-
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
- Thread starter Diablos
- Start date
- Status
Just got back from the Bernie rally in Birmingham. The auditorium apparently seats 6000, and it was completely packed. Pit was absolutely full. There was apparently an overflow of like 1400 outside as well, whom Sanders also addressed (which is why it took him forever to get on stage I guess).
So I wouldn't hesitate to put the estimate at just under 8000 attendees.
So I wouldn't hesitate to put the estimate at just under 8000 attendees.
I really think that if Trump can take Iowa from Cruz (who is expected to win big there), even if it is close, he will rule the airwaves until New Hampshire and crush it there as well. If Trump wins Iowa and New Hampshire, the game is unequivocally over. I honestly think Trump is going to do everything in his power to win Iowa to kill off Cruz before he gets any major traction and continue with the strongman inevitability aura he has going.
#mamabear #realamerica
Hobbestetrician
Member
Trump/Palin has me all...
That this is a smart move for Trump, will only help him in the nomination, and there is a tiny chance he could be in the White House...not enough pills.
OrangeGrayBlue
Member
Went down a youtube rabbit hole and saw this comment on a video
:lol
:lol
Basileus777
Member
If Cruz can't win Iowa, a state heavily advantageous to him, he has no chance of winning a majority of the delegates. Even if Cruz pulls out wins in other states, the ones he would do so are proportional and Trump would be splitting delegates with him. The question then just becomes how long does it take Trump to reach a majority.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Yeah, I think so. A certain subset probably still adores her, but I think most everyone else probably hates her.
I haven't had enough to drink to seriously consider this. I'm hoping I wake up tomorrow and this was all a dream and Palin doesn't endorse Trump.
Let's see if this holds up tomorrow. Everyone I know who is asking about this has had one too many at this point.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
It's completely over the second he takes Iowa. It's one of his weakest states. Cruz might even drop out and endorse Trump after losing the one state he was supposed to win.
The only real question is if Trump can take a loss in Iowa without doing too much damage to his whole "successful winner" caricature of himself.
Indeed.
I remember reading back in the fall last year about Cruz's grand SEC primary strategy and how his whole game plan centered around running the table that day. I think sometime in the late fall, he realized that Carson was a flash in the pan, Huckabee/Santorum were non-issues, none of the establishment candidates were gaining any traction in the state, and thought that Trump would eventually fizzle out leaving Iowa ripe for his taking with his brand of social conservatism. He has fairly easily been able to establish himself as the front runner in Iowa in short order, but now runs the risk of losing the expectations game considering how natural a fit Iowa is for his style of politics.
If Trump can outperform the general expectation that Cruz is tailor-made for Iowa and will win there easily, than it could easily put Cruz's entire strategy in jeopardy, which is a truly glorious prospect.
Hobbestetrician
Member
I mean, it should only further shore up a Democratic victory in November but I really don't want to have to deal with any of this. 2012 was almost too much for me, this would do me in for sure.
Hexa
Member
I can see her being given Secretary of Interior.
iirc, the last poll of Iowa republicans had her favorability insanely high. It was from 2014 though.
Well, everyone I would normally check with has already texted me to see what's up with this. That said, everyone is also slightly drunk at this point so take nothing at face value since everyone I know is on their 4th beer at a minimum. So I'm probably not the guy to check with.
If this does happen, I am applying for work with the BBC and moving to England though.
benjipwns
Banned
VendettaRed07
Member
Trump/Palin...
I.. I just.
..Looks like I'm not sleeping tonight
I.. I just.
..Looks like I'm not sleeping tonight
Rafa=FedKilla
Banned
First day of the semester, gotta be up in three hours. Momma Bear has come to tell these little Cubs to stop fighting.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Hmm, Trump gives Freepers about 90% of what they want (basically everything except being a religious psychopath and hating gay people) whereas Cruz gives them 100% of what they want. Meanwhile, Hillary probably gives Poli-GAF 90% of what we want whereas Bernie is closer to 95% (both have pretty terrible foreign policy positions, but Bernie gets the edge if more want more socialist policies which I think on average most posters, not me, want). I think there's slightly more of a divide of Trump v Cruz.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
"We have to kill the terrorists families. They may not care about their own lives, but they'll care if we go after their families." -Donald J. Trump.
.... I think he wants to kill brown people tbh.
ehretreue.m.h
Banned
Daily Show seems to think Sanders is where it's at after the debates.
Awesome, since I'm a Sanders fan.
My question is, "why is Sanders lagging behind Clinton?"
Awesome, since I'm a Sanders fan.
My question is, "why is Sanders lagging behind Clinton?"
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Let's be real here, after President Christie gets involved in land wars in Russia and China after Russia violates his no-fly zone and China hacks into Biden's Spotify, he's not going to have that much time for killing brown people. Cruz can definitely deliver though.
most Democrats are more conservative than you and Bernie.
Because the Daily Show viewers are the Sanders demographics.
benjipwns
Banned
The Chinese are honorary brown people.
Young rich white non-voters?
Tip your waitresses!
ehretreue.m.h
Banned
I always figured Clinton was the more conservative end of the Democratic spectrum and the majority were closer to Sanders' positions.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Stop ruining the narrative.
benjipwns
Banned
I don't know how "liberal" do I rate "Present"?
Jack Remington
Banned
Bush has been out of office for 7 years. If Michigan people can't filter their water by now, that's their problem.
Very liberal. Progressiveness is all about giving presents to poor people.
The issue is that Bernie is by far and wide one the most left wing (at least from an economic standpoint) figures in politics (unless you look VERY deeply like Kshama Sawant). This is why the "isidewith" site is kind of dumb at times. Sure if you look at the statements generally then Hillary and Sanders seem similar (e.g. "do you want to increase taxes on the rich" or "put more regulation on banks"). However, when things become more specific you can see key differences between how the two handle things. Sanders seems to be in more support of the strong hand of the state interfering with the economy (breaking up the banks) and nationalizations, while Hillary is for the state to further regulate industries (go after shadow banking) and keeping the government's hands-on only as much as absolutely necessary.
In other words Hillary is a Liberal while Sanders is a Democratic Socialist. In most Western nations they would be a part of different parties (and hell this was technically the same case in America too until this election cycle). So it is a bit disingenuous to say to people "but Hillary is voted one of the more liberal senators in the party" or "she is more liberal than Obama" due to the fact that virtually no one in congress represents the ideology of Sanders and many Sanders supporters weren't satisfied with Obama in the first place. A lot of Hillary supporters have to accept that there is a notable difference between Hillary and Sanders that they can see how someone can be totally for Sanders and at the same time very annoyed by Hillary. Probably in the same way how someone could be totally for Sawant and annoyed by Sanders despite Sanders being "one of the most liberal people in politics" and "being to the left" of a the incumbent.
However, there is also a lot of hyperbole coming from some Sanders supporters. Sure Hillary is definitely to the right of Sanders, but that doesn't make her a "neocon", even by comparison. It would be better if these Sanders supporters would instead say "I like Sanders' politics and I feel that while there is some overlap with Hillary's politics, she just doesn't appeal to me as I think she her policies won't go far enough to hit the core problems facing the country", rather than "Hillary is a fascist neocon who is no different than anyone else." To also be fair, a portion of Hillary supporters have to simply accept that Sanders fans do have their reasons for preferring Sanders over Hillary so significantly and that they can feel disappointed if Hillary gets into the office. Or at least if they can't see why, then ask why Sanders fans for their opinions in a calm manner. Rather than being patronizing to them and calling them children, hippies, or racists. While it would be better if some Sanders supporters drop their "holier-than-thou" image and stop calling every person to the right of them slaves to the corporate masters.
Of course this doesn't happen. Every single thread that even somewhat relates to the primaries seems to get locked with both sides feeling that it was the other sides fault. Despite the fact that the mods have said differently. It is also amusing due to the fact that Hillary and Sanders don't seem to have much hostility toward one another. It is mostly a product of the obnoxious sides of their fanbases.
neurosisxeno
Member
I'm sure it's within an order of magnitude.
Black Republican
Member
Christie really blaming Michelle Obama for the school food choices?
i know he was responding to a kids question but still
i know he was responding to a kids question but still
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked