-
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 2016 |OT| Ask us about our performance with Latinos in Nevada
- Thread starter Makai
- Start date
- Status
Workplace self management? How do you expect that to happen? Where is the incentive? Who or what are you accountable to? What sort of leadership structure exists that won't seize the opportunity to take power away from the group as a whole?
You can't actually think an economy the size of the United States with 300+ million citizens would function appropriately with the masses owning the means of production. it would be completely chaos.
Veritigo_X
Member
Are they still figuring things out or did Rubio actually get 0 delegates?
Lol, what was the context.
Also, I enjoyed this new attack ad.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onUaRyvfv1A
Black Republican
Member
wonder where Christies voters will go
A Human Becoming
More than a Member
Did this come out before yesterday? I would have used the Donald doll instead for Primary thread.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Hillary really needs to address her demographic issues. Right now, she is a trainwreck.
I am starting to doubt her electability in a general election, and am really worried about a 3-way split where the House of Reps gets to choose.
I am starting to doubt her electability in a general election, and am really worried about a 3-way split where the House of Reps gets to choose.
They are sitting in that cafe live like they are now and he was asked who can beat Trump, Cruz? Then he went off about Cruz.
The reactions from the hosts were equally funny
"ok, ok, you obviously are tired from staying up all night"
"what I can't have an opinion?"
"Not that one"
One thing I've come to realize is that many people simply don't want to work. Every job is awful to them with terrible bosses and awful work conditions. Many people want maximum pay with minimal effort. At least the need to make money and accountability you have to bosses (or shareholders/customers if you run a company or business) incentivize people to do the minimum.
I'm not saying there aren't bad jobs out there, but there are also a ton of people who barely are willing to do the bare minimum no matter the job. I don't see how a basic income or moving towards socialism is suddenly going to incentivize these people to work harder.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
GregLombardi
Member
So bloomberg under a bernie nomination doesn't worry you at all? And his potential to carry New York and take it from the dems?
QuiteWhittle
Member
What three-way split? Bloomberg isn't running if Clinton gets nominated.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I think Bloomberg is what causes the 3-way split, and I think he probably runs if Hillary is nominated.
GregLombardi
Member
The nomination of 2 extremists leads to an independent being viable, not the nomination of an extremist and a moderate (Clinton), no?
Frank the Great
Banned
Bloomberg will really fuck things up for the Dems if he runs. It would be such a disaster.
I'd probably rather him be President than Bernie though lol.
I'd probably rather him be President than Bernie though lol.
I think it was posted last night to kick off the South Carolina race.
lol
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Why wouldn't he? All the polling we've had so far indicates Bloomberg does better against Trump-Clinton than he does against Trump-Sanders.
He said he'd only runbif it was Bernie.
I love how there's not even a JEB!mentum argument. It's the bar for how terrible you are doing now. Did you beat JEB! ?
hipsterpants
Member
So Bernie did exactly as everyone expected, yet everyone is still freaking out? Maybe I should just stay out of political threads for a while lol
Can you really extrapolate voter demographics in a state like NH to the rest of the country?
Can you really extrapolate voter demographics in a state like NH to the rest of the country?
Blowing one's cool in the clutch is what PoliGAF is all about!
It's nice to get down to the fundamental argument against all social programs, the fear of idle strangers.
To be frank, I don't think the people you're describing exist in any great quantity. I think, to the degree that they seem to, they are people who've been trapped by job lock, the lash of hunger, the lack of opportunities, etc., into situations where they're set up to fail and consequently have lost incentive to succeed because there is no pathway for them to do so. I think the idea that they exist is a phantom created by capitalism to justify its immoral choices.
But even if they did exist, I think that if people really don't want to work, it's still immoral to coerce them into doing so. Moreover, I dispute that it is productive for society. These people have no incentive to produce labor, so putting them in jobs just makes the economy less efficient. Doing the minimum is, in many cases, worse than just not showing up. I'd rather remove them and have more effective companies full of people who actually want to work at those companies. They will be more profitable and better to work at.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Let's cut out this "did as expected" shit. Beating the polls by over 5 points is not doing as expected. I mean I agree it's not necessarily hugely consequential - we'll have to see how Nevada goes - but this was not an expected result, unless you want me to go back ~10 pages and quote all of HillGaf saying they expected a Sanders 12-point win.
this is tradition for us here. People used to think I was a Diablos alt.
Macho Madness
Member
And what about the polls that showed the same gap that he got?
Don't confuse desperate hopes with expectations!
And_Gignac
Member
He beat his polling averages by 8 points. People were expecting Clinton to have a single digits defeat, instead it was a PUNCHING defeat of 22 points.
A Human Becoming
More than a Member
The final poll they had was 8 points. The average was 13.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
There was a single poll which showed him doing better than what he actually did, which was CNN/WMUR. If you remember, that's the same pollster that predicted him to win by 8 points in Iowa. I think it's reasonable to say that if you're looking for Sanders to beat his CNN/WMUR polling you're setting deliberately stupid standards to make Clinton look better.
And_Gignac
Member
Yeah, I meant his lead which went from 13 to 21 lol.
Coriolanus
Banned
Would you? That'd be lovely.
QuiteWhittle
Member
Uhh, because he said so? At least according to the NYT, Bloomberg has told his allies he's only likely to run in a Sanders v. Cruz/Trump situation.
Which makes sense considering how close Clinton and Bloomberg sit on an ideological matrix. His run would be redundant.
And the only two polls I've found comparing Bloomberg runs in Trump v. Clinton and Sanders v. Trump match-ups show little difference in the outcome.
http://morningconsult.com/2016/01/poll-bloomberg-vs-sanders-vs-trump/
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-bloomberg-idUSMTZSAPEC1SOOMWHP
RastaMentality
Banned
Trump won NH with a 3 point greater margin than Romney (with a smaller race) but yet this will go on probably much longer. Rubio's aides are already saying SC will be a bloodbath but I can't see Trump not winning by another 15+ margin again.
Macho Madness
Member
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-hire-former-obama-deputy-campaign-manager
That sounds like good news?
So I guess incentive is a myth?
Also, I'm not personally against all social programs, but I also think Sanders plan or a full minimum basic income is completely unsustainable. There isn't enough money to tax (if there is taxing that much would wreck the economy) to fund these programs. Under Bernie's plan, you are already capping the rich at what according to some economists is the highest point you can tax while maximizing revenue. His plan doesn't even include a basic income. The math just doesn't work out.
In addition, economic growth is more than just people spending their earnings (which is important). The creation of small business is vital to economic growth. This is counter to the type of government and tax environment that is required to fund these types of programs.
Abinash117
Member
Bernie won as expected, but not as much as some people thought. The average in RCP was 13, but still many polls still had Hillary losing in the double digits and at the same time the polls were partially all over the place.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
I'm really starting to worry about the left and its desire for purity and ideology above real victories.
Again I say it reminds me more and more of the tea party. A belief in complete transformation with no regard for institutional and other constraints (I'm not only talking about congress, I've not seen anyone discussing the constitutionality of many of sanders proposals and not only in the abstract but how this court would rule)
Even some liberals overturned the Medicare expansion. The dems never used to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Even if Bernie loses, many of his supporters I fear won't give up "integrity and ideology" above compromise
Neither the tea party or Bernie fans can enact their goals in our current constitutional framework. They don't even aknowlge it which is tremendously troubling
A Human Becoming
More than a Member
Ah sorry, I think I'm still frazzled from working the four day build up to the primary.
At least my efforts contributed to Bernie winning in my county by over 25%.
Macho Madness
Member
That's got to feel great.
Abinash117
Member
The Democratic party has gotten more liberal, but I don't think that type of liberal is anytime of represented in Congress, where it matters. Only in a very few instances there were disagreements. Those people are normally people that don't vote or not even voting for the Democratic party.
Roland_Gunner
Member
I'm sure O'Malley Dillon is a talented campaign leader and can benefit the team but her presence won't stop the core problem that Axelrod pointed out. That the constellation of long time Clinton friends and allies prevents the campaign team from developing a message and sticking to it. That's a change that has to come from the Clinton's themselves.
Rafa=FedKilla
Banned
It's between him and Cruz there. Trump's attack ad is great, its pretty close to what I tweeted him. I think Trump's immigration stance will play insanely strong with SC voters.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I was going off HuffPo for Sanders beating it by 5 points. RCP makes it even clearer how much Sanders outperformed his polling.
For reference, the most recent Nevada poll we had was from the amateur organization Overtime Politics, which was 47-44 Clinton on Jan 22nd. While amateur, they got 55-41 Sanders-Clinton in New Hampshire and 48-47 Sanders-Clinton in Iowa, which made them actually one of the most accurate pollsters for both.
If you want to disclude that, the last poll we had from Nevada was Gravis from the 27th of December, where it was 50-27 Clinton-Sanders, for a 23 point lead. Two points about that: firstly, that's from December. Sanders is polling about 6 points higher nationally now than he was then, and conversely Clinton 6 points lower. If we assume Nevada follows national trends (and this is very likely because Nevada is quite close to the average Democratic primary demographically), that would make it 44-33 Clinton-Sanders. Secondly, Gravis has hugely overstated Clinton in all their polls. In New Hampshire, they overestimated Clinton by 4 and underestimated Sanders by 2. In Iowa, they overestimated Clinton by 3 and underestimated Sanders by 7. In New Hampshire, they overestimated Clinton by 4 and underestimated Sanders by 14. Even if we assume they make a same-sized mistake as Iowa, that would make it 41-40 Clinton-Sanders. Accounting for Don't Knows reducing now we're in February, those are very similar numbers to Overtime Politics.
If you want to exclude Gravis because they're shit, the last poll we had from Nevada was CNN/ORC from the 10th of October (yes, Nevada is really badly polled). They had it 50-34 Clinton-Sanders. Since then, Clinton has gained 5 and Sanders 8 nationally (Biden was still in the race at that point). That would make it 55-42. In New Hampshire, CNN/ORC overstated Clinton by 5 and understated Sanders by 9. That would make it 50-49 Sanders-Clinton. Again, this is in a very similar ballpark to both of the prior two when you account for differences in Don't Know.
My guesstimation is that Nevada is actually very close right now. That's not just me thinking that. Jon Ralston, the leading Nevadan political analyst thinks so. Sanders has been quietly picking up some key Nevadan and Arizonan Hispanic community leaders. Rumour has it that both campaigns' internal polling is picking up a steady swing in the Hispanic vote - not enough for Sanders to lead the Hispanic vote, but a small enough gap to make the state very competitive.
The big downside is that Sanders has essentially no ground game there, so there are big questions as to whether he can capitalize on this momentum in a caucus state.
If Sanders wins Nevada, all bets are off. He is my favourite for the nomination at that point, no doubt about it. If the margin is in within 5 points, we're looking at a long race that will be genuinely competitive as far as the Convention, especially with Sanders fundraising like it is. If the margin is 5-10 points, Clinton is the overwhelming favourite but the race will probably still continue. If the margin is greater than 10 points, everyone gets off the Bernie bus and starts cheering for the Hilldawg.
That's my call. Nevada is critically important for this race. Let's see how it goes!
For reference, the most recent Nevada poll we had was from the amateur organization Overtime Politics, which was 47-44 Clinton on Jan 22nd. While amateur, they got 55-41 Sanders-Clinton in New Hampshire and 48-47 Sanders-Clinton in Iowa, which made them actually one of the most accurate pollsters for both.
If you want to disclude that, the last poll we had from Nevada was Gravis from the 27th of December, where it was 50-27 Clinton-Sanders, for a 23 point lead. Two points about that: firstly, that's from December. Sanders is polling about 6 points higher nationally now than he was then, and conversely Clinton 6 points lower. If we assume Nevada follows national trends (and this is very likely because Nevada is quite close to the average Democratic primary demographically), that would make it 44-33 Clinton-Sanders. Secondly, Gravis has hugely overstated Clinton in all their polls. In New Hampshire, they overestimated Clinton by 4 and underestimated Sanders by 2. In Iowa, they overestimated Clinton by 3 and underestimated Sanders by 7. In New Hampshire, they overestimated Clinton by 4 and underestimated Sanders by 14. Even if we assume they make a same-sized mistake as Iowa, that would make it 41-40 Clinton-Sanders. Accounting for Don't Knows reducing now we're in February, those are very similar numbers to Overtime Politics.
If you want to exclude Gravis because they're shit, the last poll we had from Nevada was CNN/ORC from the 10th of October (yes, Nevada is really badly polled). They had it 50-34 Clinton-Sanders. Since then, Clinton has gained 5 and Sanders 8 nationally (Biden was still in the race at that point). That would make it 55-42. In New Hampshire, CNN/ORC overstated Clinton by 5 and understated Sanders by 9. That would make it 50-49 Sanders-Clinton. Again, this is in a very similar ballpark to both of the prior two when you account for differences in Don't Know.
My guesstimation is that Nevada is actually very close right now. That's not just me thinking that. Jon Ralston, the leading Nevadan political analyst thinks so. Sanders has been quietly picking up some key Nevadan and Arizonan Hispanic community leaders. Rumour has it that both campaigns' internal polling is picking up a steady swing in the Hispanic vote - not enough for Sanders to lead the Hispanic vote, but a small enough gap to make the state very competitive.
The big downside is that Sanders has essentially no ground game there, so there are big questions as to whether he can capitalize on this momentum in a caucus state.
If Sanders wins Nevada, all bets are off. He is my favourite for the nomination at that point, no doubt about it. If the margin is in within 5 points, we're looking at a long race that will be genuinely competitive as far as the Convention, especially with Sanders fundraising like it is. If the margin is 5-10 points, Clinton is the overwhelming favourite but the race will probably still continue. If the margin is greater than 10 points, everyone gets off the Bernie bus and starts cheering for the Hilldawg.
That's my call. Nevada is critically important for this race. Let's see how it goes!
Clinton's are too prideful for that sadly. Servere character flaw. Look how Hillary went kicking and screaming over her server for months when Podesta told her back in March to hand the server over immediately to get it behind her.
If she was smart she should have done that right when she left office so if there was fall out it would have been in 2013-2014.
maabus1999
Member
Yeah, no. He basically has said he is only thinking of running because Hillary may NOT get nominated, and of course the GOP is messed up beyond recognition.
I don't think he will because once Super Tuesday hits, we'll know if Sanders even has a path to be nominated or not. And right now, the odds are heavily against him.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked