Support NeoGAF

[Deleted member 231381]

Not particularly. She's never led in their poll outside the MOE.

Yes, but most polls didn't show her leading full stop, hence why Monmouth is/was favourable for her.

 

[User 463088]

Unskewing the polls.

How am I unskewing anything? I agree, and have said all along, that Bernie will win NH. Anything other than a Bernie win in the state would have been a complete and total repudiation of him. That wasn't going to happen.

I don't believe the margin will be 14 points. NH is hard to poll, and what happens in Iowa may very well have an effect in NH. Hillary outperformed her 2008 polling in the state by nearly 11 points, this included polls that came out before and after her placing 3rd in the caucuses.

 

[Yellowtail]

OMG Jeb!

http://youtu.be/VC6H-8hktFE

 

[disastermouse]

So this makes vilifying and blowing-off potential allies a logical and good thing to do then?

Nope. I think it wouldn't apply to all potential allies, just sketchy-as-fuck ones.

 

[disastermouse]

How am I unskewing anything? I agree, and have said all along, that Bernie will win NH. Anything other than a Bernie win in the state would have been a complete and total repudiation of him. That wasn't going to happen.

I don't believe the margin will be 14 points. NH is hard to poll, and what happens in Iowa may very well have an effect in NH. Hillary outperformed her 2008 polling in the state by nearly 11 points, this included polls that came out before and after her placing 3rd in the caucuses.

That wasn't meant as serious criticism. I should have indicated that. On my second Moscow Mule.

 

[Tom_Cody]

If those numbers are accurate..
Cruz has a path to victory.
Trump has a path to victory.

I'm struggling to see how anyone else does. One big assumption is that voters who support candidates in the Establishment Bracket will hop to another Establishment candidate if their first pick drops out. But those numbers don't really support this. Trump - but Cruz especially - appear to be gaining more of those establishment voters' support in those scenarios.

We were wondering about who would blink first: the candidates or the voters. This could be a big clue.

(I love it when pollsters ask these narrowed-down hypotheticals. I wish more would.)

This dynamic is fascinating. On one hand, Trump doesn't have close to a majority and most polls show approximately a majority to be still undecided. On the the other hand, every indication is that most Republican voters are fine with Trump and Cruz, and that the votes are more likely to fall their way once the ballots are actually cast. I can understand why Jeb, Kasich, Rubio, and Christie are still in the race, but I think it's pretty likely that the race will narrow to Trump and Cruz as soon as NH. Or even just Trump. As you mentioned, very few pollsters are actually looking at the truly important questions. You can't vote undecided. We won't know the truth until the pie is actually divided up Iowa and New Hampshire.

The next month is going to be very interesting.

 

[Makai]

OMG Jeb!

http://youtu.be/VC6H-8hktFE

Yes

 

[User 463088]

That wasn't meant as serious criticism. I should have indicated that. On my second Moscow Mule.

God my sarcasm game has been shit lately...I've been trying really hard to be fair lately and I'm like how in the hell did I go full partisan on that hahaha.

 

[Makai]

@RealBenCarson will hold 2 town halls at the Blue Bunny Ice Cream Parlor b/c venue isn't big enough for the crowd.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Blue Dog Democrats generally don't vote for racially progressive policies because the vast majority of their voters are white. So having minorities refuse to vote for the elected officials who would support the policies you're calling for won't hurt them at all. Nothing in this post defends your initial argument that black voters could force Democrats to pass legislation if they acted together. Its just hand waving combined with the specious argument that the 2010 election happened because the Democrats weren't liberal enough and not that fact that the unemployment rate was 9.8%.

Actually, most Blue Dog Democrats are/were (given there's not that many left now) in Southern states, so they had a much larger proportion of black voters than average. The majority of their vote may be white, but they wouldn't be able to win election on solely white votes - just as Obama may have had far more white voters than black voters, but would have failed to win in '12 without black votes. That gives the black vote as a united bloc a far amount of political leverage, which goes unused if it won't be wielded. Obviously there are limits to this - for example, if the policy would alienate more voters than it appeases black voters it represents a net loss - but in general that leverage is still useful for some common sense policies that politicians who are electorally risk averse are avoiding.

Also, 2010 happened 100% because liberals were unenthused. It wasn't a conversion election, Republicans didn't win because people suddenly switched to them. The same number of Republicans as last time turned out and liberals thought "fuck it, why bother". In this case, I don't actually think it was because Obama didn't do anything progressive, I think it's because he did a very bad job of marketing his achievements - in fairness, because a large part of his party very stupidly shut him down on them (and paid the price). The DNC is not actually very good at electioneering and is quite lucky they have a demographic advantage for the presidency.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

God my sarcasm game has been shit lately...I've been trying really hard to be fair lately and I'm like how in the hell did I go full partisan on that hahaha.

I'm sorry, I've been overusing your sarcasmometer later, that's probably my fault. I'll try reining it back. :x

 

[User 463088]

OMG Jeb!

http://youtu.be/VC6H-8hktFE

Oh dear baby Jesus, I love this. This is "I am not a witch" territory of greatness for me.

 

[User 463088]

I'm sorry, I've been overusing your sarcasmometer later, that's probably my fault. I'll try reigning it back. :x

You're fine

I'm just on a diet. And I'm cranky. I want fat, sugar and grease. That's what I typically run on. Currently, I'm just running on pure hatred and self loathing.

 

[PBY]

OMG Jeb!

http://youtu.be/VC6H-8hktFE

Yo the Establishment eating their own. Savage.

 

[Elaugaufein]

So this makes vilifying and blowing-off potential allies a logical and good thing to do then?

It's the same as with the centrist block only with less leverage. You can't be seen as a reliable slavish vote or you get nothing and you can't be pointlessly hostile either because you get nothing. But if a centrist has nothing to offer there's little point in going along because of "Maybe, one day....".
That involves maintaining a reasonable skepticism of centrists who approach you during primaries because they tend to track centre in generals. You'd see a hell of a lot skepticism if Clinton made the approach in a General but obviously that's not going to happen.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

That is the first high energy thing Jeb! has done all campaign.

 

[User 463088]

That is the first high energy thing Jeb! has done all campaign.

How very dare you act as though Jeb! had anything whatsoever to do with something his SuperPAC did. The very insinuation is scandalous. Scandalous I say.

 

[Holmes]

 

[Veritigo_X]

Kim Davis is attending the State of the Union? Wut?

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Shame about NBC/SurveyMonkey. They're a good pollster and normally fairly neutral in terms of where they fall compared to the other pollsters. Mind you, IBD/TIPP was 100% an outlier and that one is probably in line with the general picture of something like 53-38; it's not unexpected really.

Still, Sanders is maybe one good poll away from having 40 nationally. I still think we'll get one before Iowa.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

OMG Jeb!

http://youtu.be/VC6H-8hktFE

Jeb Bush a savage, doing the Establishment much damage.

Jeb seven months ago: "I'm going to be a happy warrior."

Jeb today: "If I drown, Rubio drowns too."

 

[disastermouse]

God my sarcasm game has been shit lately...I've been trying really hard to be fair lately and I'm like how in the hell did I go full partisan on that hahaha.

It's fair game. Just wanted to make sure you knew I was kidding.

 

[HylianTom]

It's the same as with the centrist block only with less leverage. You can't be seen as a reliable slavish vote or you get nothing and you can't be pointlessly hostile either because you get nothing. But if a centrist has nothing to offer there's little point in going along because of "Maybe, one day....".
That involves maintaining a reasonable skepticism of centrists who approach you during primaries because they tend to track centre in generals. You'd see a hell of a lot skepticism if Clinton made the approach in a General but obviously that's not going to happen.

This might be where we differ. You present her as a centrist offering nothing. I dispute that strongly.

 

[B-Dubs]

Kim Davis is attending the State of the Union? Wut?

Who the fuck invited her? Sure as hell wasn't the president, I've got that list.

 

[benjipwns]

How very dare you act as though Jeb! had anything whatsoever to do with something his SuperPAC did. The very insinuation is scandalous. Scandalous I say.

Plus, it would be illegal! I simply can't see a candidate in this day and age doing something illegal with all the media scrutiny.

Except Hillary Clinton. There's nothing she won't do and the neoliberal media cronies won't cover up.

 

[disastermouse]

You're fine

I'm just on a diet. And I'm cranky. I want fat, sugar and grease. That's what I typically run on. Currently, I'm just running on pure hatred and self loathing.

What kind of diet? I go with calorie restriction, 16/8 intermittent fasting, and 1gm/lb of lean mass protein macro. Also keeping fat high enough to prevent destroying my sex drive.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Jeb Bush a savage, doing the Establishment much damage.

Jeb seven months ago: "I'm going to be a happy warrior."

Jeb today: "If I drown, Rubio drowns too."

Jeb will be gone after NH. He's not getting delegates in either Iowa or NH and that will be that. After Iowa and NH there will be 6 Republican candidates tops - Trump, Cruz, Carson, Christie, Rubio, Kasich. Less if Kasich and Christie miss the NH 10% bar. You can hope you'll be a beneficiary of others pulling out... unless you have 0 delegates so far, because then you're an obvious loser.

Rubio being the only establishment candidate competitive in Iowa means it will probably be him to battle it out against Cruz and Trump, but Christie or Kasich could shock, I suppose.

 

[disastermouse]

This might be where we differ. You present her as a centrist offering nothing. I dispute that strongly.

What does she offer? Correction: What would they trust that she offers?

 

[PBY]

Jeb will be gone after NH. He's not getting delegates in either Iowa or NH and that will be that. After Iowa and NH there will be 6 Republican candidates tops - Trump, Cruz, Carson, Christie, Rubio, Kasich. Less if Kasich and Christie miss the NH 10% bar.

He's not dropping out after NH.

 

[benjipwns]

Who the fuck invited her? Sure as hell wasn't the president, I've got that list.

Kim Davis will attend Obama's speech Tuesday night after the Family Research Council arranged for her to be in the House audience along with her attorney Mat Staver.

The Rowan County clerk will be in the audience along with Jim Obergefell, the plaintiff in the Supreme Court case legalizing gay marriage across the country, who will be a guest of President Obama.

I didn't know the FRC had a standing reservation on gallery seats.

 

[Veritigo_X]

Who the fuck invited her? Sure as hell wasn't the president, I've got that list.

Her lawyer won't say and no one has fessed up yet.

It's a mystery!

Edit: Oh, mystery solved.

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

OMG Jeb!

http://youtu.be/VC6H-8hktFE

This is amazing.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

He's not dropping out after NH.

If he doesn't meet the minimum bar in Iowa or NH, he will have 0 delegates. Meanwhile Christie and/or Kasich, and definitely Rubio, would have at least some. Even if another establishment drops out, their votes won't go to him, they'll go to one of the above. There's literally no point in running. Every Republican primary has either a threshhold or is winner take all. If he misses delegates in Iowa or NH, continuing just means taking 0 delagates after 0 delegates after 0 delegates. What on earth is the point in continuing under those circumstances? Like, I agree nobody has the leverage to force him out, but Jeb! is not going to sit there taking L after L after L forever. It's beneath him.

 

[Elaugaufein]

This might be where we differ. You present her as a centrist offering nothing. I dispute that strongly.

Sorry, that was my bad. Only the last line was about this specifically, the rest was hypotheticals which is why I was avoiding using left or right because it applies to non-centrists generally.

 

[disastermouse]

I didn't know the FRC had a standing reservation on gallery seats.

Wow. Jesus gets a seat and Lucifer gets a seat. How has 'both sides-ism' penetrated beyond the media?

 

[RustyNails]

Hope they focus on her face as Obama speaks about gay marriage and progress.

 

[PBY]

If he doesn't meet the minimum bar in Iowa or NH, he will have 0 delegates. Meanwhile Christie and/or Kasich, and definitely Rubio, would have at least some. Even if another establishment drops out, their votes won't go to him, they'll go to one of the above. There's literally no point in running. Every Republican primary has either a threshhold or is winner take all. If he misses delegates in Iowa or NH, continuing just means taking 0 delagates after 0 delegates after 0 delegates. What on earth is the point in continuing under those circumstances?

The bolded was true 3 months ago too though.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

I think she also has a point: re not needing to necessarily give a solution. You're electing leaders to lead! You tell them a problem, they offer solutions, you take the one with the best solution. If you just tell them solutions, you may as well replace the entire political system with just a direct democracy. We have intermediaries because we trust them to be able to deal with these issues better than we can ourselves; because it's their *job* to do it. Sometimes, some of us can end up in jobs where politicians looking for how to present their solution or what more specific solution matches their general wide solutions go, like in advocacy groups, but that's not true of the average person and shouldn't have to be true of the average person. At best it's true of e.g. volunteers in funded advocacy movements.

That said, I'm somewhat conflicted on this issue myself. I can respect the other side of the argument too.

No this isn't how politics works. You demand policies and politicians seek voters, this isn't a direct democracy because different groups compete and have opposing ideas and politicians have to assemble collations so compromises are made. You're in essence arguing for politics selecting voters.

Change never comes from politicans offering solutions. It never has and never will. Again, this is a failure of our education system to acurately discribe how we got the progressive movement, civil rights, abolition, abortion rights, gay marriage, etc. its presented as magical and inevitable and the work of great men in washington and state capitals.

Read saul alinski, seriously

“The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem.

“Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.

 

[NeoXChaos]

Jeb will be gone after NH. He's not getting delegates in either Iowa or NH and that will be that. After Iowa and NH there will be 6 Republican candidates tops - Trump, Cruz, Carson, Christie, Rubio, Kasich. Less if Kasich and Christie miss the NH 10% bar. You can hope you'll be a beneficiary of others pulling out... unless you have 0 delegates so far, because then you're an obvious loser.

Rubio being the only establishment candidate competitive in Iowa means it will probably be him to battle it out against Cruz and Trump, but Christie or Kasich could shock, I suppose.

He's not dropping out after NH. He's staying till FL.

 

[HylianTom]

What does she offer? Correction: What would they trust that she offers?

That word: trust.

This is where it all boils down.

I have a feeling that she could offer them everything realistic, and she still wouldn't be trusted.

That reference to a scale of interaction between a candidate and activists.. to threaten a non-vote in the event of nomination strikes me as irresponsible. Especially if there's hope for another candidate in another cycle.

(And if I haven't been clear, I've been talking about general election behavior, not primary behavior.)

 

[Deleted member 231381]

No this isn't how politics works. You demand policies and politicians seek voters. You're arguing for politics selecting voters.

Change never comes from politicans offering solutions. It never has and never will. Again, this is a failure of our education system to acurately discribe how we got the progressive movement, civil rights, abolition, abortion rights, gay marriage, etc.

I disagree. Almost all significant change from both the left and right comes from conviction politicians. Reagan didn't do what the public wanted. He persuaded them to want what he wanted. Ditto FDR, and same story in other countries - Attlee and Thatcher in the United Kingdom, De Gaulle and Mitterand in France. When you just follow what the public already wants, you end up with insipidness like the Blair government or the later Clinton years.

 

[disastermouse]

No this isn't how politics works. You demand policies and politicians seek voters. You're arguing for politics selecting voters.

Change never comes from politicans offering solutions. It never has and never will. Again, this is a failure of our education system to acurately discribe how we got the progressive movement, civil rights, abolition, abortion rights, gay marriage, etc.

No, it really doesn't. These groups increase pressure, they don't always or even usually dictate specific terms or policies.

 

[benjipwns]

If he doesn't meet the minimum bar in Iowa or NH, he will have 0 delegates. Meanwhile Christie and/or Kasich, and definitely Rubio, would have at least some. Even if another establishment drops out, their votes won't go to him, they'll go to one of the above. There's literally no point in running. Every Republican primary has either a threshhold or is winner take all. If he misses delegates in Iowa or NH, continuing just means taking 0 delagates after 0 delegates after 0 delegates. What on earth is the point in continuing under those circumstances? Like, I agree nobody has the leverage to force him out, but Jeb! is not going to sit there taking L after L after L forever. It's beneath him.

Iowa does not have a minimum bar on the Republican side. (Because the delegates aren't awarded by the caucus process.)

 

[NeoXChaos]

PPP IA

Trump 28
Cruz 26
Rubio 13
Carson 8
Jeb 6

Hillary 46
Sanders 40

Qpac IA: Sanders 49, Clinton 44

 

[disastermouse]

That word: trust.

This is where it all boils down.

I have a feeling that she could offer them everything realistic, and she still wouldn't be trusted.

That reference to a scale of interaction between a candidate and activists.. to threaten a non-vote in the event of nomination strikes me as irresponsible. Especially if there's hope for another candidate in another cycle.

(And if I haven't been clear, I've been talking about general election behavior, not primary behavior.)

How many more cycles? They've been living on promises since 1996. That's starvation rations.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

The bolded was true 3 months ago too though.

Don't think so. 3 months ago there was a reasonable hope that Trump would flame out. Even a month ago Jeb!'s NH numbers weren't so bad. Literally every day is worse than the last for his campaign, it'll break soon.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Iowa does not have a minimum bar on the Republican side. (Because the delegates aren't awarded by the caucus process.)

Really? How do you distribute delegates at a caucus if not by the caucus process? Genuinely interested, I thought the Republican version was pretty standard.

 

[Arkeband]

Is anyone following MoveOn.org's endorsement of Bernie?
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/sanders-campaign-endorsed-moveon-36233860

MoveOn says the Vermont senator was supported by 78.6 percent of its membership in an online vote of more than 340,000 members. Hillary Clinton received 14.6 percent and Martin O'Malley received 0.9 percent with the remaining members urging no endorsement.

I guess Hillary had 30% back in 2008, so she's way down in favorability amongst members.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

lol Monmouth's NH poll has Sanders with net 86% favorability. To give Clinton some due, it's mildly impressive she's actually within the bounds of competitiveness against that.

EDIT: Huh, he's more favourable in NH than Vermont.

 

[benjipwns]

Really? How do you distribute delegates at a caucus if not by the caucus process? Genuinely interested, I thought the Republican version was pretty standard.

They're distributed at the state convention months later. The caucus selects the delegates to the state convention. This is why Ron Paul walked away with 95% of the Iowa delegates in 2012 despite finishing 3rd in the straw poll. Everybody else went home after it.