• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Wow. Jeb is getting ready to fold shop.

Lesson 2 of the 2016 campaign: establishment candidates respond to establishment pressure. Non-establishment candidates don't.

With the republican outrage about the establishment in the party, this should be surprising to noone.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
I don't know if I'd call it a reasonable argument, but I would point out that a lot of the CU fears have turned out not to materialize. Money in politics is a very real problem, but it's clearly not the defining variable in most races.
I don't know if I agree. Maybe it's not defining, but hard to argue a super pac blanketing Ohio with Benghazi ads in October wouldn't be formidable.
 
Carson is going to flop. Trump only needs to tout his business experience and talk about medicare cuts. But Carson will definitely sew up the evangelical vote. Still, I think Trump will lose Iowa. Its such a kooky state for GOP electorate.
 

Teggy

Member
LOOK AT THIS.

CSAXC5IUwAcoLCP.png

Please tell me this was a Republicans only poll. Please.

Please?
 

Paskil

Member
The one silver-lining about Citizens United that I've noticed so far is that no matter how much Super PAC money you raise, you still need a shitton of money to your campaign to be able to run an actual campaign. See: Jeb Bush and Scott Walker this year.

However, I hope that's not an argument people grasp on to to say that CU is a reasonable policy

It has had a surreal impact on Congressional elections.
 

Bowdz

Member
I don't know if I'd call it a reasonable argument, but I would point out that a lot of the CU fears have turned out not to materialize. Money in politics is a very real problem, but it's clearly not the defining variable in most races.

In primary battles, certainly. Wait for the general election though. The sheer volume of attack ads will be absolutely sickening.
 
With the republican outrage about the establishment in the party, this should be surprising to noone.

You can't spend 30+ years shitting all over Establishment Politics and run establishment candidates. It's contradictory, and it's no surprise the GOP is a mess right now. I just hope after this election the GOP restructures itself into something useful, because their current system is already failing at a national level, and soon will start buckling on a state level.

Please tell me this was a Republicans only poll. Please.

Please?

It says "Among likely Republican caucusgoers" in bright red. Unless I'm mistaken for Caucuses you have to be registered with the party to participate.
 
I don't know if I agree. Maybe it's not defining, but hard to argue a super pac blanketing Ohio with Benghazi ads in October wouldn't be formidable.

Well... look at 2010, 2012, 2014. Superpacs have been dumping tons of money into races every election since 08, and... it seems to have mixed results at best.

IIRC, the Kochs dumped millions upon millions of dollars into various local races, and lost every single time. Money is important, but outside money? Verdict's still out.

He was there for the biscuits.

The first Herman Caine position I can get behind. Popeye's has godlike biscuits (and the fries are very nearly as good).
 
Ah sorry, I was reading it on my phone and it was super tiny :)

No big deal. It being Republicans only doesn't make it any less terrifying. 96% of respondents like that Ben Carson "approaches problems with common sense"? Have they heard the mans ideas? 81% find a candidate who compares the ACA to slavery attractive?
 

Makai

Member
Nobody saw Trump coming, and nobody even thought about...whatever the fuck is causing Carson to do well
Or that Sanders would break 10%

I'm trying to decide whether 2012 or 2016 has been crazier. Nobody thought Perry would crumple that badly. Nobody expected Caine, Gingrinch (2x), and Santorum would rise above Romney.

2016 looking like the far and away favorite.
 
Or that Sanders would break 10%

I'm trying to decide whether 2012 or 2016 has been crazier. Nobody thought Perry would crumple that badly. Nobody expected Caine, Gingrinch (2x), and Santorum would rise above Romney.

2016 looking like the far and away favorite.

Sanders in my mind was always likely to be an uphill battle, and people love an underdog so It's reasonable that he would get at least 10% with no other major challenger. I think the rise of Trump and Carson is much crazier than people like Santorum and Gingrich doing well. Herman Cain still caused my favorite political satire on Earth.
 

Mike M

Nick N
Or that Sanders would break 10%

I'm trying to decide whether 2012 or 2016 has been crazier. Nobody thought Perry would crumple that badly. Nobody expected Caine, Gingrinch (2x), and Santorum would rise above Romney.

2016 looking like the far and away favorite.
2016 is the clear winner. It's like the circus that was 2012, only the tent is on fire and the elephants are trampling the clowns.
 

HylianTom

Banned
2016 has been my favorite GOP primary (second: 1996).

My favorite general still has to be 2008. Not sure we'll ever see anything or anyone like Palin ever again.
 

Konka

Banned
2016 has been my favorite GOP primary (second: 1996).

My favorite general still has to be 2008. Not sure we'll ever see anything or anyone like Palin ever again.

Can't beat McCain suspending his campaign to return to Washington to solve the global financial crisis. Just think about how much worse the world would be now had McCain not returned at that pivotal moment.
 

Bowdz

Member
It's weird that Trump calls Jeb! low-energy yet Carson seems to be on a 24/7 sedative cocktail.

I really hope Trump starts going after Rubio with the same intensity that he has gone after Bush. I agree that Carson will probably do well in IA and then flame out, but Rubio will be the main challenger if Bush can't right his campaign. Trump needs to start defining Rubio before he defines himself to the broader electorate.
 
Or that Sanders would break 10%

I'm trying to decide whether 2012 or 2016 has been crazier. Nobody thought Perry would crumple that badly. Nobody expected Caine, Gingrinch (2x), and Santorum would rise above Romney.

2016 looking like the far and away favorite.

Sanders polling as high as he did was certainly interesting. Were he, say, 10-15 years younger he could eventually morph into a viable candidate at the national level. Alas.

Could also go for governor, so there's... wait a second. The current dem governor has said that he won't run for reelection. Seat's up for grabs in november '16. #bernlieve.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
Can't beat McCain suspending his campaign to return to Washington to solve the global financial crisis. Just think about how much worse the world would be now had McCain not returned at that pivotal moment.

Which wouldn't be near as good if not for him canceling his Letterman appearance to rush to the economy's aid by doing a Katie Couric interview instead.

https://youtu.be/aR5FGkpfsbM?t=399
 

Makai

Member
Sanders polling as high as he did was certainly interesting. Were he, say, 10-15 years younger he could eventually morph into a viable candidate at the national level. Alas.

Could also go for governor, so there's... wait a second. The current dem governor has said that he won't run for reelection. Seat's up for grabs in november '16. #bernlieve.
You're blowing my mind here.
 

Makai

Member
Sanders in my mind was always likely to be an uphill battle, and people love an underdog so It's reasonable that he would get at least 10% with no other major challenger. I think the rise of Trump and Carson is much crazier than people like Santorum and Gingrich doing well. Herman Cain still caused my favorite political satire on Earth.
Good video. I agree, but I'm assuming I am biased by seeing the events unfold in realtime.
 

HylianTom

Banned
Trump: I’m Surprised There’s No One “More Conservative” Than Paul Ryan For Speaker

Donald Trump said Thursday he’s not thrilled with the idea of Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan being Speaker of the House and expressed shock that Republicans haven’t found a more conservative candidate.

“Im not thrilled, I’m not thrilled,” Trump said of Ryan on the John Fredericks Show. “Not easily, I mean it’s not that you are given a choice. Don’t forget that you have people in Washington, Republicans that are going to be making a choice, and it looks like he is going to be the one. You saw what happens this morning and it looks like he is going to be the one. And if you have to live with it, you have to live with it, John. We can’t go crazy. We can’t say oh gee, I refuse to show up, or I refuse to do something.”

Trump said Ryan was soft on immigration, the key issue of Trump’s campaign.

“Now he’s very, very weak on illegal immigration, I don’t like that, you know he’s an amnesty person, and you know I’m not thrilled with that,” said Trump. “Because you get amnesty and you do something wrong, you get amnesty, that’s not what we are all about. And other things that you mentioned. And at the same time, a very conservative group in Washington, that you like and that I like and you know it looks like they are backing him. You want to sort of have a group of people that are unified and they do need somebody. “I’m a little surprised that somebody more conservative and tough, because they need some toughness, and smartness, and I’m a little surprised that somebody more conservative and tougher on the issues has not been chosen,” said Trump. “I’m a little surprised, actually.” Trump’s views on Ryan have shifted between support and criticism in recent years.

Stir that shit, Trumpy..
 
Romney: Without Romneycare, no Obamacare

n a Boston Globe obituary for Staples founder Thomas Stemberg, who died Friday at the age of 66, Romney attributed his focus on health care as governor to a conversation the two had shortly after his election. According to the Globe, the late businessman asked Romney why he ran for governor, to which he replied that he wanted to help people. In turn, Stemberg told Romney that the most effective way to accomplish his goals in that regard would be to ensure health-care access for everyone.

“Without Tom pushing it, I don’t think we would have had Romneycare,” said Romney, who helped Stemberg open the first Staples store in the 1980s with the backing of Bain Capital. “Without Romneycare, I don’t think we would have Obamacare. So, without Tom a lot of people wouldn’t have health insurance.”


Big change from the rhetoric in 2012.
 
I went to the metropolitan museum of art today. The guard at the entrance told me no drinks were allowed inside so i discretely stashed my large size unopened gatorade behind the trash can to the right of the front door, like every other idiot ever. When I came out it was gone. /salt

Could you please compose yourself rusty kun
 

Diablos

Member
Romney: Without Romneycare, no Obamacare
Big change from the rhetoric in 2012.

Romney going up against his own 2012 campaign I see

Funny how that works.

I want to know how he would replace OCare with 'state by state' plans or whatever... how the fuck do you force a state to do that without all the red ones opting out as they did for a state exchange? To his credit Romney had the best 'replace' rhetoric but that is not saying a lot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom