Support NeoGAF

[Plinko]

Scott Walker hasn't declared for President.

Like Kasich and Christie he's in the nebulous zone regarding the difference between an actual campaign and having a PAC as sitting Governors.

Jindal's pulling the trigger this week because he's dead in all the relevant polls (national/Iowa/NH) and thus is currently outside the debate thresholds. Plus there's a governor's race this year so he's done while Christie, Kasich and Walker all have their second terms to go basically with Christie slightly ahead by a year.

As long as Walker leads Iowa and is in the top of the heap elsewhere he can hold off like Perry did in 2012. He probably shouldn't have back surgery and self-medicate though.

I still think Jeb wipes the floor with him in the debates. Jeb is going to be this cycle's Romney: He's going to be the only guy that appears reasonable, the carnival of crazy will die down, and republicans will realize Jeb is the only shot they have and get in lockstep behind him.

The difference between Jeb and Walker is that Jeb actually has a decent economic record, while Walker has an absolutely disastrous record in Wisconsin. When the general public finally sees what he did to that state he'll have absolutely zero shot at the presidency.

 

[FiggyCal]

I still think Jeb wipes the floor with him in the debates. Jeb is going to be this cycle's Romney: He's going to be the only guy that appears reasonable, the carnival of crazy will die down, and republicans will realize Jeb is the only shot they have and get in lockstep behind him.

The difference between Jeb and Walker is that Jeb actually has a decent economic record, while Walker has an absolutely disastrous record in Wisconsin. When the general public finally sees what he did to that state he'll have absolutely zero shot at the presidency.

I think both of you guys clearly know more about this stuff than I do. But Jeb does not actually come off as a reasonable person right now with his position on the minimum wage and social security. He's also made some gaffes as well, breaking character to announce that he was running weeks before he actually announced and failing to understand a very basic question from Megyn Kelly about Iraq and failing to give a reasonable and consistent answer on three separate attempts. Or maybe it was because when Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio were asked the same question, they answered correctly and he had to backpedal.

I don't know if Jeb will wipe the floor with anyone at the debates.

 

[Plinko]

I think both of you guys clearly know more about this stuff than I do. But Jeb does not actually come off as a reasonable person right now with his position on the minimum wage and social security. He's also made some gaffes as well, breaking character to announce that he was running weeks before he actually announced and failing to understand a very basic question from Megyn Kelly about Iraq and failing to give a reasonable and consistent answer on three separate attempts. Or maybe it was because when Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio were asked the same question, they answered correctly and he had to backpedal.

I don't know if Jeb will wipe the floor with anyone at the debates.

I really think Walker is going with the, "If I don't say anything ever, people won't know who I really am and vote for me" plan, which won't work when you've got 9 other people taking shots at your record on stage.

 

[benjipwns]

Walker so far ticks all the boxes except he looks weird.

Jeb's parade of immigrants at his announcement was another tone deaf move.

Bush can't even get to 20% in the polls. His "front-runner" status is based on the fact that he gets 11% against like seven others who poll at around 10%. The Bush name is an anchor around his sewing up the "he can win the general!"

Jeb's unfavorables only beat out Trump and Christie's and he's got the wrong position on the primary issue.

Jeb is going to be this cycle's Romney: He's going to be the only guy that appears reasonable, the carnival of crazy will die down, and republicans will realize Jeb is the only shot they have and get in lockstep behind him.

You do remember that the "carnival of crazy" got truly crazy with Santorum actually winning contests (after polling at 2% right before Cain collapsed), along with Gingrich and Paul remaining semi-competitive out-polling every current candidate nationally.

The candidates went into Iowa with their national averages at:
Gingrich: 27%
Romney: 25%
Paul: 12%
Perry: 6%
Bachmann: 6%
Santorum: 4%
Huntsman: 2%

After Iowa, NH, SC, Florida, Nevada, Colorado, Missouri, Minnesota and Maine (knocking out Perry, Huntsman and Bachmann) the poll averages were:
Feb 12th:
Romney: 31%
Santorum: 25%
Gingrich: 20%
Paul: 14%

Feb 13th:
Santorum: 30%
Romney: 29%
Gingrich: 18%
Paul: 12%

Feb 18th:
Santorum: 34%
Romney: 28%
Gingrich: 15%
Paul: 12%

A week before Super Tuesday their poll averages were:
Romney: 33%
Santorum 31%
Gingrich: 15%
Paul:11%

At the start of April the averages were still:
Romney: 38%
Santorum: 28%
Gingrich: 14%
Paul: 12%

Santorum suspended his bid on April 10th as he ran out of money with the polls at:
Romney: 40%
Santorum: 26%
Paul: 13%
Gingrich: 12%

On June 21st, 2011 these fours poll averages were respectively:
Romney: 24.4%
Gingrich: 7.1%
Paul: 6.9%
Santorum: 3.7%
(Cain: 9.3%, Bachmann: 6.3%, Perry: 5.3%, Huntsman: 1.3%)

The current poll averages:
Bush: 10.8%
Walker: 10.6%
Rubio: 10.0%
Carson: 9.4%
Huckabee: 8.6%
Paul: 8.2%
Cruz: 7.0%
(Christie: 4.6%, Trump: 3.6%, Perry: 3.2%, Santorum: 2.2%, Fiorina: 1.8%, Kasich: 1.8%, Graham: 1.4%, Jindal: 1.0%)

From February 15th to August 8th, Romney's lead over the next closest candidate never fell to 5% or less. When Romney led Perry 19.5% to 14.5%. (Bachmann at 12.7%)

 

[Plinko]

Walker so far ticks all the boxes except he looks weird.

Jeb's parade of immigrants at his announcement was another tone deaf move.

Bush can't even get to 20% in the polls. His "front-runner" status is based on the fact that he gets 11% against like seven others who poll at around 10%. The Bush name is an anchor around his sewing up the "he can win the general!"

Jeb's unfavorables only beat out Trump and Christie's and he's got the wrong position on the primary issue.


You do remember that the "carnival of crazy" got truly crazy with Santorum actually winning contests (after polling at 2% right before Cain collapsed), along with Gingrich and Paul remaining semi-competitive out-polling every current candidate nationally.

The candidates went into Iowa with their national averages at:
Gingrich: 27%
Romney: 25%
Paul: 12%
Perry: 6%
Bachmann: 6%
Santorum: 4%
Huntsman: 2%

After Iowa, NH, SC, Florida, Nevada, Colorado, Missouri, Minnesota and Maine (knocking out Perry, Huntsman and Bachmann) the poll averages were:
Feb 12th:
Romney: 31%
Santorum: 25%
Gingrich: 20%
Paul: 14%

Feb 13th:
Santorum: 30%
Romney: 29%
Gingrich: 18%
Paul: 12%

Feb 18th:
Santorum: 34%
Romney: 28%
Gingrich: 15%
Paul: 12%

A week before Super Tuesday their poll averages were:
Romney: 33%
Santorum 31%
Gingrich: 15%
Paul:11%

At the start of April the averages were still:
Romney: 38%
Santorum: 28%
Gingrich: 14%
Paul: 12%

Santorum suspended his bid on April 10th as he ran out of money with the polls at:
Romney: 40%
Santorum: 26%
Paul: 13%
Gingrich: 12%

On June 21st, 2011 these fours poll averages were respectively:
Romney: 24.4%
Gingrich: 7.1%
Paul: 6.9%
Santorum: 3.7%
(Cain: 9.3%, Bachmann: 6.3%, Perry: 5.3%, Huntsman: 1.3%)

The current poll averages:
Bush: 10.8%
Walker: 10.6%
Rubio: 10.0%
Carson: 9.4%
Huckabee: 8.6%
Paul: 8.2%
Cruz: 7.0%
(Christie: 4.6%, Trump: 3.6%, Perry: 3.2%, Santorum: 2.2%, Fiorina: 1.8%, Kasich: 1.8%, Graham: 1.4%, Jindal: 1.0%)

From February 15th to August 8th, Romney's lead over the next closest candidate never fell to 5% or less. When Romney led Perry 19.5% to 14.5%. (Bachmann at 12.7%)

If I'm hearing what you're saying, it appears that you believe the crazies are dividing the hard right vote (Cruz, Huckabee, Carson, Trump). Do you actually think they'll all eventually pick one of those guys? Because I'd argue that the more reasonable right wingers are dividing the vote between Bush, Walker, and Rubio. Eventually, one of those guys will start to get more and more of the votes (and I ignore Paul because his supporters are never voting for anyone else in the primary). I just can't picture it being Walker because his record in Wisconsin is HORRENDOUS. Possibly the worst of any candidate up there. How could he ever win in a general election? Yes, the Kochs love him because he hates unions and the poor/middle-class. However, the people running the GOP aren't stupid. I have to think the big money knows that Walker has huge unfavorables and that record is indefensible.

I know everyone here discounted him already, but I still think if Carson shows up to the debates, speaks eloquently, and doesn't put his foot in his mouth, he has a decent shot to pull off a surprise in the primary. His favorables are high and he is respected in general circles.

 

[Coriolanus]

I know everyone here discounted him already, but I still think if Carson shows up to the debates, speaks eloquently, and doesn't put his foot in his mouth, he has a decent shot to pull off a surprise in the primary. His favorables are high and he is respected in general circles.

Same could be said of Kasich, who is far better at resisting the urge to degustate feet.

 

[benjipwns]

For fun, 2008 Democratic and Republican polling...can't get the old averages to work so, you'll have to deal with single polls.

GOP (using Rasmussen because of amount of polls):
June 21st:
Fred Thompson 27%, Rudy 23%, Romney 12%, McCain 11%, Huckabee 3%

December 30th:
McCain 17%, Huckabee 16%, Romney 16%, Giuliani 15%, Thompson 12%, Paul 7%

February 24th:
McCain: 53%, Huckabee: 30%, Paul: 9%

DEM (using various):
June 21st (Rasmussen):
Clinton: 37%, Obama: 25%, Edwards: 13%, Richardson: 4%, Biden: 4%, Kucinich: 3%, Dodd: 1%, Gravel: 0.5%
June 24th (CNN):
Clinton: 35%, Obama: 23%, Gore: 16%, Edwards: 13%, Richardson: 4%, Biden: 2%, Kucinich: 1%, Dodd: 0%, Gravel: 0%

December 20th (Rasmussen):
Clinton: 39%, Obama: 27%, Edwards: 17%, Richardson: 3%, Biden: 3%, Kucinich: 3%

February 10th (AP/Ipsos):
Clinton: 46%, Obama: 41%

April 2nd (CBS/NYT):
Obama: 46%, Clinton: 43%

April 30th (CNN):
Obama: 46%, Clinton: 45%

May 11th (ABC/WaPo):
Obama: 53%, Clinton: 41%

May 28th (Rasmussen - last poll like for GOP):
Obama: 47%, Clinton: 44%

 

[Plinko]

Same could be said of Kasich, who is far better at resisting the urge to degustate feet.

I thought about Kasich but he reminded me way too much of Huntsman when comparing what he says to what the other candidates say. I just think he's not far right enough for the base.

 

[Coriolanus]

I thought about Kasich but he reminded me way too much of Huntsman when comparing what he says to what the other candidates say. I just think he's not far right enough for the base.

Neither was Romney, and yet he became the frontrunner. Push comes to shove, the party will pick the best combination of least buttfuck crazy and most popular.

 

[PhoenixDark]

His approval rating has dropped since declaring, plus he has never been in a national primary. Jeb and others are going to destroy this guy for not answering questions.

He isn't in the race right now, he doesn't have to answer questions.

The longer this flag issue lingers, the more likely it becomes a "persecution" hill for republicans to willingly die on. All that's needed is a firm comment from Obama and it'll set these idiots off.

 

[benjipwns]

I just can't picture it being Walker because his record in Wisconsin is HORRENDOUS. Possibly the worst of any candidate up there.

Not to GOP voters.

I have to think the big money knows that Walker has huge unfavorables

PPP's last poll...all voters:
Bush: 25% Fav, 51% Unfav
Cruz: 27% Fav, 46% Unfav
Walker: 29% Fav, 35% Unfav

Among Independents:
Bush: 25%-47%
Cruz: 26%-46%
Walker: 29%-36%

Among Republicans:
Bush: 36%-40%
Cruz: 47%-23%
Walker: 55%-12%

Quinnipiac's:
Bush: 28%-44%
Cruz: 28%-37%
Walker: 22%-25%

Indeps:
Bush: 25%-45%
Cruz: 24%-40%
Walker: 22%-25%

Repubs:
Bush: 52%-20%
Cruz: 55%-12%
Walker: 51%-4%

FOX News'
Bush: 37%-44%
Cruz: 27%-35%
Walker: 25%-21%

Indeps
Bush: 30%-48%
Cruz: 24%-36%
Walker: 27%-21%

Repubs
Bush: 56%-27%
Cruz: 49%-17%
Walker: 44%-9%

 

[PhoenixDark]

The Walker dismissals here come from liberal perspectives. Conservatives like him and his record. And he has won multiple elections in a blue state. We can bring up he never won during a general election but republicans don't care.

Walker is going to treat Bush like W treated Kerry: an out of touch elitist who doesn't understand regular people (ie middle and lower class white men). I think he's going to trot out a variety of "they might believe that on college campuses but in the real world..." type responses.

Walker is far from perfect but should be able to take out someone as out of touch as Bush.

 

[benjipwns]

In a mid-June 2011 PPP poll, Romney's favorables were 55-27 among Republicans. Mid July was 50-31.

 

[Plinko]

Look at Walker's fav/unfav ratings. Nobody knows anything about him. Literally half of the country has no idea who he is at this point. Most people in the country have no idea that his record is so terrible. You guys keep saying, "To republicans it's great!" Yet, in the GE, he can't win with just the GOP vote.

I have no doubt he could get through a primary, but in the GE? None of his policies appeal to independents.

 

[benjipwns]

But who cares about the general election? It's Hillary winning easily. Just like Obama was always going to win in the last two.

The interesting thing is how this primary is going to shake out. It's the first time since 1920 there hasn't been a presumptive Republican nominee or two entering the "invisible primary" field. (Hell, even the Democrats haven't been so great about this, though their presumptive candidates tend to go down in flames, we'll call out Gary Hart in particular.) The 1976 Democratic primary was the last one at this level, 16 candidates, 14 staying in until Iowa and the only near frontrunner was Scoop Jackson who was unacceptable to half the party or more. (1972 also saw 16 candidates, but McGovern and Humphrey were frontrunners since 1968.)

We're getting the modern equivalent of the old 30-150+ ballot conventions with factions and a potential dark horse and favorite sons and big names with large swaths of the party aligned against them where they'll stall out.

We can't have that kind of fun anymore because of George McGovern and his merging the state with the two major political corporations. The dick.

Also the original Progressives. That whole lot of dicks.

 

[NeoXChaos]

crow of 5000. Make of it what you will. University of Denver

 

[Yellowtail]

More pics:

Oh sorry. That was Ron Paul.

 

[Third Strike]

How strong of support does Sanders have from minorities? He's very popular with the white liberal crowd, but what about Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians?

 

[NeoXChaos]

How strong of support does Sanders have from minorities? He's very popular with the white liberal crowd, but what about Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians?

slim to none. He has almost no support among the demographics that decide the nomination. Hillary does. Unless he cuts into HIllary lead and gap among them, he has no chance.

 

[Coriolanus]

slim to none. He has almost no support among the demographics that decide the nomination. Hillary does. Unless he cuts into HIllary lead and gap among them, he has no chance.

Eh, sorta. He does cut straight into the "mummy" demographic that is so favoured by the other party.

 

[KingK]

Probably old news, but new to me:
Chris Rock considered hosting The Daily Show for the 2016 Election only
Snipped from a larger NYT profile on Comedy Central: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/21/magazine/comedy-central-in-the-post-tv-era.html

God, I would have loved for that to happen. Now I'll be disappointed regardless of how good Trevor does.

slim to none. He has almost no support among the demographics that decide the nomination. Hillary does. Unless he cuts into HIllary lead and gap among them, he has no chance.

Yeah, Bernie needs to start talking about those issues more frequently. I think it's a mistake he hasn't had a speech dedicated to police brutality/inequality in the justice system yet. He actually has a better record and better policies than Clinton when it comes to minority issues. He needs to bring up his record there more often (such as opposing the mass incarceration of the 90s, organizing sit-ins and attending MLK's march on Washington) and make it more clear how his message of dealing with income inequality and corporate electoral influence directly relates to racial inequality.

I'm not saying he would be able to lead Hillary with any demographic (I still don't think he really stands a chance) but he should at least be able to siphon off some amount of Hillary's support from minority demographics if he puts more effort into explaining his record and policies on such issues.

 

[Yellowtail]

Yeah looking at that Sanders crowd pic again, it does look whiter than an RNC convention.

The most recent national poll (by PPP) has Clinton trouncing Sanders 63-8 among Hispanics, and 83-1 (!) among African Americans. And good luck eating into that lead when Hillary has a 90/6 favorable/unfavorable rating among black voters.

The question is, how much does the disaffected white liberal vote max out to? Progressive insurgents like Dean and Tsongas and Bradley and Hart all hit a ceiling because they had limited appeal beyond upscale white liberals. Obama managed to overcome that ceiling in 2008 by adding 85% of African American primary voters to his coalition, and even then he only just edged out Hillary (and still lost the popular vote). And it's often forgotten that Hillary got two-thirds of the Latino vote in 2008, and there's no reason to believe she has less support this time round.

You can see that Bernie has only just started to realize this, and has begun to talk about immigration reform in his stump speech and address racism. And it's good that Hillary is pushing him to the left on these issues (although he's still silent on gun control), but he can't expect to make many inroads when Hillary's had a 20+ year head start on minority outreach.

 

[Coriolanus]

What DID hillary do to track that well amongst minorities, btw?

 

[Plinko]

What DID hillary do to track that well amongst minorities, btw?

Bill.

 

[Poodlestrike]

Bill.

Heyoooooo

 

[thepotatoman]

crow of 5000. Make of it what you will. University of Denver

I was there, that photo is of a stadium that holds 3,000 people. The other 2,000 had to watch it from tvs at other parts of the campus because they ran out of room. He opened his speech saying he thought he might as well make a stop in denver on his way to LA and organize an event of a few hundred, but clearly was wrong about that.

If he planned better and got a bigger venue, his photo would look a lot more like those Ron Paul photos, but the underlying point of big events not equalling big voting numbers is still true.

Still, Ron Paul laid the groundwork for Rand Paul, who is laying the groundwork for what is clearly the future of the republican party after their demographics problems really start to hurt them. Ron Paul basically informed young people hungry for change what change can look like, and those young people will eventually grow old enough to be the ones in the majority.

Bernie Sanders is doing the same for the left. He's not influencing Hillary, he's influencing the relatively malleable views of young left leaning people on what change could really look like.

Yeah looking at that Sanders crowd pic again, it does look whiter than an RNC convention.

The most recent national poll (by PPP) has Clinton trouncing Sanders 63-8 among Hispanics, and 83-1 (!) among African Americans. And good luck eating into that lead when Hillary has a 90/6 favorable/unfavorable rating among black voters.

The question is, how much does the disaffected white liberal vote max out to? Progressive insurgents like Dean and Tsongas and Bradley and Hart all hit a ceiling because they had limited appeal beyond upscale white liberals. Obama managed to overcome that ceiling in 2008 by adding 85% of African American primary voters to his coalition, and even then he only just edged out Hillary (and still lost the popular vote). And it's often forgotten that Hillary got two-thirds of the Latino vote in 2008, and there's no reason to believe she has less support this time round.

You can see that Bernie has only just started to realize this, and has begun to talk about immigration reform in his stump speech and address racism. And it's good that Hillary is pushing him to the left on these issues (although he's still silent on gun control), but he can't expect to make many inroads when Hillary's had a 20+ year head start on minority outreach.

Was Hillary's crowd any less white?

But yeah, Hillary's been tackling the issue of race very well in her speeches. I've been quite disappointed in how Sanders has mostly ignored issues of race. He mostly just talks about the economy, and occasionally says "and black people are extra poor, so they should like my economic stances even more".

 

[Dominican Power]

Sander's message should resonate with younger and minority voters. I'd vote for him.

 

[KingK]

Yeah looking at that Sanders crowd pic again, it does look whiter than an RNC convention.

The most recent national poll (by PPP) has Clinton trouncing Sanders 63-8 among Hispanics, and 83-1 (!) among African Americans. And good luck eating into that lead when Hillary has a 90/6 favorable/unfavorable rating among black voters.

The question is, how much does the disaffected white liberal vote max out to? Progressive insurgents like Dean and Tsongas and Bradley and Hart all hit a ceiling because they had limited appeal beyond upscale white liberals. Obama managed to overcome that ceiling in 2008 by adding 85% of African American primary voters to his coalition, and even then he only just edged out Hillary (and still lost the popular vote). And it's often forgotten that Hillary got two-thirds of the Latino vote in 2008, and there's no reason to believe she has less support this time round.

You can see that Bernie has only just started to realize this, and has begun to talk about immigration reform in his stump speech and address racism. And it's good that Hillary is pushing him to the left on these issues (although he's still silent on gun control), but he can't expect to make many inroads when Hillary's had a 20+ year head start on minority outreach.

Hillary is not pushing him to the left on these issues. He's always been to the left of Hillary here (except on gun control), he just hasn't been talking about it as much as she has, which is a big mistake.

 

[Coriolanus]

Hillary is not pushing him to the left on these issues. He's always been to the left of Hillary here (except on gun control), he just hasn't been talking about it as much as she has, which is a big mistake.

He was having a giggle, mate.

 

[ivysaur12]

Even if he became somewhat competitive, Bernie's pretty dismal numbers with minority voters would make it highly unlikely he could win the nomination. That's part of the reason why you see him doing well in New Hampshire -- white, college educated voters are his forte -- but struggling elsewhere.

 

[thepotatoman]

What DID hillary do to track that well amongst minorities, btw?

While Bernie spends most of his time talking about economics and money in politics issues, Hillary spends most of her time talking about immigration and criminal justice issues.

But even if Bernie started focusing on those more, I think grassroots movements are probably likely going to be dominated by middle class people with enough time on their hands to research fringe candidates and to take the time to campaign on those candidate's behalf, even though it's very likely that candidate might end up losing.

And thanks to segregation, those grassroots campaigners are probably going to mostly spread the word to other middle class people.

I also think it's easier for white people to be optimistic enough in society to back the long shot when they don't have the experience of society constantly screwing them over.

 

[KingK]

He was having a giggle, mate.

My bad lol. Fwiw, Hillary's speech after Charleston had some really good shit and sounded more genuine than when she usually talks imo.

And for the record, I still don't think Bernie has a shot at winning the nomination unless something terrible happens to Hillary, but I do think he could do better than people give him credit for.

I also think he could set the stage for a more "mainstream" candidate to carry on his platform down the road with more of a real shot (maybe someone like DeBlasio?)

 

[NeoXChaos]

He could win NH but get destroyed down the road when we get to the big delegate winner take all states like FL, IL, OH, PA etc.

This path is possible for him in a time warp. not mine. https://revolutionaryds.wordpress.com/2015/06/16/sanders-can-win-the-democratic-presidential-primary-heres-how/

 

[ivysaur12]

He could win NH but get destroyed down the road when we get to the big delegate winner take all states like FL, IL, OH, PA etc.

This path is possible for him in a time warp. not mine. https://revolutionaryds.wordpress.com/2015/06/16/sanders-can-win-the-democratic-presidential-primary-heres-how/

wut

 

[Yellowtail]

My bad lol. Fwiw, Hillary's speech after Charleston had some really good shit and sounded more genuine than when she usually talks imo.

Yeah I was joking. I think all the rhetoric of anyone being pulled to the left by another candidate is silly. Bernie certainly isn't running to push Hillary (whose policy agenda was mostly set in the early months of this year), he's running to establish a long term ideological change in the Democratic party.

And I think Hillary sounded genuine in that speech - and her earlier speeches on racial justice - because she actually is on this topic. The issues of racial disparities and immigration reform ties into her decades long advocacy of women and children. Notice her specific statistic she singled out in the speech that black children are 500% more likely to die of asthma. There's a reason she's made family issues one of her "four fights" and tried to frame her candidacy around fighting for American families (rather than income inequality per se). She can talk about it with conviction. On the other hand she sounds consistently awkward approaching economic inequality (while Bernie looks uncomfortable every time he veers outside of that topic). For Sanders income inequality is the greatest challenge of our time, in Clinton's words the full participation of women and girls is the great unfinished business of the 21st century. You have to discuss everything when you run for President, but it's great to see Sanders and Clinton talk about the specific topics they genuinely care about because they really know their shit. Which is why she should just come out in support of TPP. She obviously supports it, she could probably advocate for it better than Obama, and she's strong enough to endure any blowback. A debate between Bernie and her on it would be genuinely great.

While Bernie spends most of his time talking about economics and money in politics issues, Hillary spends most of her time talking about immigration and criminal justice issues.

But even if Bernie started focusing on those more, I think grassroots movements are probably likely going to be dominated by middle class people with enough time on their hands to research fringe candidates and to take the time to campaign on those candidate's behalf, even though it's very likely that candidate might end up losing.

And thanks to segregation, those grassroots campaigners are probably going to mostly spread the word to other middle class people.

I also think it's easier for white people to be optimistic enough in society to back the long shot when they don't have the experience of society constantly screwing them over.

These are good points. Minorities generally back the establishment candidate, because they're disproportionately more affected by a Republican administration. African American support only broke for Obama when he won Iowa and showed he was actually viable.

Also I think people like to think voters decide candidates by looking at their record and platforms (and hence if everyone finds out about Sanders hell win!). That doesn't really happen. Clinton and Obama were virtually indistinguishable ideologically in the 2008 primaries (and there's not that much of a gulf between Clinton and Sanders now), the vote split along cultural rather than ideological lines. You could practically predict who a person was voting for based on age/race/sex/income/college education etc. The same will happen this time round. Sanders can offer the perfect platform to minorities, but he's still a socialist Jew with a heavy Brooklyn accent while the Clintons have been perfecting their brand for over 20 years.

He could win NH but get destroyed down the road when we get to the big delegate winner take all states like FL, IL, OH, PA etc.

This path is possible for him in a time warp. not mine.[/URL]

Lol. So the plan is to invoke the Southern Strategy? I wonder how these Sanders diehards will react when Clinton stomps him among blue collar whites. They'll go from championing the proletariat to calling them low information hicks who vote against their own interests in a second.

 

[ivysaur12]

Setting the alarm for 7am tomorrow for decisions.

 

[HylianTom]

Setting the alarm for 7am tomorrow for decisions.

I've put dummy patients on my outpatient schedule for two hours tomorrow morning, just so that I'm free to watch what unfolds.

13 days off starting on Thursday!

(Riding through Mississippi right now. We're playing a road game: "Spot the Confederate flags.")

 

[ivysaur12]

I've put dummy patients on my outpatient schedule for two hours tomorrow morning, just so that I'm free to watch what unfolds.

13 days off starting on Thursday!

(Riding through Mississippi right now. We're playing a road game: "Spot the Confederate flags.")

it's literally on the state flag.

 

[B-Dubs]

it's literally on the state flag.

He never said it was challenging.

 

[Teggy]

Jerusalem (AFP) - The flamboyant wife of Israeli Interior Minister Silvan Shalom published an "inappropriate joke" Sunday about US President Barack Obama on her Twitter account, only to later delete it and apologise.

"Do u know what Obama Coffee is? Black and weak," Judy Shalom Nir-Mozes wrote to her 74,400 followers.

Online shock, condemnation and accusations of racism later led her to delete the incriminating tweet.

"I apologize, that was a stupid joke somebody told me," she wrote on her @JudyMozes Twitter account in English.

Damn...wtf

 

[Plinko]

Damn...wtf

After that joke she's probably now leading republican polling for the primaries.

 

[Tamanon]

I don't get it though. Isn't black coffee generally strong?

 

[Coriolanus]

I don't get it though. Isn't black coffee generally strong?

Black only means without cream, sugar or other stuff. Just coffee and water.

 

[Third Strike]

So, can I pretty much kiss my ACA subsidies goodbye tomorrow? I'm really nervous about tomorrow's ruling.

 

[NeoXChaos]

So, can I pretty much kiss my ACA subsidies goodbye tomorrow? I'm really nervous about tomorrow's ruling.

What state are you in? Your Governor didn't sign the expansion?

 

[Third Strike]

What state are you in? Your Governor didn't sign the expansion?

NC, and nope.

 

[NeoXChaos]

NC, and nope.

We in the same boat bud. If this ruling fails we are screwed. No chance Jindal or his successor who certainly will be Republican and Vitter will do "real" expansion. Atleast you have a chance to oust McCory next year with Cooper.

 

[Plinko]

So, can I pretty much kiss my ACA subsidies goodbye tomorrow? I'm really nervous about tomorrow's ruling.

1. We don't know if it will be announced tomorrow.

2. We don't know if it will be turned down.

 

[KingK]

Damn...wtf

SHOCKING NEWS: Top members of the Israeli government and their family members are racist. Who could have expected such attitudes could exist within Netanyahu's government!?!

So, can I pretty much kiss my ACA subsidies goodbye tomorrow? I'm really nervous about tomorrow's ruling.

I'm nervous too. I'm in Indiana (lol mike pence) and my mom, sister and I all have health insurance through the federal exchange that is mostly subsidized. My mom started saving literally over $400 a month after we got that plan so a negative ruling would be pretty devastating.

 

[Y2Kev]

I heard a rumor on the Twitter that the Affordable Obamacare Law is going to be announced tomorrow.