• 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.

PoliGAF 2015-2016 |OT3| If someone named PhoenixDark leaves your party, call the cops

Status
Not open for further replies.
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/01/us/politics/chris-christie-marco-rubio-iowa-campaign.html
It was the same question, on the same topic, asked on the same day to two different candidates: How, as president, would you hold down the crushing cost of a college education?

Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey gave an operatic, eight-minute answer in which he derided rock-climbing walls as an extravagant campus fad, disclosed in minute detail his children’s tuition bill for the year ($120,500), poked fun at his weight and imagined a hypothetical showdown in which he told his 19-year-old daughter she could not return to the University of Notre Dame because of the price tag.

“After the crying, the stamping of the feet, the running upstairs, and slamming of door, the ‘you are ruining my life’ — you know what we are going to do,” he said to knowing laughs. “We are going to figure out a way, any way we can, to make it work.”

At a campaign stop 70 miles away, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida gave an answer half as long. Mr. Rubio efficiently, almost mechanically, ticked through his three-point plan to allow students to use work experience for class credit (in his words, “competency-based learning”), let private investors pay for tuition and make colleges divulge which majors yield the best-paying jobs. He concluded with a dark assessment of liberal arts colleges as “indoctrination camps” protected by the political left “because all their friends work there.”
Click to expand...
Mr. Christie’s town-hall-style meetings here are stripped-down, unfussy affairs, so determinedly casual that his staff picks coffeehouses, bowling alleys and even bars as sites. (Bars are inexpensive, staff members say, and the setting all but guarantees a crowd.) He uses no stage or barriers, just a microphone and a bottle of water with the label ripped off. He plops himself down in the middle of the room and wanders into the crowd and plays for laughs at almost every turn: The audience at a cafe here broke into laughter 21 times.

Mr. Rubio’s events are much more meticulously planned, so formal that cloth-covered fencing is set up around the perimeter of the room. (Aides said it made the young lawmaker seem more presidential.) He speaks the entire time atop a raised platform, flanked by enormous red-white-and-blue campaign posters lit by spotlights. Polished applause lines tumble from his mouth: In Clinton, Iowa, the crowd interrupted him at least 15 times with bursts of clapping.
Click to expand...
Mr. Rubio favors lofty, patriotic, high-minded narration to make his points; Mr. Christie relies on emotional, sometimes borscht-belt-style storytelling that can drag his events to two hours, twice as long as Mr. Rubio’s.

Asked about the funding shortfall for Social Security, Mr. Christie zeroed in on a few older women in a cafe, walking up to them and delivering his proposal to raise the retirement age with a side of marital humor. Male life expectancy, he said, has risen to 79, closing in on 83 for women. “That four-year vacation you were hoping for at the end of your life from us, you may not get it,” Mr. Christie told them as laughs erupted across the room. “We may be hanging with you the entire trip.”

Mr. Rubio’s style can be stirring — or oddly disconnected. When a young woman at his event in Clinton wondered what he would do to lure millennial voters to the Republican Party, pointing out that she was one of just a handful from that generation who came out to see him, Mr. Rubio delivered a rehearsed-sounding answer heavy on campaign talking points instead of an actual strategy. “Here is how we are going to fix it,” he said. “By allowing free enterprise and limited government to be applied to the challenges of the 21st century.”

The young woman looked unpersuaded.
Click to expand...
Voters seem highly attuned to the stagecraft (or lack of it) in the candidates’ dueling town halls. In Clinton, in the northeast corner of the state, about a dozen people were left standing at a Rubio event despite ample space in the room: Using an old campaign trick, his staff had subdivided a large banquet hall to create the illusion of a packed room, but that also meant there was insufficient seating.

“I’m surprised they didn’t use this whole room,” said Laurie Kuehl, a 72-year-old woman who arrived after all the seats were filled.

In Waukee, Iowa, on Wednesday night, Mr. Christie’s decision to hold an event at an Irish pub left a dozen or so regulars at the bar confused about how an evening drink with friends had turned into a presidential campaign event. “I had no idea he was coming,” said Gaylen Wermouth, 44, a construction worker sipping a Bud Light as Mr. Christie held court on matters of national security and debt.
Click to expand...
 
J

Jack Remington

Banned
We finally got a new Nevada poll. Trump leads with 33, Cruz at 20, Rubio 11.

Btw Iowa is a month away now. Trump should definitely be collapsing at any moment now that voters will be paying attention.
 
C

Cerium

Member
Jack Remington said:
We finally got a new Nevada poll. Trump leads with 33, Cruz at 20, Rubio 11.

Btw Iowa is a month away now. Trump should definitely be collapsing at any moment now that voters will be paying attention.
Click to expand...

He's not leading in Iowa anymore though. I'm just hoping he places a strong second and that New Hampshire comes through.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Thing to watch for in Iowa is somebody else who's never really been in the race in the state starting to surge from here on. It's arguably happened every cycle in the modern era. And definitely has in 2004, 2008 and 2012.

I haven't researched it but I believe it to be a result of the caucus process itself.
 
J

Jack Remington

Banned
Cerium said:
He's not leading in Iowa anymore though. I'm just hoping he places a strong second and that New Hampshire comes through.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking Trump wins NH, SC and Nevada and finishes 2nd in Iowa. That should basically end the race.

I don't see any other of the non Trump/Cruz candidates doing anything at this point. The rest of the GOP field looks flabby and sick.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Jack Remington said:
I'm thinking Trump wins NH, SC and Nevada and finishes 2nd in Iowa. That should basically end the race.

I don't see any other of the non Trump/Cruz candidates doing anything at this point. The rest of the GOP field looks flabby and sick.
Click to expand...
Problem is that all states through March 1st are PR.

That leaves leverage for other candidates to form an Establishment/Anti-Trump Voltron down the road rather than just drop out. Because a majority of delegates will be in the hands of other candidates unless it becomes a runaway field for Trump and Cruz/whoever within just three weeks.
 
A

A Human Becoming

More than a Member
NeoXChaos said:
1. You think Trump has a shot in your state and 2. Its going to be close between Hillary and Bernie isnt it?
Click to expand...
1. I think he will even if he loses Iowa. He seems to be the one everyone talks about here.
2. If the difference is more than 5 points I'll be surprised. Bernie has a strong base here, but Hillary has the establishment.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
benjipwns said:
Problem is that all states through March 1st are PR.

That leaves leverage for other candidates to form an Establishment/Anti-Trump Voltron down the road rather than just drop out. Because a majority of delegates will be in the hands of other candidates unless it becomes a runaway field for Trump and Cruz/whoever within just three weeks.
Click to expand...

The issue is, though, let's say we reach a point where no one can win an overall majority of delegates....but Trump has the most pledged delegates. Who does the Establishment utilize to create a coalition ticket? In a situation in which Trump is in first, I would think Cruz would be second. They're not going to want him either. As Trump is not beholden to anyone, I could see him offering the VP to Cruz to get his delegates. A convention in which the GOP essentially has no control would be amazing.

Or, they force someone through against the wishes of a plurality of their parties voters. Do they risk pissing Trump off?
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
Nah, that's the calamity scenario where you just accept that the presidency will be a watershed moment and focus your efforts on doing the best you can everywhere else.
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
B-Dubs said:
Such a short list, no wonder he picked bud light.

In case you can't tell I'm rolling my eyes.
Click to expand...

The sad thing about that list is that you can tell that the dude cares about what he serves, but has to keep that kinda crap in stock because lotsa people are afraid to branch out.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
You handle this via Rumsfeld's Strategy.

You go with the sitting Senator dependent on the established GOP infrastructure both in the general and in the future (for his own races) rather than the billionaire who needs absolutely none of it for his one bid in the sun.

I'd probably guarantee that the nomination won't be decided at the convention, and Cruz won't be anyone's VP.

If you're sitting in Mid-March with Trump at a third of the delegates, Cruz at 20% and the other 45% scattered. Everybody else of name status can drop out to endorse Rubio in succession to build his momentum, and then Rubio can endorse Cruz a month or so later when he comes up short because he stinks. Cruz/Rubio stops Trump and attaches Rubio to the ticket.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Coriolanus said:
The sad thing about that list is that you can tell that the dude cares about what he serves, but has to keep that kinda crap in stock because lotsa people are afraid to branch out.
Click to expand...

Yep. That list of IPA's is great, but his selection on Lagers is extremely lacking. He's got more stouts than most places though, usually a place will have Guinness and call it job done. Good on him for having Left Hand as well.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
benjipwns said:
You handle this via Rumsfeld's Strategy.

You go with the sitting Senator dependent on the established GOP infrastructure both in the general and in the future (for his own races) rather than the billionaire who needs absolutely none of it for his one bid in the sun.

I'd probably guarantee that the nomination won't be decided at the convention, and Cruz won't be anyone's VP.

If you're sitting in Mid-March with Trump at a third of the delegates, Cruz at 20% and the other 45% scattered. Everybody else of name status can drop out to endorse Rubio in succession to build his momentum, and then Rubio can endorse Cruz a month or so later when he comes up short because he stinks. Cruz/Rubio stops Trump and attaches Rubio to the ticket.
Click to expand...

My point is, though, Trump won't take that sitting down. Obviously, the delegates can be released to whomever, but there is no way he will play nice if the GOP "steals" the nomination from him.

There's no win for the GOP in this situation. Do they piss off the ultraright wingers who support Trump to prop up Rubio who would be, at that point, seen as someone trying to steal the nomination? In that instance, I can't see Trump not running 3rd party. If he does, they are 100% guaranteed a loss. Or, do they grudgingly accept Trump knowing they're screwed, but they can keep their Rubio powder dry for next time. I do not see a Cruz/Rubio ticket working out. The establishment hates Cruz, probably as much as they fear/hate Trump.

Edit: Anyone surprised Bernie hasn't released his numbers yet?
 
O

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
SUPERIOR, Wis. (AP) -- The mayor of a northern Wisconsin city is apologizing for his Facebook comments calling President Barack Obama a Muslim.

A letter from Superior Mayor Bruce Hagen appears in the Superior Telegram on Friday. In his letter, Hagen says his calling Obama a Muslim was "a poor choice of words in a moment of anger."

WDIO-TV reports Hagen also apologized to the Muslim community for "being insensitive."

But the mayor continues to stand by his dislike of Obama's policies.

Hagen drew protests and calls for his resignation after he posted on Facebook that Obama is a Muslim who has "destroyed the fabric of democracy."

Earlier, Hagen agreed to cut short his vacation and attend a community meal planned Saturday by the Islamic Center of the Twin Ports.
Click to expand...

http://www.waow.com/story/30866639/...um=social&utm_source=facebook_WAOW_Newsline_9

Dunno about you guys, but I always use muslim as a slur whenever I get pissed off at someone.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
adam387 said:
My point is, though, Trump won't take that sitting down. Obviously, the delegates can be released to whomever, but there is no way he will play nice if the GOP "steals" the nomination from him.

There's no win for the GOP in this situation. Do they piss off the ultraright wingers who support Trump to prop up Rubio who would be, at that point, seen as someone trying to steal the nomination? In that instance, I can't see Trump not running 3rd party. If he does, they are 100% guaranteed a loss. Or, do they grudgingly accept Trump knowing they're screwed, but they can keep their Rubio powder dry for next time. I do not see a Cruz/Rubio ticket working out. The establishment hates Cruz, probably as much as they fear/hate Trump.
Click to expand...
Trump's not an idiot. Why would he launch an independent bid after losing the GOP nomination? (Something that would bar him from many state ballots.)

Trump has no ties to the party, none. Cruz has decades of ties to the party, is a sitting Senator and thus integrated into the RNC fundraising infrastructure, and isn't somebody who will rock the boat when it actually matters. A President Cruz would surround himself with old GOP hands like most everyone else would. Trump and Paul are the only real threats of that not happening across the board. Especially on foreign policy, which is the only place that matters.

The Rubio (or Jeb or Christie) feint is cover for those who wouldn't want to endorse Cruz for whatever reason.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
benjipwns said:
Trump's not an idiot. Why would he launch an independent bid after losing the GOP nomination? (Something that would bar him from many state ballots.)

Trump has no ties to the party, none. Cruz has decades of ties to the party, is a sitting Senator and thus integrated into the RNC fundraising infrastructure, and isn't somebody who will rock the boat when it actually matters. A President Cruz would surround himself with old GOP hands like most everyone else would. Trump and Paul are the only real threats of that not happening across the board. Especially on foreign policy, which is the only place that matters.

The Rubio (or Jeb or Christie) feint is cover for those who wouldn't want to endorse Cruz for whatever reason.
Click to expand...

Cruz is not well liked within the party. Hell, he's not well liked within the Senate. I also think Cruz is a bigger disaster for the GOP than Trump would be. Trump has a slim chance in the General. Cruz has none.

As far as why Trump would go 3rd party, do you really see Trump as a good little solider. I think he'd do it for no other reason than "Fuck you." I think his initial threat was a smart tactic to get the GOP to chill the hell out with him. However, if they actively engage in something to deny him the nomination against a plurality of the voters...ya, I think he'd flip the table and say eff you. He does not seem the gracious in defeat type of person.

He's definitely not stupid...but he's also not walking away from this without something.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Why would Trump spend gobs of his own money just to help insure a GOP defeat? All so he gets to say "see I told you!" He'll say that even if Jeb won a three-way race with him in it.

Running independent and getting less than 10% in a general would do far more harm to his ego than bowing out after having lost the GOP race and being able to always talk about "what could have been" had he been the nominee.

Cruz doesn't need to be liked, he just needs to be dependent and integrated, which he is.
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
Why would trump spend gobs of his own money running for president? All so he can maybe go against hills and get rekt? After losing contracts, endorsements, being seen as a lunatic and all that noise?
 
A

A Human Becoming

More than a Member
My father mentioned to me before that Trump has said he plans on dropping out if he starts losing. Can't see him running independent then; Trump is no loser.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Coriolanus said:
Why would trump spend gobs of his own money running for president?
Click to expand...
But he hasn't. And if he won the GOP nomination he wouldn't have to.

He'd have to as an independent unless the DNC is going to foot the bill for his court cases.

There's also a point of sunk costs.
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
benjipwns said:
But he hasn't. And if he won the GOP nomination he wouldn't have to.

He'd have to as an independent unless the DNC is going to foot the bill for his court cases.

There's also a point of sunk costs.
Click to expand...

Suppose you're Reince and you're sitting there with the Turtle deciding what you would do. You know you're most likely gonna lose that election either way. You know your rabid base apparently > your sane base. You know you need to demolish the idea that The One True Conservative is what the party needs to get the executive. You know that if The Golden One runs third party, that's a very dangerous scenario for your party structure.

Do you bluff against the man with the largest ego in the country? Or do you just cut your losses, let the bastard have his damn loss anyway, and focus on absolutely everything else?
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
You absolutely call Trump's bluff on the Presidential front. If you're assuming you're losing, you keep control within the Party, you don't let Trump's people get ahold of it.

Who are his supporters going to vote for down ballot anyway?
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
You call Trump's bluff and then you lose either way, mate, since you won't get rid of the kind of rethoric he represents.

It's a lose lose scenario. His supporters will remain around, more rabid than ever since they'll feel that the party has betrayed them, and then you get to enjoy the continued expansion of the freedom caucus.
 
C

Cerium

Member
I don't think there will be a brokered convention.

Momentum will reduce it to a two person race, and one of the two will get a majority.
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
Hmmm, we're disagreeing about the consequences, benj.

I consider that the best case would be a mondale situation, you put the bastard up there, let him get crushed, and use that as an example to force the party back on the right track.

You consider that the best case is to out-politics him, and then you do... something... to try to deal with the rabid base going ballistic.

I understand the appeal of your scenario. i'm just considering that it would only lead up to even more extreme candidates popping up, in the same way that the house and the base became more radicalized from 08 to 16
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Letting Trump have the nomination and the Party and losing won't shock the base into lurching towards the Democrats' positions. And god forbid he wins?

Best to let Trump go be Trump if he wants to and keep the Party controls as far away from his as possible.

Anything short of Trump establishing a Fortress America (paid for and constructed by Mexicans, like all good American products) won't protect the GOP from a "stabbed in the back" myth.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
Coriolanus said:
Hmmm, we're disagreeing about the consequences, benj.

I consider that the best case would be a mondale situation, you put the bastard up there, let him get crushed, and use that as an example to force the party back on the right track.

You consider that the best case is to out-politics him, and then you do... something... to try to deal with the rabid base going ballistic.

I understand the appeal of your scenario. i'm just considering that it would only lead up to even more extreme candidates popping up, in the same way that the house and the base became more radicalized from 08 to 16
Click to expand...

but would not Cruz fit that mondale scenario than Trump. Trump would be considered an anomaly but Cruz is a true believer. Cruz is a "we finally let you have your guy and he lost" "We told you so"
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
NeoXChaos said:
but would not Cruz fit that mondale scenario than Trump. Trump would be considered an anomaly but Cruz is a true believer. Cruz is a "we finally let you have your guy and he lost" "We told you so"
Click to expand...

I see both Trump and Cruz as being capable of pulling a Mondale 2.0.

The problem, however, is if Cruz/Trump loses by a narrow margin. Then you're truly fucked.

Cerium said:
You will when the nukes start flying.
Click to expand...

We have the coffee, mate. We safe.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Look, these people are morons, but they aren't moronic at politics. They know the whole "you got your guy and we lost" thing will not matter. They've tried this with Romney, McCain and W. Bush of all people. And the party's base rejected them increasingly.

As George Will said, it took sixteen years to count the votes and Goldwater won. That mentality continues to dominate conservative thought. It's actually and naturally ideological.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
benjipwns said:
Look, these people are morons, but they aren't moronic at politics. They know the whole "you got your guy and we lost" thing will not matter. They've tried this with Romney, McCain and W. Bush of all people. And the party's base rejected them increasingly.

As George Will said, it took sixteen years to count the votes and Goldwater won. That mentality continues to dominate conservative thought. It's actually and naturally ideological.
Click to expand...

what does this mean? and it context.
 
benjipwns

benjipwns

Banned
Nixon barely won against a massively divided and unpopular Democratic Party well after gaining the support of Goldwater as his first priority (in response for Nixon supporting Goldwater in '64) before driving out all the Rockefeller opposition one by one.

Goldwater's 1964 victory was a "shock" because it had come against the increasing trend of Dewey Republican domination that Eisenhower had pulled out of the gutter. If anything the party would, as Will noted, re-orient away from the "liberals" and towards Goldwater/Reagan.

The Reagan mythology has dominated the GOP and arguably the Democratic Party since.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom