• 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.
T

teiresias

Member
adam387 said:
I am definitely anything but a Sander's defender, but I highly doubt he would go negative. I disagree with him on a few things, but I do think he is principled and believes in what he says. He says he won't go negative, and I'll take him at his word.

Having said that, I think a lot of it will depend on what he or his campaign considers an "attack." In someone online quarters, saying you're not voting for Bernie is immediately an attack against Bernie, liberalism, and progressive values. Pointing out differences is not a negative attack.
Click to expand...

Any pollster showing a Hillary lead will be considered to be attacking him.
 
M

Makai

Member
h6JKuhl.png


:U
 
M

Makai

Member
Marco fell off. Ted Cruz fell way off. Fiorina entering Rand territory. All but Trump, Carson, Jeb, and Marco are below 5%. Trump has more than Carson, Jeb, and Marco combined.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
At this point in time in 2012 Romney sucked so much he was even losing to Cain.

Trump is so much stronger of a front runner that he hasn't even come close letting to anyone push him into second place like Romney did.
 
B

brainchild

Banned
Aaron Strife said:
"Donald Trump is collapsing"

(numbers are now at highest they've been during the whole campaign)

"Marco Rubio is poised to be the next frontrunner"

(numbers are falling)

"Jeb Bush is eh"

(eh)

Come on, I wanna see my boy Bobby in the next debate!
Click to expand...

Aggregate pollsters are the great reality checkers. Had it not been for them, Carson would've had this on lock until Rubio took over.
 
R

RastaMentality

Banned
If Carson gets the nom, I hope we can put a cap on the black people voting for him because he's black foolishness when he fails to hit 25%+ of the black vote.
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
So... umm... what exactly is O'Malley's endgame?

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/...uy-first-sanders-now-omalley-takes-glove-off/
Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley delivered his sharpest attack to date on front-runner Hillary Clinton in an appearance Monday on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”

Mr. O’Malley, running a distant third, also took aim at Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, casting his two rivals as career politicians with little record of achievement.

He dismissed both Mr. Sanders and Mrs. Clinton as “two candidates who have been in Washington for about 40 years, neither one of whom has gotten much done.”

Reprising his line from the Jefferson-Jackson dinner in Des Moines on Saturday, Mr. O’Malley likened Mrs. Clinton to a “weathervane” who “shifts its positions in the wind.”
...

“Hillary Clinton has changed her position on virtually every defining issue in this race, except for one — and that is to protect the big banks on Wall Street and go along with business as usual. I don’t believe that that’s what the people of our country are looking for.”
Click to expand...
Because he's certainly not making any friends in Hillaryland.

I mean, I realise that the Democratic party has a dearth of young talent, but if he comes out of this a distant distant distant third having royally pissed off the party leader and most likely POTUS, while also launching broadsides at the favourite of the party's more liberal wing, then what exactly is he expecting to get out of it?
 
B

brainchild

Banned
shinra-bansho said:
So... umm... what exactly is O'Malley's endgame?

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/...uy-first-sanders-now-omalley-takes-glove-off/

Because he's certainly not making any friends in Hillaryland.

I mean, I realise that the Democratic party has a dearth of young talent, but if he comes out of this a distant distant distant third having royally pissed off the party leader and most likely POTUS, while also launching broadsides at the favourite of the party's more liberal wing, then what exactly is he expecting to get out of it?
Click to expand...

Man, I can't believe I'm saying this but the next dem debate is going to be... interesting, to say the least.

Can't wait to see Hillary, Bernie, and O'Malley rip each other to shreds!
 
DOWN

DOWN

Banned
I don't really understand the claim that Rubio and Cruz are good speakers. I've heard this especially for Rubio, but to me, he has that very obvious grand stand tempo and tone when he has his script in mind. He locks in and starts doing his pauses and I am surprised some people find it effective. It doesn't have the natural delivery of many other candidates, though the wording may be stronger than someone like Kasich's.

Cruz just makes me roll my eyes. I chuckled when he locked his gaze into the camera during the second debate and did that 'let me deliver this speech to my Christians' tone and pausing like Rubio but worse.
 
B

brainchild

Banned
neurosisxeno said:
I am confused on how "preparing for negative ads" became "I'M GONNA RIP THEM A NEW ONE".
Click to expand...

I can only speak for myself, but I'm not talking about that. There's a tweet suggesting that Bernie doesn't consider negative ads to be off the table anymore. Plus, he's comfortable with criticizing Hillary now. If he has this attitude doing into the next debate, it's gonna get ugly.
 
N

neurosisxeno

Member
brainchild said:
I can only speak for myself, but I'm not talking about that. There's a tweet suggesting that Bernie doesn't consider negative ads to be off the table anymore. Plus, he's comfortable with criticizing Hillary now. If he has this attitude doing into the next debate, it's gonna get ugly.
Click to expand...

That's a stretch. There's a big difference between policy criticism and negative attack ads. There's no way he changes a strategy that has always worked for him over the past 30 years over a single comment that people are trying to misrepresent.
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Makai said:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/can-ben-carson-really-take-out-donald-trump/

They conclude that Trump needs to win Iowa to have a realistic shot at winning the nomination.
Click to expand...

Iowa is nowhere near as important as that any more.

Also,

natesilver: That Iowans are paying more attention to the race than people elsewhere in the country, so they may be early adopters of trends we’ll see elsewhere. In other words, once Trump starts getting Iowa-type scrutiny in other states, he might fade.
Click to expand...

:lol :lol :lol

Recent history shows Iowa isn't needed at all.

Nate is so salty about Trump. What a baby.
 
U

User1608

Banned
Nate should have conceded weeks ago at least. He's going to look like a total fool when proven wrong, which is seeming very likely now.
 
F

Farmboy

Member
Nothing left for Nate to do than just keep doubling down, hoping he'll look like a genius if/when Trump does lose.

Also: there's obviously a market for 'Trump won't be the nominee' punditry.
 
U

User 406

Banned
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
Events like Greer's lecture don't fit well into possible policy decisions by the state and need to be handled by the people though.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I think Greer and other lectures by foul people that have been pressured into canceling is just basic social enforcement of mores. Just because there's some pushback for this one doesn't invalidate the concept.

Is there some kind of political link you're referring to I'm missing? As far as I knew it was just another bigot gets scheduled for a lecture, people protest thing. I haven't been following the story that closely.
 
C

Cheebo

Banned
HylianHistorian said:
Nate should have conceded weeks ago at least. He's going to look like a total fool when proven wrong, which is seeming very likely now.
Click to expand...

To be fair pretty much everyone in the media & political journalism and the like agree with Nate. As do the betting odds. If Trump is the nominee it isn't Nate being wrong. It is virtually every political journalist in the country being wrong. And the entire media establishment continues to double down on this.

For example, just on Friday I saw Chris Cizzila the main politics beat writer for the Washington Post declare Trump is unlikely to win a single primary.

danm999 said:
If Nate is wrong I can only imagine the crow he will have to eat given 2012.
Click to expand...

How is his 2012 data model prediction relevant? His personal primary predictions are a completely different thing than his data model he uses for the general elections that were more or less flawless so far in 2008, 2010, 2012, & 2014. His primary predictions are just his gut guesses no different than us. His data model is for the general elections is purely numbers based.

Him guessing the primary wrong doesn't make his impeccable data model used for general elections any less flawless than it has been the last 7 years.
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Joe Shlabotnik said:
Carson leading Trump nationallly (26% / 22%) for the first time in new CBS poll
Click to expand...

Oh, republicans. Keep on republicaning.

The great part about this is that NOW everyone else will start attacking him at the debate. Going to be fun to watch.
 
D

danm999

Member
Cheebo said:
How is his 2012 data model prediction relevant? His personal primary predictions are a completely different thing than his data model he uses for the general elections that were more or less flawless so far in 2008, 2010, 2012, & 2014. His primary predictions are just his gut guesses no different than us. His data model is for the general elections is purely numbers based.
Click to expand...

I mean in the sense a lot of people salty with him for dispelling the "tight race" narrative are going to put the screws to him.
 
C

Cheebo

Banned
danm999 said:
I mean in the sense a lot of people salty with him for dispelling the "tight race" narrative are going to put the screws to him.
Click to expand...

Disputing the tight race narrative was due to his general election data model, I can't see how any of that is related to his gut guesses for a primary.

Nate Silver the data statistician isn't the same as Nate Silver the political journalist. Him getting a primary wrong doesn't change anything about how his data model works which is what his track record is based off and his dispelling of a tight race in '12 and '08. They are basically completely two different people. Equating his predictions with his data model analysis doesn't make any sense to me.
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
Mr. Carson, a retired neurosurgeon, is the choice of 26 percent of Republican primary voters, the poll found, while Mr. Trump now wins support from 22 percent, although the difference lies within the margin of sampling error.

The survey is the first time that Mr. Trump has not led all candidates since The Times and CBS News began measuring presidential preferences at the end of July.

No other candidate comes close to Mr. Carson and Mr. Trump. Senator Marco Rubio of Florida received 8 percent while former Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida and Carly Fiorina, the former Hewlett-Packard chief executive, are each the choice of 7 percent of Republican primary voters.

Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas and Gov. John R. Kasich of Ohio each received support from 4 percent of those surveyed.
Click to expand...
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/fir...edges-ahead-nationally-in-timescbs-news-poll/

So if roughly we group these.
Evangelical Christian Right: 26+4+4 = 34
Establishment-ish: 8+7+7+4+4 = 30 - I put Fiorina in here.
Trump: 22

But apparently 7/10 of those who gave a candidate response, were still not certain to back their selection. Trump's support is firmer, 55% saying they were sure.
 
D

danm999

Member
Cheebo said:
Disputing the tight race narrative was due to his general election data model, I can't see how any of that is related to his gut guesses for a primary.

Nate Silver the data statitican isn't the same as Nate Silver the political journalist.
Click to expand...

Because most pundits who called him out didn't understand the difference between those two things in the first place.

Seriously they'll go "see; Nate Silver gets it wrong too na na na na na".
 
C

Cheebo

Banned
danm999 said:
Because most pundits who called him out didn't understand the difference between those two things in the first place.

Seriously they'll go "see; Nate Silver gets it wrong too na na na na na".
Click to expand...
I see it happening too. His data model has a better track record than anything else in this industry, there is no reason to question it until the model actually gets an election wrong for once.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
GAF Museum - The Greatest OTs of All Time (or at least, some of the great ones)
|OT|
4
2K
Komatsu replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
Top Bottom