Bam Bam Baklava
Member
He would tell all his supporters to follow him to a new nation he is going to build called Outer Heaven.
-
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 |OT2| Pls print
- Thread starter ivysaur12
- Start date
- Status
He would tell all his supporters to follow him to a new nation he is going to build called Outer Heaven.
Aaron Strife
Banned
It would be amazing if Bill Clinton - a decade and a half after his presidency - essentially engineered the defeat of the Republican Party in the next election.
Of course, we still have yet to see if the environment is good enough that Hillary (or Bernie whatever) could run up the score on Trump enough to carry the House and Senate with the presidency. But I think it will be - who's the House Speaker again?
Roland_Gunner
Member
He blames the establishment for rigging the election against him and immediately launches a third party campaign.
I'm talking he's already the nominee and loses the general election.
He buys Haiti, throws out everyone who lives there, and starts his own country. Only classier, more luxurious and with his name on it in big gold letters.
It might seem crazy what I'm about to say
But I'm here in Congress, it's my first day
Yeah, I think the banks will be just fine
Yeah, no time to read, can't waste my time
Because I'm Chafee
Clap along if you vote on something unknown to you
Because I'm Chafee
Clap along if you don't know what this bill's supposed to do
But I'm here in Congress, it's my first day
Yeah, I think the banks will be just fine
Yeah, no time to read, can't waste my time
Because I'm Chafee
Clap along if you vote on something unknown to you
Because I'm Chafee
Clap along if you don't know what this bill's supposed to do
I'm sorry.
Man, if he wins Iowa and then New Hampshire and then South Carolina.. wowza.
I realize that the bounces from these early states aren't quite what they used to be, but the "momentum" narrative that would inevitably arise from such a string of events would make him damn tough to take down at that point, even if it were to turn into a one-on-one contest. Hell, if everyone but The Chosen AntiTrump dropped-out after South Carolina, it'd be a very conspicuous move on the part of the GOP establishment - and it'd be one that primary voters could be very likely to resent.
(Side note: we're approaching 90 days of Trump leading in the polls. According to Steve Kornacki, during the 2012 cycle Newt led for 53 days, Perry for 40, and Santorum for 16.)
I realize that the bounces from these early states aren't quite what they used to be, but the "momentum" narrative that would inevitably arise from such a string of events would make him damn tough to take down at that point, even if it were to turn into a one-on-one contest. Hell, if everyone but The Chosen AntiTrump dropped-out after South Carolina, it'd be a very conspicuous move on the part of the GOP establishment - and it'd be one that primary voters could be very likely to resent.
(Side note: we're approaching 90 days of Trump leading in the polls. According to Steve Kornacki, during the 2012 cycle Newt led for 53 days, Perry for 40, and Santorum for 16.)
He didn't include Cain, but it looks like he led from mid-October to mid-November.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
What about my man Cain?
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Scroll the author picture. It's exactly the type of person who you think would write that
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Still waiting for the GAF-predicted poll number collapse.
BertramCooper
Banned
It's really cool to see ErasureAcer embrace the obvious misogyny that underlies his hatred of Hillary.
STOP TALKING ABOUT BEING A WOMAN YOU WOMAN
STOP TALKING ABOUT BEING A WOMAN YOU WOMAN
It's coming. Trump's just a flavor of the year.
Who is the "leading" establishment candidate in both of these polls when you don't count the outsider trio of Trump/Carson/Fiorina? Rubio. It all comes down to the belief that in the end an establishment candidate will win, like they always do. It is why Rubio & Bush still lead the predictwise market.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Predictwise showing HUGE moves today. Clinton now at 77% chance.
http://www.predictwise.com/politics/2016DemNomination
http://www.predictwise.com/politics/2016DemNomination
Hillary - 77%
Bernie - 13%
Jeb Bush - 30%
Marco Rubio - 29%
Donald Trump - 13%
Preditwise gives equal likelihood of Bernie winning the Dem nomination as Trump winning the GOP one loll.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Blame the money markets.
eBay Huckster
Member
yeah, the money markets are throwing any GOP predictions way out of whack whereas they're mostly consistent with polling on the Dem side
Well the money market is pretty much in line with the likes of the political journalists and the Nate Silver types.
I can't recall a single other election in which every single political analyst and the betting market was unanimously contrary to polling.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Trump+Carson+Cruz combining for 25% likelihood when their combined polling numbers are at 57% just seems way too low to me. The freak that's left at the end could easily be able to get the voters of the other two horrible people that drop out.
Don't most polling show very few voters second choice is Trump?
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
I think Cruz would rather endorse Trump than anyone else though if he drops out and I think that would really change things.
RustyNails
Member
Cruz' brown nosing Trump, and his refusal to attack any candidate easily tells me he is begging for a VP slot.
He won't drop out to endorse Trump anytime before Super Tuesday. His entire campaign is waiting on Trump to fall and scooping up his entire base.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
His endorsement won't matter in the slightest, especially after he drops out.
I think if/when she clinches the nomination, I'm going to post a thread in the OT with links to the best SNL sketches of the 1990s (whichever ones are available online, that is).
Deep down, I know I'm going to go through all of them anyway (I've already been looking around this afternoon), and many of us are going to be making references to them all year long (and maybe for the next decade!), so why not?
====
And I really, really want to believe that Edwards is going to survive the onslaught that's coming. Jindal might've really succeeded in royally fucking the GOP here this year; Edwards keeps harping on a newspaper question to the candidates asking them to grade the Jindal administration - he was the only one to give Jindal an 'F'
Deep down, I know I'm going to go through all of them anyway (I've already been looking around this afternoon), and many of us are going to be making references to them all year long (and maybe for the next decade!), so why not?
====
And I really, really want to believe that Edwards is going to survive the onslaught that's coming. Jindal might've really succeeded in royally fucking the GOP here this year; Edwards keeps harping on a newspaper question to the candidates asking them to grade the Jindal administration - he was the only one to give Jindal an 'F'
Fucking Rand lol. Drop out already!
Aaron Strife
Banned
The problem is you have to discount candidates who make up like 60% of the vote before you land on Rubio. Like, ignore a supermajority of the poll results and this guy who's barely hanging in there at 8% is totally the frontrunner guys.
That LA poll I wanna believe I wanna believe I wanna believe
lol. yeah. It's really funny that the establishment candidates (and Carly) are the flavors of the
Fuck Lessig. I like his bill idea but publically announcing you will resign right after getting a single issue bill passed is one of the stupidest political campaigns I've ever heard.
He would have been just as effective if he promised to only run once and people wouldn't feel like they're voting for a White House with an unknown vice president.
FloydtheFathead
Member
It's about ethics in political pandering Bert. Didn't you know?
Edit - I did like Hillary in the debate as she did appear polished and presidential and plan to vote for her.
Don't hold your breath. Vitter will go hard negative against Edwards. Will be surprising to see if Dardenne and Angelle endorse Vitter or Edwards. Wonder if that would make a difference.
mightynine
Member
As someone from the gre...er, state of Louisiana, Edwards only leads because the GOP vote is split between three candidates right now.
He'll more than likely make a runoff, but I don't expect him to win it.
Vitter's gone negative on everyone and in a runoff he'd go full blitz. If it's between Vitter and Edwards, I don't think Vitter would coast to victory as much as I first thought, but he'll win because Louisiana is red as can be.
I would imagine Dardenne and Angelle will just not endorse a candidate. Perhaps if the state GOP leans on them.
EDIT: I'm forgetting about a pretty large chunk of undecided voters, but I just don't see them breaking blue.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Single mothers.
Is predictwise legit (in terms of placing bets and getting paid out) or is it potentially shady like InTrade was (well it wasn't, but it could've been)?
Jerk off.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Still, I don't think it's outrageous to suggest Trump and Carson have no real shot at being the nominee. Fiorina has a low shot. Which is why I understand outright dismissing them and focusing on the highest establishment guy (Rubio, Bush, Kasish, etc). I simply don't believe the party would sit back and allow Trump to win, nor do I believe he's capable of winning even if it was a fair playing field. Carson is a dumbass and various party voices like Jennifer Rubin have already voiced concerns about that. Fiorina would be an interesting, cynical choice as nominee...but her views on gay marriage will end her eventually.
What can the party do that they aren't already doing short of vote-counting fraud?
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
The GOP has studied imaginary voter fraud for so long that they may be able to pull off actual voter fraud though...
PhoenixDark
Banned
Delegates, my dear friend. Delegates.
Aaron Strife
Banned
I think there's a difference between saying "One of the establishment candidates might pull ahead" vs. "Shut up Bush and Rubio are still leading goddammit." One being a measured, fair assessment and the other disregarding all available data. Carson's dumb statements don't seem to be hurting him yet. They might but it hasn't shown up in the polls.
Walk me through it, please. I recall a lot of the states are winner-take-all this time.
I remember that states with primaries through March 14th award their GOP delegates by proportion. After that point, it's winner-take-all.
The conservative blogosphere went a bit nuts on this because Florida is winner-take-all; they thought that Jeb would be able to win at home easily and get that large cache prize of delegates.
If their theory is correct - that the system was set-up to benefit an establishment candidate from Florida - then the establishment could be burned by their own rule change if Trump ends-up winning Florida and all of its delegates.
There are going to be 2470 delegates to the RNC in 2016. Of those, 437 are superdelegates, unbound by results of any state primary or caucus. If it's close between Trump and AntiTrump, these superdelegates could in theory swing the race to his opponent.. but there'd be certain hell to pay if Trump was winning most of the voting process.
===
Meanwhile, this should be verrrrrry interesting..
PhoenixDark
Banned
I'd imagine that if Trump does well in the early states, the establishment will aggressively move to select one candidate and bet the farm on him. Massive money, endorsements, media, etc. Right now it seems like Rubio is that guy. The winner take all format should help the establishment candidate capture many delegates.
Most delegates are state/district level politicians. Trump being the nominee would likely result in a nationwide annihilation of the republican party, meaning it would be in many delegates' best interest for him not to win. I don't think it would be hard for the GOP to convince his pledged delegates to switch their vote at the convention. Likewise any delegates won by other candidates would likely side with whoever the remaining establishment candidate is.
Trump would likely retaliate by running for third party, but ultimately that wouldn't be nearly as bad of a result as Trump being the party's nominee. The GOP would lose if Trump ran as a third party...but it wouldn't be a state wide massacre (they'd keep the house, likely senate, etc).
Manmademan
Member
The party establishment "overturning the will of the people" and taking trump's pledged delegates and handing them to rubio/cruz/etc would split the party like a ripe melon.
Infinitely worse than trump winning and getting annihilated- but obviously the best outcome for democrats.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked