he'd ever get more speaking time is if the moderators specifically set uninterrupted blocks of speaking time solely for him and only him. The guy doesn't even like to approach people to tell them he's running for president, he just doesn't have the personality for making himself heard and interjecting on the stage the way Hilary, Bernie and even (at times) O'Malley did.
benicillin
Banned
Still not getting the appeal of O'Malley. Isn't he universally disliked in the state he represented because of how awful he was?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked