• 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.
So I initially interpreted this as Rubio and Cruz beginning to pull away. But then I noticed something peculiar about the poll:



It's over, folks. They exclude most of the candidates and Trump still wins.

The question will be what happens between Rubio and Cruz. Assuming Trump and Carson are in it to win it, what happens in a Cruz v. Rubio competition to be The Third Man? If one of them dropped, would the other get their supporters?
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
The question will be what happens between Rubio and Cruz. Assuming Trump and Carson are in it to win it, what happens in a Cruz v. Rubio competition to be The Third Man? If one of them dropped, would the other get their supporters?

Most of Cruz's support would likely go Trumps way, they cover a lot of the same ground.
 

NeoXChaos

Member
If Trump Cruz or Carson became the nominee who would be actual defectors and endorse Hillary? I can see Prebius and Co. holding their noses on all 3 and supporting them.
 
Supreme Court to consider Virginia redistricting case

The Supreme Court announced Friday that it will decide whether a lower court was right to invalidate Virginia’s congressional-district map earlier this year, freezing the process of drawing new congressional lines in the state.
...

But Republicans argued in their Supreme Court appeal that the lower court didn’t “make the required finding that race rather than politics” drove the Legislature’s map-drawing decisions. The appeal also argued that the district court shouldn’t have “relieved Plaintiffs of their burden to show an alternative plan that achieves the General Assembly’s political goals” while bringing “greater racial balance.”


The Supreme Court is also asking the plaintiffs to address whether they have the standing to bring the case since they don't live in Scott's district, which is at the heart of the case.

Welp, game over.
 
Ted Cruz: "If you are supporting amnesty you are supporting the Ayatollah Khamenei having nuclear weapons in Iran."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHQOSfnV4hM

This is likely the most out there statement Cruz made today, but he made a lot of other statements about how we need to stop all forms of immigration to stop the Democrats from getting more elected officials. He's past Trump on the right of immigration.

Okay, he's maybe not there yet, you're right.
 
If Trump Cruz or Carson became the nominee who would be actual defectors and endorse Hillary? I can see Prebius and Co. holding their noses on all 3 and supporting them.

No one who wants a future in the party.

I could see McCain pulling a Lieberman if the ticket is Trump/Cruz and he gets primaried by a Cruz-backed Tea Partier.
 

Maledict

Member
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHQOSfnV4hM

This is likely the most out there statement Cruz made today, but he made a lot of other statements about how we need to stop all forms of immigration to stop the Democrats from getting more elected officials. He's past Trump on the right of immigration.

Okay, he's maybe not there yet, you're right.

I think I'm going mad, but for me this is a link to a song by System of a Down... ?
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
“Dr. Carson does not believe China is currently fighting in or deploying troops to Syria, and contrary to press reports, he has never made that assertion.” The Carson campaign declined to provide the statement to POLITICO.

Ben Carson at the debate said:
"We also must recognize that it's a very complex place. You know, the Chinese are there, as well as the Russians, and you have all kinds of factions there,"

Come on, Ben. I also LOL'ed at "contrary to press reports." That liberal press!
 
I'm honestly surprised it said "Violent Criminal" instead of "Violent Thug" as many dog whistles as Trump throws out.

Even Trump isn't going to go there with Dr. Carson. He's a negro, but he's the GOP's negro. And he's magical besides. Going with the racial code words would just wake up Colin Powell and Michael Steele and other black Republican moderates, and that's bad for the GOP's appeal to their minority members and well as to their moderates in general. Trump knows that even he can't mess with that.
 
Gooddam Eli Lake, Josh Rogan, Noah Pollack and the rest of the neo-con media and their chickenhawking tweets.

The want to turn every event in the world to the next iraq. Meanwhile their sitting in DC safe and sound making 6 figures.
 

Averon

Member
I wonder if the Paris attacks are going to change the conversation in the race. I can see the GOP making terrorism a number one campaign issue again.
 

Honestly, when they ruled on Citizens United, it hurt both parties but is killing off the sensible Republicans. When they gerrymandered, it hurt the establishment. Regardless on how they rule, if I ever shake hands with the conservative wing of the SCOTUS, I will personally thank them for helping kill off the Republican Party. (If it happens). Trolling done at the next level.
 
Ooh, superdelegates, you have Bernie supporters shaking in our boots.

For those that are fuzzy on superdelegates, or as they are formally known, unpledged delegates, they represent one fifth of the vote, at the Democratic National Convention, which officially chooses the party's candidate for President, and the only "super" thing about them, from the party's point of view, is that they are chosen by the party and can vote for whomever they like, regardless of how well the candidate has done in the primaries. In practice, they only really come into play when there isn't a clear winner. In 2008, Hillary also had an sizable early advantage in superdelegates, but as the primary wins came in for Obama, he picked up almost all the undecided "supers" (currently 50%) and some defectors too.

The Hillary camp and the establishment media, have actually scored an own goal, by highlighting that half the superdelegates have already pledged their allegiance to the Democratic Party's preferred candidate, the candidate that, to this day, defends the death penalty, even with the inevitable human tragedy of sending a single innocent person to the death chamber, the candidate that voted for the 2002 Iraq war, when Sanders and Obama had the good sense to vote against it, the candidate who still wants to wreck the lives of people for merely smoking marijuana, the candidate who previously referred to the TPP as the "gold standard" and after months of dragging her feet, finally claims she's against it, the candidate that thought she could curtail the excesses of Wall Street, by merely asking them to "Cut it out", the Goldman Sachs poster child.

This just provides more fuel for the unparalleled Bernie Sanders grassroots movement, and for that, we can thank the establishment ;). And if you want an anecdotal indication of the large disparity in grassroots support, between the campaigns, try finding a Hillary debate watch party; they're practically non existent and although attendance numbers for Bernie's parties are likely to be down significantly, you can probably find one near you (I'm going to my local).

Bonus Topic! For those who tried to "poo poo" me questioning the accuracy of polls today, you should check out the What's the Matter With Polling NYT article, which raises the exact point I highlighted, on conducting polls with people who still have and use a land line.
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
Honestly, when they ruled on Citizens United, it hurt both parties but is killing off the sensible Republicans. When they gerrymandered, it hurt the establishment. Regardless on how they rule, if I ever shake hands with the conservative wing of the SCOTUS, I will personally thank them for helping kill off the Republican Party. (If it happens). Trolling done at the next level.
Trolling is typically intentional. It's more like meta own goal-ing


Edit: Citizens United is still an awful decision, but candidates like Jeb! have clearly demonstrated that unlimited cash isn't all that great if you don't control it.
 
Honestly, when they ruled on Citizens United, it hurt both parties but is killing off the sensible Republicans. When they gerrymandered, it hurt the establishment. Regardless on how they rule, if I ever shake hands with the conservative wing of the SCOTUS, I will personally thank them for helping kill off the Republican Party. (If it happens). Trolling done at the next level.

Yup, the establishment is hurting as much as the Dems are. And I hope NC is the next one to get picked up by the SCOTUS, at least before 2020. Kennedy has been pretty consistent in cases around gerrymandering.
 
Sober reminder from Paris about the gravity and importance of the ability to handle international crises.
I would assume this sort of incident that makes global security a more tangible issue will harm neophytes like Carson. But then that race has been confounding, maybe for whatever reason his supporters think him capable with regard to foreign affairs, despite all evidence to the contrary. I don't actually know who among the Republican field could plausibly handle an international crisis. Kasich? Draft Rmoney.

In a similar fashion, Clinton as a former Secretary of State and a longer history at a national level, has more credibility in this realm than a former Governor of a medium sized state, or a Senator of a tiny state, with limited exposure to foreign affairs.
 
I would assume this sort of incident that makes global security a more tangible issue will harm neophytes like Carson. But then that race has been confounding, maybe for whatever reason his supporters think him capable with regard to foreign affairs, despite all evidence to the contrary. I don't actually know who among the Republican field could plausibly handle an international crisis. Kasich? Draft Rmoney.

In a similar fashion, Clinton as a former Secretary of State and a longer history at a national level, has more credibility in this realm than a former Governor of a medium sized state, or a Senator of a tiny state, with limited exposure to foreign affairs.

i can't imagine ANY of them could possibly be worse than GWB....ok, besides Carson.
 
Daniel B·;185389067 said:
Ooh, superdelegates, you have Bernie supporters shaking in our boots.

For those that are fuzzy on superdelegates, or as they are formally known, unpledged delegates, they represent one fifth of the vote, at the Democratic National Convention, which officially chooses the party's candidate for President, and the only "super" thing about them, from the party's point of view, is that they are chosen by the party and can vote for whomever they like, regardless of how well the candidate has done in the primaries. In practice, they only really come into play when there isn't a clear winner. In 2008, Hillary also had an sizable early advantage in superdelegates, but as the primary wins came in for Obama, he picked up almost all the undecided "supers" (currently 50%) and some defectors too.

The Hillary camp and the establishment media, have actually scored an own goal, by highlighting that half the superdelegates have already pledged their allegiance to the Democratic Party's preferred candidate, the candidate that, to this day, defends the death penalty, even with the inevitable human tragedy of sending a single innocent person to the death chamber, the candidate that voted for the 2002 Iraq war, when Sanders and Obama had the good sense to vote against it, the candidate who still wants to wreck the lives of people for merely smoking marijuana, the candidate who previously referred to the TPP as the "gold standard" and after months of dragging her feet, finally claims she's against it, the candidate that thought she could curtail the excesses of Wall Street, by merely asking them to "Cut it out", the Goldman Sachs poster child.

This just provides more fuel for the unparalleled Bernie Sanders grassroots movement, and for that, we can thank the establishment ;). And if you want an anecdotal indication of the large disparity in grassroots support, between the campaigns, try finding a Hillary debate watch party; they're practically non existent and although attendance numbers for Bernie's parties are likely to be down significantly, you can probably find one near you (I'm going to my local).

Bonus Topic! For those who tried to "poo poo" me questioning the accuracy of polls today, you should check out the What's the Matter With Polling NYT article, which raises the exact point I highlighted, on conducting polls with people who still have and use a land line.

I don't really know if you're trolling or are serious. I'm going to assume you're legit serious.

Super Delegates are important not for their voting at the convention. I mean, that's important, but it's not the most important function.

The most important function of a superdelegate endorsing you is that they have experience running in the state that you hope to get delegates from. For example, Howard Dean is a superdelegate. From Vermont. He endorsed Hillary. He's becoming part of her team in Vermont to win the primary there. (She won't win it, but just saying...) These people are important because they understand how to win elections outside the areas that you're comfortable with. They know the local people. They know the local issues. They have infrastructure and support teams that can be turned to help in the primary and general.

In 2008, there were only about 50 superdelegates that switched their support from Hillary to Obama. She released all of her delegates once he had secured enough delegates to win. I can't remember the exact number, but it was in the ballpark of 50 that switched from her to him during the primary season.

There have also been several polls out recently that show Hillary's supporters are far more firm in their support of her than Bernie's. (That's what happens when your main qualification for support is "I'm not her.")

But again, your entire premise is why some of us have issues with Bernie's candidacy. Every, single thing in the known universe is not good news for Bernie Sanders. If you want to leave on these rose colored glasses, you're in for a really, really shitty primary season.
 
I spent 30 seconds in the comments section on NBC News coverage of the Paris attacks. The right wing folks are already tying it to immigration. And letting everyone know that Ayatollah Obama has planned for this to happen soon to the US. Because reasons.
 
I spent 30 seconds in the comments section on NBC News coverage of the Paris attacks. The right wing folks are already tying it to immigration. And letting everyone know that Ayatollah Obama has planned for this to happen soon to the US. Because reasons.

Yep, regardless of whether or not this is tied to Syrian refugees, people on the American (and not just American) right are going to use this to fuel their closed borders/anti-immigration agenda.
 
Yep, regardless of whether or not this is tied to Syrian refugees, people on the American right are going to use this to fuel their closed borders/anti-immigration agenda.

Reactionist bullshit is more accurate. An attack on this scale isn't something that happens over night--this took months of planning. Being able to get people with conviction inside France and keep them there for months while getting weapons moved in and explosives is quite the process. This likely was already in the works before the Syrian Refugee crisis became big news, and until we even know the identification of the assailants can't make any claims about... really anything.

We assume it's ISIS-related (it probably is) and it's a well organized attack that took careful planning, and is a massive tragedy.


Yup. Look halfway up the page. It's expected she will carry more Super Delegates because they are more tied to the party than the desires of a states constituents. She is clearly the parties choice candidate.
 
Yes, but it's really a good thing because....um, Bernie's grassroots campaign will...ya, I'm not sure, but it was a good thing for Bernie and bad for Hillary.

I would say it has little effect on his campaign. He has always been the underdog candidate, and it's easily deflected with a simple "I may not be the candidate the party wants, but I may be the candidate the American people want." A majority of people don't know or care about super delegates to be honest.
 
The problem with that argument (the one the people want, not in tune with constituents) though... is that she's also leading within the Democratic electorate. These endorsements then can also be taken as simply reflecting their electorate's views.

Endorsements provide some signalling effect, presumably, for instance Sen. Coons of Delaware a former Biden backer endorsing her probably signals. But they probably help more in terms of local organisation than anything else I imagine.
 
I would say it has little effect on his campaign. He has always been the underdog candidate, and it's easily deflected with a simple "I may not be the candidate the party wants, but I may be the candidate the American people want." A majority of people don't know or care about super delegates to be honest.

Right. Like I said, though, they're more important than people give them credit for. These are (often) people that have won state wide races. They know who can get things done in their state. They know how to target and mobilize. They have contacts and resources that a person outside their district/state just cannot build in the small time a primary runs.

It's also an optics thing. Not a single senator has endorsed him. Not one. That's an optics problem. The people that know him best don't think he can/should win. How do you spin that when people like Sherrod Brown have endorsed someone else. You can't call him a neo-liberal with a straight face.
 
I don't really know if you're trolling or are serious. I'm going to assume you're legit serious.

Super Delegates are important not for their voting at the convention. I mean, that's important, but it's not the most important function.

The most important function of a superdelegate endorsing you is that they have experience running in the state that you hope to get delegates from. For example, Howard Dean is a superdelegate. From Vermont. He endorsed Hillary. He's becoming part of her team in Vermont to win the primary there. (She won't win it, but just saying...) These people are important because they understand how to win elections outside the areas that you're comfortable with. They know the local people. They know the local issues. They have infrastructure and support teams that can be turned to help in the primary and general.

In 2008, there were only about 50 superdelegates that switched their support from Hillary to Obama. She released all of her delegates once he had secured enough delegates to win. I can't remember the exact number, but it was in the ballpark of 50 that switched from her to him during the primary season.

There have also been several polls out recently that show Hillary's supporters are far more firm in their support of her than Bernie's. (That's what happens when your main qualification for support is "I'm not her.")

But again, your entire premise is why some of us have issues with Bernie's candidacy. Every, single thing in the known universe is not good news for Bernie Sanders. If you want to leave on these rose colored glasses, you're in for a really, really shitty primary season.

I'm sorry, but your logic possibly doesn't hold water. In December of 2007, Hillary had over double the number of superdelegates (169 vs. 63), and she still lost. Could it be that a formidable grassrooots campaign is far more important, as both Obama and Bernie managed to assemble?
 
Daniel B·;185399294 said:
I'm sorry, but your logic possibly doesn't hold water. In December of 2007, Hillary had over double the number of superdelegates (169 vs. 63), and she still lost. Could it be that a formidable grassrooots campaign is far more important, as both Obama and Bernie managed to assemble?

This act is getting pretty tiresome.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom