There are elements of that discussion that sound hauntingly familiar. =)
-
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 |OT| Keep Calm and Diablos On
- Thread starter Aaron Strife
- Start date
- Status
There are elements of that discussion that sound hauntingly familiar. =)
If we're being fair I said that about pretty much everyone but Trump. Bless his dipshit heart, he's making this entire primary season not only bearable, but downright entertaining.
I can't say I'm a fan either, but that's because I'm a Queens guy and getting to Brooklyn is annoying.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Lots of Walker doubters. I'm saving all these posts.
I just hate the guy. I still think he's got a pretty good shot at it. I'd give him a... 35-40% chance, maybe?
I wouldn't go above 25% personally. I mean I won't write him out completely, it's entirely possible that the entire field implodes worse and the Kochs are able to keep him afloat through it, but I wouldn't bet actual money on it.
Walker has a worse chance of winning than Bush, but a slightly better chance of winning than Rubio. Still, I don't foresee Walker getting it. He's sort of imploding and needs that Koch cash fast.
He's a terrible campaigner, much worse than almost everyone else in the Republican field.
He's a terrible campaigner, much worse than almost everyone else in the Republican field.
I'm honestly not 100% sure that any amount of money can keep him in the game until the voting starts. He looks like an empty suit on the debate stage and the more debates they have the worse he'll look, what they need is an actor dressed up as Scott Walker to debate for him. Like Idris Elba.
Take my percentages the same way you would Final Fantasy XV completion percentages.
I still think he has a better chance than Jeb! The base ain't swallowing the establishment's shit this year. Jeb!'s going nowhere fast. Maybe he has like 10% chance or something, but I just don't see it actually happening. I still think Walker rides that line well enough that he could unite the anti-establishment shits and the establishment shitlords.
That is if he doesn't do something Perry-esque and get laughed out of everything. He's got a pretty good chance of doing that too.
BertramCooper
Banned
If I'm John Kasich and I don't end up above Walker in this shitshow when all is said and done, I probably consider suicide.
Late response, but so much this. It is exactly what I hope Hillary will say about it in the debates. Add some historic context, and even use the term 'un-American' (against them for once).
Bush is dumb, but Walker is an empty suit. It's a lot easier to prop up an idiot than it is an empty suit.
The far right will not accept another Bush. It is Walker or bust. If Bush gets the nod he will limp there.
Agreed.
Though I think it's actually more that the far right will not accept another forced establishment candidate that they have to hold their nose and vote for. The fact that he's a Bush doesn't particularly help.
Officerrob
Banned
I'm more shocked that Ben Carson has risen so much than Trump being where he is. The celebrity just saying stupid shit attracts a lot of attention, I get that. But the "one of the good ones" Carson actually polling at about 10% is hilarious
RastaMentality
Banned
I've been curious lately. Who's the best female speaker in politics today?
As in politician? Elizabeth Warren.
But that's a mortal sin, and then at the pearly gates he wouldn't be able to deliver that sweet talking point he's been rehearsing.
I actually thinks in terms of sounding personable and likable while also talking policy, McCaskill is pretty fucking good. She comes across less of a politician and more like she's having a 1-on-1 conversation. I get her appeal, though she's pretty gaffe prone (as she'd probably admit).
RastaMentality
Banned
She reaaaally seems like she would murder in some debates too. Her netroots speech is one of my faves of the year.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Do I have enough liberal ally XP points to say Lindsy Graham?
Yes, you can say that. I chortled.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I guess I'm not getting this board's "Walker has a better chance than Jeb" routine.
Walker has lost almost 5% in polls since the last debate. I mean, some polls have him at 4% now. Think about that-- the guy's first time on the national stage and his popularity plummets. That's a terrible sign. Jeb hasn't really gone anywhere. He still gets that same 10-12% vote. Walker never says anything of substance. He'll get picked apart repeatedly as the field is whittled down. His record is freaking terrible--easily the worst of the candidates. Walker has Koch money, but Jeb has a ton as well.
Whose votes are going to go to Walker? It isn't Carson--polls show those clearly go to Trump. Fiorina? Doubtful. Cruz? Eh.
I still think Trump takes this. If not, it's Jeb or Rubio.
Walker has lost almost 5% in polls since the last debate. I mean, some polls have him at 4% now. Think about that-- the guy's first time on the national stage and his popularity plummets. That's a terrible sign. Jeb hasn't really gone anywhere. He still gets that same 10-12% vote. Walker never says anything of substance. He'll get picked apart repeatedly as the field is whittled down. His record is freaking terrible--easily the worst of the candidates. Walker has Koch money, but Jeb has a ton as well.
Whose votes are going to go to Walker? It isn't Carson--polls show those clearly go to Trump. Fiorina? Doubtful. Cruz? Eh.
I still think Trump takes this. If not, it's Jeb or Rubio.
You actually think Trump could win the nomination? almost all analyst give him no chance at that. Him winning the nomination would be unprecedented and break every rule of the GOP cycles of the past.
We have PD who believes Walker will get the nomination. We have Plinko who believes Trump will get the nomination. We have I who believes Jeb with get the nomination.
Any takers on Rubio getting the nomination? I think I will win this bet.
I think he will be the nominee. In 2020.
speculawyer
Member
Uh . . . None of that conflicts with what I said.
Actually, it supports what I said. They want to get rid of the illegal immigrant labor market. The wall advances that. Getting rid of birthright citizenship, which can act as a magnet for illegal immigrants, advances that. Do they mention these directly? No. But that also means they don't condemn them.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I do. Look at the voting numbers. Over 40% in some polls are supporting Trump, Carson, or Fiorina--all people who haven't spent their life in politics. The GOP mindset right now is different than in previous primaries. Everyone on here keeps talking about the establishment, but I think the general feeling among GOP voters is that they want someone outside of the establishment.
Carson and Fiorina will tank. I think the vast majority of those voters will go to Trump.
I just don't think Trump compares to Perry/Gingrich of last cycle. He's got way more money. He already has offended numerous groups to no deficit. He's brash and doesn't hold back--something these voters seem to love.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
That's still pretty good odds. I mean, at default with minimal handicapping you'd probably be starting out your odds at something like this:
Bush - 25%
Walker - 25%
Rubio - 25%
Trump and everyone else - 25%
No matter what you do it seems hard to justify putting someone at 50%. Personally I put Trump at slightly better odds than everyone else just because he is clearly in the lead at this moment. Not much better than everyone else since there's clearly plenty of chances for him to fall or another to rise, but I don't know how else to handicap it when everyone seems like such a terrible choice to me.
I believe no matter who you chose you have a good chance of being wrong, bringing it down to luck in the end. It doesn't matter how good you are at determining these things.
because that is how its always been. With the exception of Reagan the establishment has always gotten who they wanted going back to Goldwater in 64. I see your point. I just don't think the far right have the power to make it happen. The establishment has a chain around their neck and I don't see the numbers materializing at the end of the day for the anti-establishment to beat back the powers that decide the nomination.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Trump's favorables will do him in if you ask me. 60% of the Republicans still don't like him and probably never will.
That's really the only downfall. It's also seeming like he has hit a peak for the moment. No poll is showing him above 32% and his exposure is through the roof right now.
That's really the only downfall. It's also seeming like he has hit a peak for the moment. No poll is showing him above 32% and his exposure is through the roof right now.
That's down to the large pool of candidates, no one is going to break 32% (What I mean is that no one will have a clear winning majority) with 17 people running. We aren't going to get a better idea of how the republican nomination will shake out until people start dropping out and the dynamics of the race change drastically as a result.
speculawyer
Member
Having a great GDP doesn't put money in joe six pack's pocket. At least since 1980.
I mean, if the problem is that capitalists have been capturing labor's share of productivity increases, the solution isn't to limit immigration, it's to limit capitalism.
speculawyer
Member
But this may be the year. Look at that Iowa poll with Trump, carson, and Fiorina.
I have no idea who will win. It is hard to pick one when they all seem like loooooosers. But after saying that, I think Trump has a slight edge. He's Teflon. He is a great speaker and he is releasing policy positions now that are resonating.
RustyNails
Member
I love how Trump is making every GOPer take a stand on the border wall lol
speculawyer
Member
Remember, perception is reality. I know the wall is not in the official union policy. But it is a simple remedy that is easily understood by the masses. Dey took er jerbs!
You are talking nuanced policy. Trump is talking politics that resonate.
One possibly telling moment is coming up in September. Jeb! (well, a pro-Jeb! SuperPAC) is about to do his first major ad buy for IA/NH/SC. They'd originally planned a $10-million campaign, but they bumped it up to $15 million. It'll be interesting to see if his numbers move at all.
Trump's best allies right now are the huge field and the stubbornness of his core supporters. He has to like that the candidates in Tier 2 and 3 are pretty fluid, ever jockeying for position; it gives the lower candidates the hope needed to stay in, just to see if something happens that bumps them up a tier.. it's not like it'd take that much of a percentage gain to appear to be on the move, right?
If the field stays wide and drop-outs before IA and NH are limited to a small handful of candidates, he could conceivably win these early states with unimpressive/low percentages. I have no doubt he'd try his best to manipulate the media into creating a "Trumpmentum!" narrative at that point.
At this point, I'm stumped on the end outcome, and I'm not willing to rule anyone out. My hunch is that the final four will come down to thepotatoman's picks: Bush, Walker, Rubio, and Trump.
I'm wondering if the establishment would attempt to force any of those candidates out in order to minimize chances of Trump's nomination. And I'm wondering how slighted Trump would feel if he perceived the process to be manipulated.
No matter what, I don't think this ends well for the GOP this time around. If the establishment gets its nominee of choice in what is clearly a year for rebellion, the base is not going to take it well. And if the base gets its preferred pick, they end-up with a candidate who's unable to win a general election.
Trump's best allies right now are the huge field and the stubbornness of his core supporters. He has to like that the candidates in Tier 2 and 3 are pretty fluid, ever jockeying for position; it gives the lower candidates the hope needed to stay in, just to see if something happens that bumps them up a tier.. it's not like it'd take that much of a percentage gain to appear to be on the move, right?
If the field stays wide and drop-outs before IA and NH are limited to a small handful of candidates, he could conceivably win these early states with unimpressive/low percentages. I have no doubt he'd try his best to manipulate the media into creating a "Trumpmentum!" narrative at that point.
At this point, I'm stumped on the end outcome, and I'm not willing to rule anyone out. My hunch is that the final four will come down to thepotatoman's picks: Bush, Walker, Rubio, and Trump.
I'm wondering if the establishment would attempt to force any of those candidates out in order to minimize chances of Trump's nomination. And I'm wondering how slighted Trump would feel if he perceived the process to be manipulated.
No matter what, I don't think this ends well for the GOP this time around. If the establishment gets its nominee of choice in what is clearly a year for rebellion, the base is not going to take it well. And if the base gets its preferred pick, they end-up with a candidate who's unable to win a general election.
"Problem". Psh it's a feature not a bug.
If capitalists win then capitalism is working right [/robber baron]
Not to mention the 14th Amendment.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
CNN's poll today has Trump's favorability among republicans at 68% - 28%. I have not seen any poll since his july rise where his approval rating among republicans is worse than 50%-35%.
Trump's approval ratings rose alongside his July rise, and all the polls are seeing the same thing. Cillizza was humble enough to say he was wrong, but 538 did not admit being wrong about banking on Trump's approval ratings among his own party being negative in June. Instead they made another one mid July, just this time saying his approval was below average instead of saying it was negative. But Trump's improving favorability didn't stop either, and now that Trump has mostly caught up to the other republicans, they don't even mention it anymore.
That more than anything is really bugging me about their coverage of Trump. They're clearly cherry picking data to push their view when they completely change the indicators over the course of 2 months without even mentioning the fact that their previous reasons for dismissing Trump ended up being completely wrong.
speculawyer
Member
This doesn't really say much without being able to look at how people responded to all the other candidates with the same question. Most people probably view their own favorite candidate as the most likely to win.
RustyNails
Member
Of course Republicans see a non-Trump candidate having a better chance to win the general. But that does not mean they will rally to him if he is indeed the nominee. Kinda like democrats who see Hillary having a better chance than Col. Sanders. But if by stroke of luck he becomes the nominee, democrats will fully support him.
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
I don't understand why people are so enamored with Sanders.
The only position he has that I'm aware of specifically being different than Clinton's is breaking up all the big banks because reasons (i.e. he thought of a really good slogan.) But breaking up all the big banks doesn't even necessarily make sense if you think about it for more than 10 seconds and try and imagine the economic impact of doing that + the cost/benefit of doing it. That's nothing to say about whether its even an actual thing you can do. It mostly sounds like demagoguery, really.
The only position he has that I'm aware of specifically being different than Clinton's is breaking up all the big banks because reasons (i.e. he thought of a really good slogan.) But breaking up all the big banks doesn't even necessarily make sense if you think about it for more than 10 seconds and try and imagine the economic impact of doing that + the cost/benefit of doing it. That's nothing to say about whether its even an actual thing you can do. It mostly sounds like demagoguery, really.
RustyNails
Member
Policy wise they're not really different. Bernie bots just see Hillary as corrupt, corporatist and untrustworthy.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Breaking up the banks means splitting them up into separate entities, not killing them. I don't see how that creates an economic impact.
And he has lots of differences with Clinton. He's for single payer healthcare while Hillary wants to keep with Obamacare, and he's for free college while Hillary has an overly complicated plan to create debt free college.
There's also issues like the TPP, where Sanders disagrees with it at the core, while Hillary wants Obama to get a better deal, and Citizen's United where Sanders has pledged to only nominate justices that would overturn the ruling, while Hillary wants to do it through a constitutional amendment that has no chance of ever happening anytime during her presidency.
I think there's also something to be said about general focus, like how Hillary mostly focuses on gender inequality while Sanders mostly focuses on inequality between the rich and the poor.
I think you have to not be paying attention if you really think this. Even outside the campaign trail, you need to look at how often Sanders, Warren, Brown, and Franken disagree with Obama, and I don't think it's a big leap to say Hillary is going to align more with Obama on those issues that don't get as much attention, like finance regulation.
Just like every other politician.
Biden for all his praise voted for the Iraq War like Hillary but I don't see him getting attacked like she is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTs7bhnv6DY&t=0m19s
Aaron Strife
Banned
Hillary said the same thing about the justices though. It's true she brought up a constitutional amendment and frankly that should be something we fight for as well. Doesn't have to be an either/or.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Has she? I haven't seen it.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Jeb seems to be fighting more for his brother's honor than to actually get the presidency.
http://time.com/4002603/jeb-bush-nsa-evildoers/
http://time.com/4002603/jeb-bush-nsa-evildoers/
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked