PoliGAF 2014 |OT| Kay Hagan and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad News

Status
Not open for further replies.
Carpe Libertatem said:
He won't win in either the primary or the general; the only reason he would run is to push the other candidates (ie Hillary) to the left in the primary
Click to expand...

It would be a weird election then. Similar to how Mitt Romney was super conservative during primaries but then had to backtrack on just about every stance he took during the primaries because they were so insanely far right nobody would vote for him on the national stage. I honestly think Democrats and Independents would vote for an actual Liberal over a Moderate like Hillary.
 
neurosisxeno said:
I'm seeing a surge in articles and reports suggesting Bernie Sanders is considering a Presidential run. The optimist in me loves the idea, but the realist believes it could lead to a Republican lead House, Senate, and President, which terrifies me...

Alternatively, he might actually stand a chance. He's a great politician with a lot of good intentions, but I don't think the Democratic party would ever willingly let him run. I think he would have a pretty solid shot if he made it on the ticket since the field of potential presidential candidates for the Republicans is pretty crappy.
Click to expand...

How? He isn't going to win a single primary or caucus.
 
neurosisxeno said:
It would be a weird election then. Similar to how Mitt Romney was super conservative during primaries but then had to backtrack on just about every stance he took during the primaries because they were so insanely far right nobody would vote for him on the national stage. I honestly think Democrats and Independents would vote for an actual Liberal over a Moderate like Hillary.
Click to expand...
just like ted kennedy?
 
Anyways I think the Dem nomination is going to be an O'malley, vs clinton with another guy more left.

O'malley is going to position himself has actually having done liberal stuff and pin hillary as all talk and too conservative. Clinton is going to run the same kind of inevitable campaign with her tacking more to the left at least rhetorically
 
APKmetsfan said:
didn't he run as a liberal against carter?

I'm just disputing the notion dems go for the 'more liberal'
Click to expand...

Yeah but there were more factors than just the fact he was more left wing than Carter, in fact I don't think Kennedy's ideology was even a factor in the campaign.

Kennedy was pretty much considered a shoe in for the nomination until the iran Hostage Crisis caused a rally around the flag effect that let Carter sail through Iowa and New Hampshire and give his campaign momentum it never let up except for the New York primary in March but that was a fluke.
 
neurosisxeno said:
I'm seeing a surge in articles and reports suggesting Bernie Sanders is considering a Presidential run. The optimist in me loves the idea, but the realist believes it could lead to a Republican lead House, Senate, and President, which terrifies me...

Alternatively, he might actually stand a chance. He's a great politician with a lot of good intentions, but I don't think the Democratic party would ever willingly let him run. I think he would have a pretty solid shot if he made it on the ticket since the field of potential presidential candidates for the Republicans is pretty crappy.
Click to expand...
He's going to be in the primary race and he'll be ignored in a similar fashion to Ron Paul. I am completely sure of this. Only way this doesn't happen is if there's another progressive with a shot at winning worth his endorsement.

And I do believe there's a lot of good that could come with even just that level of attention.
 
If Sanders ran in the primary I would volunteer for his campaign day and night

Although I have no problem voting for Hillary in the general and I think she's alright, though if someone more liberal runs against her in the primary I will certainly vote my conscience

In fact the only Democrat with presidential aspirations I couldn't really stomach voting for in a general election is Andrew Cuomo.

But enough about that I'm going to fantasize about President Sanders now with Democratic majorities in both houses
 
speculawyer said:
I like Bernie but I can't see him as president.

How would Bernie deal with ISIS or Putin?
Click to expand...

According to his website, it seems he wants sanctions on Putin and limited airstrikes on ISIS. So basically what we're doing right now.
 
APKmetsfan said:
didn't he run as a liberal against carter?

I'm just disputing the notion dems go for the 'more liberal'
Click to expand...

Yes but you can hardly compare 2 different people going for the nomination to a Democrat running as a Liberal against an incumbent Democrat. There's also the fact that as someone pointed out, prior to 1979 Kennedy was actually favored.

thepotatoman said:
He's going to be in the primary race and he'll be ignored in a similar fashion to Ron Paul. I am completely sure of this. Only way this doesn't happen is if there's another progressive with a shot at winning worth his endorsement.

And I do believe there's a lot of good that could come with even just that level of attention.
Click to expand...

As someone who has voted for Bernie Sanders every chance he got, I don't think he will get any real coverage. Ron Paul is probably a good analogy because I see Sanders having a huge presence in Social Media, and a lot of younger voters will probably favor him, but there's almost no way he wins the nomination. I could see him taking a few random primaries here and there (New Hampshire wouldn't surprise me) but I doubt he will get the necessary delegates. The media seems to want Hillary pretty damn bad, and I doubt we'll see Sanders get more than a handful of questions in any given debate.

jamesinclair said:
Except every state in New England, and California.
Click to expand...

He'd carry VT like 80/20 over any potential Republican candidate. People in this state love Bernie Sanders.

APKmetsfan said:
He'd be an Obama.
Click to expand...

Basically. After the 2000's no President is going to up and invade with ground forces anymore. Bush will be remembered for the next 50+ years as the President that brought us to Afghanistan and presented us with Iraqi WMD's. Honestly, it would be a waste to fight ISIS on the ground anyway. Air Strikes are effective enough.

As for Putin, he's to smart to do something he wouldn't get away with.
 
Oblivion said:
Well for once, they'd be accurate.
Click to expand...
It would be a funny admission on their part "this guy is a socialist" "eh Obama didn't ruin everything and he was a socialist" "no no this one is REALLY a socialist, we were just throwing whatever would stick with Obama"
 
Aaron Strife said:
If Sanders ran in the primary I would volunteer for his campaign day and night

Although I have no problem voting for Hillary in the general and I think she's alright, though if someone more liberal runs against her in the primary I will certainly vote my conscience

In fact the only Democrat with presidential aspirations I couldn't really stomach voting for in a general election is Andrew Cuomo.

But enough about that I'm going to fantasize about President Sanders now with Democratic majorities in both houses
Click to expand...

Sanders is my first vote, and I suspect he'll get the anti-Hillary vote if Warren as I expect doesn't run.
I expect Sanders to end up getting about 25% if it becomes a two-man race (he'll do terrible in the South and with minorities because I suspect minorities will go heavily for Hillary if she's running against a non-minority)
 
thepotatoman said:
He's going to be in the primary race and he'll be ignored in a similar fashion to Ron Paul. I am completely sure of this. Only way this doesn't happen is if there's another progressive with a shot at winning worth his endorsement.

And I do believe there's a lot of good that could come with even just that level of attention.
Click to expand...

Do you really think he's going to go to the trouble of switching parties just to run for president unsuccessfully?

He could easily run for president unsuccessfully right now. The only reason he'd have to actually run as a Democrat is explicitly to pressure Hillary Clinton, because if he doesn't switch, he doesn't get to debate.
 
Aaron Strife said:
2 new polls of North Carolina have Hagan up 4 or 9

Stick a fork in it, gang

Also there's a New Hampshire poll from CNN that has Shaheen up 7 with Registered Voters and tied with Likely Voters (rofl)
Click to expand...

single-edged%20razor%20blade.jpg
 
Scott Walker wants to pass drug testing for welfare recipients, because it worked so well in getting implemented in Georgia and Florida.

Do these people even pay attention to what happens in other states when they decide to pass things like this?
 
Wilsongt said:
Scott Walker wants to pass drug testing for welfare recipients, because it worked so well in getting implemented in Georgia and Florida.

Do these people even pay attention to what happens in other states when they decide to pass things like this?
Click to expand...

It's less about policy and more about shaming the poor and and dog whistling politics. I'm convince the GOP gets some sick pleasure in making life as hard as possible for poor people.
 
Wilsongt said:
Scott Walker wants to pass drug testing for welfare recipients, because it worked so well in getting implemented in Georgia and Florida.

Do these people even pay attention to what happens in other states when they decide to pass things like this?
Click to expand...

They're all for making social program dollars less efficient and it gives them the bonus of motivating voters in their base.
 
Wilsongt said:
Scott Walker wants to pass drug testing for welfare recipients, because it worked so well in getting implemented in Georgia and Florida.

Do these people even pay attention to what happens in other states when they decide to pass things like this?
Click to expand...

I think the theory is, all it takes is one to be legitimized, then the dominoes start to fall after that.
 
Wilsongt said:
Scott Walker wants to pass drug testing for welfare recipients, because it worked so well in getting implemented in Georgia and Florida.

Do these people even pay attention to what happens in other states when they decide to pass things like this?
Click to expand...

We should start drug testing people who get the EITC and child tax credit.
 
Monkey Cage and Sam Wang have Dems favored, now. 538 and WaPo and I think Upshot have is barely GOP favored.

Everyone but Wang has it an essential toss-up.

As the fundamentals are removed by the model the closer we reach the election date, the polling matters more and so far the polling hasn't moved to the fundamentals.
 
pigeon said:
Do you really think he's going to go to the trouble of switching parties just to run for president unsuccessfully?

He could easily run for president unsuccessfully right now. The only reason he'd have to actually run as a Democrat is explicitly to pressure Hillary Clinton, because if he doesn't switch, he doesn't get to debate.
Click to expand...

Yes I do. What would be the problem with him changing parties briefly?
 
Black Mamba said:
Monkey Cage and Sam Wang have Dems favored, now. 538 and WaPo and I think Upshot have is barely GOP favored.

Everyone but Wang has it an essential toss-up.

As the fundamentals are removed by the model the closer we reach the election date, the polling matters more and so far the polling hasn't moved to the fundamentals.
Click to expand...

Wang still considers it a toss-up. I believe he said anything under 90% is a toss up.
 
Yeah, people confuse probabilities with polling numbers. At 90%, there's a 1 in 10 chance that things go the unlikely way, which isn't unheard of. 90% doesn't mean "landslide."
 
KrZRYFv.jpg


Welp.

Wang still considers it a toss-up. I believe he said anything under 90% is a toss up
Click to expand...

Well, I don't know what he personally considers a toss-up but I wouldn't consider 4:1 odds a toss up, for example. It just means it's not that unlikely for the Dems to lose. I think most statisticians and such believe anything less than 3:1 can be colloquially used as toss-up.

Silver is now 55/45 GOP.
 
thepotatoman said:
Wang still considers it a toss-up. I believe he said anything under 90% is a toss up.
Click to expand...
Probably because his model is much more volatile that 90% is less of a sure thing than it is for other models, which are fundamentals based and insulate themselves somewhat from poll outliers or random swings.

Glad to see Nate is coming around although I still think his modeling is flawed. Part of the reason he had the GOP up as much as they were was a built-in assumption that the closet we get to Election Day, the more they'd rise in the polls, which isn't really based on anything other than Beltway-esque conventional wisdom that keeps saying it's going to be a wave year (which hasn't materialized). If anything Democrats have started doing better in certain states like IA/NC.
 
Black Mamba said:
Well, I don't know what he personally considers a toss-up but I wouldn't consider 4:1 odds a toss up, for example. It just means it's not that unlikely for the Dems to lose. I think most statisticians and such believe anything less than 3:1 can be colloquially used as toss-up.

Silver is now 55/45 GOP.
Click to expand...

I just looked it up. Wang actually said below 80% is still a toss-up. And apparently he has it at 70% right now, so I guess it's right on the cusp where he would stop calling it a toss up.
 
alstein said:
I expect Sanders to end up getting about 25% if it becomes a two-man race (he'll do terrible in the South and with minorities because I suspect minorities will go heavily for Hillary if she's running against a non-minority)
Click to expand...

He may not do so terrible in the South, especially with minorities. Yes, he's not explicitly a minority, but he is all about social issues. By and large, minorities in the South use up way more tax money in the form of social programs per capita than most states in the North. So if they are presented with two choices, one saying "I'm the woman who's going to be just like my predecessor" and the other saying "I'm the man who's going to focus on the programs that citizens want and need unlike my last 8 predecessors", I think it could really go either way.

If you want to discuss something that could turn voters off, most glaring issue is his age--he'll be 75 by election day in 2016, which is quite old considering our past several presidents.

thepotatoman said:
Yes I do. What would be the problem with him changing parties briefly?
Click to expand...

He was originally a Democrat but has served almost entirely as an Independent working very closely with the Democratic Party.

Wilsongt said:
My local news station is about to run a piece on young voters and what they find important... This iz gona b gud
Click to expand...

I can probably spoil it for you--drug legalization and LGBT rights.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Sports betting |OT|
7
10K
Hideous Snake replied
ItalianGAF |OT| - Italia
3
957
Azzurri replied
Food |OT| GAFeteria
2
77
17K
SLoWMoTIoN replied
Good New Music?
2
2K
bitbydeath replied
InFAMOUS [Mafia] [OT] No Good Karma...
69 70 71 72 73
4K
184K
OceanicAir replied
Top Bottom