• 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.
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
I think by Iowa it will basically be just Trump, Carson, Rubio, Bush, Cruz - and in roughly that order, too (nationally, not in Iowa).
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
Imagine that Dr Pleb comes to you in January 2015 and offers you a free random statistic from later on in this political cycle - a glimpse into the future, no catch, no cost!

You accept his offer. And this is what that random peek into the future produces:

@ppppolls:
76% of SC Republicans think the pyramids were for burying the dead, 7% think they were for storing grain, 3% for the usage of aliens
Click to expand...

You'd be utterly confused, right?
 
Q

QuiteWhittle

Member
Universal health care to appear on Colorado ballot in 2016

Supporters of universal health care have gathered enough signatures to put on next year's ballot a plan to make Colorado the first state to opt out of the federal health law and replace it with taxpayer-funded coverage for all.

Proponents submitted 158,831 qualified signatures, about 60,000 more than required to put the measure on the ballot, Secretary of State Wayne Williams said Monday. The question would make Colorado the first state to opt out of the federal Affordable Care Act and replace it with universal health care.

The campaign is expected to face intense opposition and could make for a heavily funded, highly visible debate over the viability of single-payer health care in a key swing state in the 2016 presidential election.
...

The ColoradoCareYES campaign says employers would have to pay a new tax — about 7 percent of a worker's wages into the health co-op, on top of deductions for Social Security and Medicare. Employees would have a payroll tax of about 3 percent. Both employers and workers then would not have to pay premiums to a private health insurer.
Click to expand...

I wonder if this would fare any better than Vermont's plans.
 
S

Skiptastic

Member
Macho Madness said:
Thanks PoliGAF. Google probably thinks I'm a Ted Cruz supporter or something now.

l6Wvx9U.jpg
Click to expand...
Awesome to learn of another Hoosier-GAF member!
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
From Charles Blow's NYT column:
Carson has pushed back on the biographical charges with more verve than he has exhibited at any of the debates. That is because the biographical charges don’t simply threaten the Carson campaign, they threaten Carson the corporation — the former I have always contended was simply a vehicle for the latter. Has no one else wondered why Carson’s chief media surrogate isn’t his campaign manager or communications director, but his business manager, Armstrong Williams?

Carson may no longer be a practicing physician, but he is a full-time profiteer, selling his story in books and speeches and paid handsomely to do so. Good work, if you can get it. But these new charges threaten to reduce the legend to a fairy tale, and thereby threaten the checks to be cashed after the votes have been cast.

Media observers seem to me too focused on Ben Carson the candidate. I remain focused on Ben Carson the enterprise, and apparently, so is he.
Click to expand...
Makes a lot of sense.

He doesn't really give a rats ass if you question his tax plan numbers. And he'll flip his position on things like Medicare in an instant without much fuss. But his biography is his meal ticket.
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
Very funny: we celebrated reports that Jeb (or a Jeb affiliate) is planning on destroying Rubio.

When I go to conservative news sites and read the comments, I see the same reactions:
Let them fight. Let them destroy each other to make way for someone else.

===

Also:
Is Vitter on the Verge of Losing Everything?

Louisiana isn’t anywhere close to belonging on a list of swing states, yet Republican David Vitter is at risk of losing not only his gubernatorial race this month, but also his Senate seat next year.

The Pelican State’s senior senator has struggled to unify the Republican vote after finishing second in the Oct. 24 jungle primary with just 23 percent. He trails Democrat John Bel Edwards in multiple public polls heading into the Nov. 21 runoff.

Vitter’s numbers have dipped to a point where, should he lose, some Republicans will want him to drop his bid for re-election to the Senate in 2016 because they are concerned he could put the seat at risk of a Democratic takeover. Republicans are already defending senators in blue and purple states, and GOP strategists don’t want to have to spend money in a state where President Barack Obama received 41 percent in 2012.

Still, with Republican Matt Bevin’s surprisingly comfortable win in last week’s gubernatorial race in Kentucky — after being down in the polls — it’s worth considering whether Obama’s unpopularity in the South could prove enough to vault Vitter to victory, too, and make a Senate decision moot.

...

Vitter and Republicans are trying to persuade voters by coupling Edwards with Obama, similar to a strategy Bevin and Republicans employed in Kentucky. But time is running short for the senator, considering early voting started over the weekend. One GOP strategist admitted the party could probably drive up Edwards’ negatives enough to win, but it might take two months, rather than two weeks.
Click to expand...

Agree 100% with the strategist in this case. Time is of the essence for Vitter, and he's running out.
 
B

Black Republican

Member
PublicPolicyPolling
Our new SC poll:
Trump 25,
Carson 21,
Cruz 15,
Rubio 13,
Bush 8,
Fiorina 5.
No one else gets more than 3%
Click to expand...
https://t.co/56IbPznbPV

65% say Carson's 'violent youth' makes no difference to them, 9% more likely to vote for him, 22% less likely:
Click to expand...

Carson's recent controversy seems to have had no effect. Was at 21% in SC in Sept., 21% now. 69/17 fav easily best:
Click to expand...
not surprised , they'll ride or die with him

Although he's still out front Trump's standing has declined a good bit from September- he's dropped 12 points from when he led with 37% on our poll then. His overall popularity with the Republican base has declined from then as well- he'd had a 64/28 favorability rating, but that's dropped down now to 53/33. It's possible the field will have seen some winnowing by the time the race gets to South Carolina and that's boding a lot less well for Trump now too. In September we found he led Marco Rubio 58/35 in a head to head match up and trailed Ben Carson only 46/45. Now he can achieve only a tie with Rubio at 46%, and his deficit to Carson is up to 51/38. He also ties Ted Cruz 44/44 in a head to head- the one he does still dominate is against Jeb Bush where he's up 57/32.
Click to expand...

The news isn't good for Jeb Bush either. He led South Carolina with 19% in February. Now he's in 5th place at 8%, but more importantly voters don't seem to be buying his relaunch. Only 26% agree that 'Jeb can fix it' to 55% who say they think he can't. Those numbers are a function of his overall unpopularity with the GOP base in the state- just 36% see him favorably to 46% who have a negative view of him. He continues to particularly have credibility issues on the right- only 4% of 'very conservative' voters support him and his favorability with them is 32/49.
Click to expand...

unless the other guys drop dead next morning, Bush aint winning SC
 
U

User 463088

Banned
SC Crosstabs

It's going to be nasty for Bernie in SC. His unfavorables among the entire voting block are bad (14 points worse than Hillary's). But, when you look at his numbers among PoC, 32/32 against Hillary's 85/9..... Damn.

New Jersey Primary Poll

Clinton 56

Sanders 23

O’Malley 2



Clown Car

Trump 31

Carson 16

Rubio 15

Christie 8

Cruz 7

Fiorina/Bush 4

Kasich 3

It's pointless since NJ isn't until June, but just putting it out there.
 
K

Kemal86

Member
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
I can't believe emergency contraception in the U.S. costs $50 to consumers when it can be sold at a profit for $4.

Government backed monopolies are real fun.

(no problems with my life, just researching some stuff related to abortion)
Click to expand...

Where I live (Midwest US) it was over $90 just a few years ago. Not sure what the price is around here now.
 
T

theprodigy

Member
going back to this:

Crab said:
I mean that's factually not true. The number who intend to vote Hillary and the number who then think she won are not within the margin of error of one another, and in an unfavourable manner. Vice versa for Sanders.
Click to expand...

using data from the same poll, rather than crossing different polls covering different regions, Clinton leads 72/18 and 67% think she won the forum compared to 16% for Sanders

should have paid more attention to the data you were looking at
 
Y

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Bush can't even trash Marco right. What was the advantage of all the asslicking years ago? Now it's back to haunt you. Bye Jeb.
 
T

teiresias

Member
adam387 said:
SC Crosstabs

It's going to be nasty for Bernie in SC. His unfavorables among the entire voting block are bad (14 points worse than Hillary's). But, when you look at his numbers among PoC, 32/32 against Hillary's 85/9..... Damn.
Click to expand...


I think it's equally interesting that her favorables are also much better amongst self-described (I'm assuming this is self-described) "Very Liberal" voters.

Hillary: 80/17
Sanders: 44/34
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
teiresias said:
I think it's equally interesting that her favorables are also much better amongst self-described (I'm assuming this is self-described) "Very Liberal" voters.

Hillary: 80/17
Sanders: 44/34
Click to expand...

Not really, Sanders's support has always been an age oriented one and not an ideological one.
 
D

Daniel B·

Banned
Cheebo said:
How long till Daniel posts about how significant that hilarious college student prediction thing is?
Click to expand...

[post=184923542];)[/post] (for those that haven't already seen my post, it's a link to the post in the associated thread).

I see that we would possibly need this fantastic type of result, to put Bernie's plan into action, as Obama never actually had a supermajority (never attained a usable 60 vote fillibuster-proof majority) and even then, that might not have been enough, as in the 2012 Senate vote, to end the billions the hugely profitable "big oil" corporations receive in subsidies (tax credits), only achieved a 51-47 vote, with four Democrats voting against and two Republicans voting for the measure.

A few notable votes are Jim Webb (D-VA), my past senator from Virginia, who despite only receiving a paltry $26k in campaign contributions, from big oil and gas, voted against the measure, along with Rand Paul ($100k) and John McCain ($2.8 million!). The two Senators who weren't there, would, in all likelihood, also have voted against: Mark Kirk (R-IL; $450k) and Orrin Hatch (R-UT; $200k). It's also interesting to note that Democrats, despite also receiving large campaign contributions, such as Harry Reid and Max Baucus, who at the time had received $350k in campaign contributions, voted for the measure.

For full details on the S. 2204, Repeal Big Oil Tax Subsidies Act result, including the votes and individual big oil campaign contributions, check out the ThinkProgress article.

Bernie voted for the measure, as I'm sure Hillary would have done, but my point is (finally ;) ), Bernie has the potential to achieve the massive landslide in popular support, including in the South, where as Hillary, the "establishment" politician, probably won't even muster Barack's level of support in 2008.
 
C

Cerium

Member
Daniel B·;184938629 said:
Bernie has the potential to achieve the massive landslide in popular support, including in the South, where as Hillary, the "establishment" politician, probably won't even muster Barack's level of support in 2008.
Click to expand...

Ov5p9Po.gif
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
Tonight is the Louisiana debate.. I think I'll end-up watching GOP highlights. Vitter looked desperate at the forum yesterday, so I want to see what he tries tonight.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Daniel B·;184938629 said:
Bernie has the potential to achieve the massive landslide in popular support, including in the South, where as Hillary, the "establishment" politician, probably won't even muster Barack's level of support in 2008.
Click to expand...

jbiSf3m.gif
 
C

Cheebo

Banned
What no one has been able to explain to me is if Bernie s capable of this sort of crazy landslide of unprecedented scale then why can't he beat Hillary? If there was this massive super majority behind him then why is he losing?

If he was capable of a massive landslide in a general he should he completely dominating the primary. Which he struggles to even get more than around 22-23% in.
 
Q

QuiteWhittle

Member
Daniel B·;184938629 said:
[post=184923542]
Bernie voted for the measure, as I'm sure Hillary would have done, but my point is (finally ;) ), Bernie has the potential to achieve the massive landslide in popular support, including in the South, where as Hillary, the "establishment" politician, probably won't even muster Barack's level of support in 2008.
Click to expand...

What's your reasoning? Why do you think a socialist from New England with bottom-tier support from black Americans(Southern Democrats = Black Democrats becomes truer every day) has any better potential to win the south than the former first lady of Arkansas and the wife of the last Democrat to make significant inroads into the deep south?
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
Cheebo said:
What no one has been able to explain to me is if Bernie s capable of this sort of crazy landslide of unprecedented scale then why can't he beat Hillary? If there was this massive super majority behind him then why is he losing?

If he was capable of a massive landslide in a general he should he completely dominating the primary. Which he struggles to even get more than around 22-23% in.
Click to expand...
I'll play devil's advocate here
(although I love Bernie and don't like calling him the Devil, but that's neither here nor there. It's a turn of phrase. You get the gist.)
and say that one possible answer is that poll sampling hasn't reflected what such a revolutionary turnout would look like.

Not that I buy it necessarily, but that'd be one of the first explanations that comes to mind. If Iowa comes and Bernie outperforms the polling, thus blowing us and punditry and the political world away, then we'd be forced to consider this as a legit possibility.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
HylianTom said:
I'll play devil's advocate here
(although I love Bernie and don't like calling him the Devil, but that's neither here nor there. It's a turn of phrase. You get the gist.)
and say that one possible answer is that poll sampling hasn't reflected what such a revolutionary turnout would look like.

Not that I buy it necessarily, but that'd be one of the first explanations that comes to mind. If Iowa comes and Bernie outperforms the polling, thus blowing us and punditry and the political world away, then we'd be forced to consider this as a legit possibility.
Click to expand...

He'd need a win in SC for a reconsideration to occur. Iowa is heavily white, he'd need a win somewhere with black people to change the game.

Saying Iowa can change the game for him is comparing him to Obama, which he is not. Bernie needs to prove he can win the African-American vote, nothing else will alter the calculus.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
Why do journalists that complain about silencing free speech block all of their political opponents on Twitter?

They're not blocking random trolls, they block other journalists that criticize them.
 
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