PoliGAF 2016 |OT| Ask us about our performance with Latinos in Nevada

Status
Not open for further replies.
theprodigy said:
South Carolina is winner take all, so Rubio getting 3rd or 4th doesn't matter unless he gets 1st in one district too.
Click to expand...

That's... a really good point I forgot entirely, thank you.

In that case I don't expect any non-Trump/Cruz candidate to take a single delegate.
 
Sanders isn't an atheist. He's a non-denominational Jew.
 
Crab said:
I think the real question is how Rubio/Bush plays out. If Rubio takes 3rd and Bush takes the 4th with less than 10%, then he gets no delegates
Click to expand...
No, South Carolina is WTA by district and statewide.

The 10% threshold only applied to New Hampshire. (And will to Kansas and Maine.)
 
ivysaur12 said:
The reason why Obama is a socialist!!! didn't catch on beyond the far reaches of the right wing sphere is because he wasn't a socialist. The same is true of Hillary. That is not the case with Sanders, who is a socialist.
Click to expand...
But if he admits it then it doesn't become an issue!!
 
UltimaPooh said:
Why do we keep coming back to this point.

Unless there are new polls I'm missing... Bernie beats Hilary against all the Republican noms in the GE.
Click to expand...

Someone with a higher favorability rating is going to do better in match ups with someone that doesn't have it has much. Ben Carson is slightly better or is as competitive when it comes to match ups with Clinton. It can also be the case that sometimes someone that isn't that well known, is going to have better favorability ratings .

According to Gallup( at the beginning at December ) Bernie does not have a higher familiar rating than Clinton. http://www.gallup.com/poll/187607/donald-trump-known-not-liked.aspx
 
Abinash117 said:
Someone with a higher favorability rating is going to do better in match ups with someone that doesn't have it has much. Ben Carson is slightly better or is as competitive when it comes to match ups with Clinton. It can also be the case that sometimes someone that isn't that well known, is going to have better favorability ratings .

According to Gallup( at the beginning at December ) Bernie does not have a higher familiar rating than Clinton. http://www.gallup.com/poll/187607/donald-trump-known-not-liked.aspx
Click to expand...

Yes, also the current exposure to Sanders people have is, oh look he is doing so well. Raising lots of money, lots of fans, etc. That exposure you get from being in GE is much different.
 
benjipwns said:
No, South Carolina is WTA by district and statewide.

The 10% threshold only applied to New Hampshire. (And will to Kansas and Maine.)
Click to expand...

Yeah, prodigy pointed that out. I just looked it up now - there's 27 for winning the state and 3 for every district win. Considering that, I'd be totally unsurprised if Trump swept the state.
 
Crab said:
Yeah, prodigy pointed that out. I just looked it up now - there's 27 for winning the state and 3 for every district win. Considering that, I'd be totally unsurprised if Trump swept the state.
Click to expand...

29 for winning the state (26 at large+3 party leaders)

but yes
 
Abinash117 said:
Someone with a higher favorability rating is going to do better in match ups with someone that doesn't have it has much. Ben Carson is slightly better or is as competitive when it comes to match ups with Clinton. It can also be the case that sometimes someone that isn't that well known, is going to have better favorability ratings .

According to Gallup( at the beginning at December ) Bernie does not have a higher familiar rating than Clinton. http://www.gallup.com/poll/187607/donald-trump-known-not-liked.aspx
Click to expand...

Gosh, I wonder who is being selective with the polls now?

http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/188957/voting-begins-sanders-popular-clinton-dems.aspx
 
Anderson: "Mr. Sanders, 83% of the American population believes the Bible is the Word of God. What do you say to those Americans, and your opponent on the Republican ticket, that feel you don't hold the same beliefs in God?"

Sanders: "Anderson, I don't begrudge anyone what they want to believe. Believe it! Do what you will. In fact, I think the Bible has a great deal to teach us about modern issues. When those Pharaohs were hoarding all that treasure and wealth and beating on the downtrodden Jews, what did the Jews do Anderson? What did they do? Revolution Anderson . . . REVOLUTION! Maybe with a little help from God . . . maybe not . . . but it was a revolution Anderson . . . over income inequality. Now about those bankers in Egypt . . ."
 
RustyNails said:
How do you think he will respond when one of the questions inevitably ask him if he believes the bible to be the lord's word?
Click to expand...

Presumably the same way Kennedy did, given Catholics aren't scripturalist.
 
dramatis said:
I feel like the turnout numbers for the Republican side are more scary than any other numbers. Iowa also featured great turnout for Republicans. I wonder what this means for the general.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that New Hampshire is an open primary where independents can vote for either side. Many anticipated a strong preference for the GOP ticket as it would make more difference than voting one way or the other in a clear Sanders win.

This was likely the reason why so many of the GOP candidates wound up in the running behind Trump.

As for Iowa, it is a traditionally right leaning state with a very strong evangelical right that shows up in primaries. It isn't representative of the nation as a whole and other than being first has basically zero real relevance in selecting a candidate.

A Human Becoming said:
So Poli-GAF, if South Carolina results are as they are polling now* with Trump receiving 36%, Cruz 20%, and Marco Ruboto at 13%, how does the rest of the Republican nomination play out? Could Jeb? really push forward getting fourth place at 10%?

*The last poll taken was January 23rd, so these percentages may have changed significantly.
Click to expand...

If Rubio and Bush continue to squeak into the double digits they aren't going anywhere. Same for Kasich and Christie. The Republican party is heading towards a brokered convention and these guys will get to take their delegates with them in such an event. That is HUGE bargaining power.

For example, consider this possible strategy: One of Rubio or Kasich winds up a close 3rd to Trump and Cruz, all together holding about 2/3rds of the delegates with the other 1/3rd divided between the other candidates. The winner then could form a convention coalition with the other candidates by: making the lower delegate winner of Rubio/Kasich the VP, promising Christie the first Supreme Court seat that opens, offering Carson either Surgeon General or Sec. of HHS, etc.. Jeb Bush would toe the party line and gladly walk off into the sunset being remembered for a "selfless act" in blocking Trump and Cruz. Then they would composite enough delegates together to nullify either of Trump or Cruz and continue to run off ballots until everyone falls in line.

It might result in Trump running as a 3rd party candidate, but then they also might be able to drag Bloomberg in making it a four horse race with an independent siphoning away at each party. Great for the GOP as if no one hits 270 they get to pick from the top three finishers themselves in the House and Senate.
 
dramatis said:
I feel like the turnout numbers for the Republican side are more scary than any other numbers. Iowa also featured great turnout for Republicans. I wonder what this means for the general.
Click to expand...

I thought this same thing. Sanders revolution resulted in less turnout than 2008, but the repubs came out in force and improved upon 2012 turnout. At least that's what I remember reading.
 
teiresias said:
Anderson: "Mr. Sanders, 83% of the American population believes the Bible is the Word of God. What do you say to those Americans, and your opponent on the Republican ticket, that feel you don't hold the same beliefs in God?"

Sanders: "Anderson, I don't begrudge anyone what they want to believe. Believe it! Do what you will. In fact, I think the Bible has a great deal to teach us about modern issues. When those Pharaohs were hoarding all that treasure and wealth and beating on the downtrodden Jews, what did the Jews do Anderson? What did they do? Revolution Anderson . . . REVOLUTION. Maybe with a little help from God . . . maybe not . . . but it was a revolution Anderson . . . over income inequality. Now about those bankers in Egypt . . ."
Click to expand...
that sounds just like Bernie..is this real or you made it up?
 
dramatis said:
I feel like the turnout numbers for the Republican side are more scary than any other numbers. Iowa also featured great turnout for Republicans. I wonder what this means for the general.
Click to expand...

I'm becoming troubled that there's an "after Trump, us" undercurrent to the conversation. All this talk about lesser evils and taking the ball home, as it were, ignores the state, governor, and down ticket races, all of which are varying shades of gray. Have people looked at their mayors, councilmen, and state representatives, many of whom are compromised ideologically based on local issues? You cannot be represented by a hypothetical interest group which heretofore has never been elected and apparently has no organization or local presence.
 
Except wait, I must be misremembering history. Kennedy can't possibly have been elected because polls at the time consistently found Americans wouldn't vote for a Catholic. Apologies, y'all.
 
Ogrekiller said:
Cherry picking much? From the article:

Clinton does still maintain the upper hand in overall familiarity with Democrats. For the most recent two-week rolling average ending Jan. 31, 93% of Democratic adults know Clinton well enough to have an opinion about her, while 75% of Democrats know Sanders.
Click to expand...

And? 49% of Democrats find Clinton favourable; 93% know her. 53% of Democrats find Sanders favourable; 75% know him (this is very low compared to most other pollsters, btw; I find it somewhat suspicious but whatever - most of the other pollsters have it in the mid-to-high 80s by now). Like, Sanders is doing better despite having less to work with!
 
teiresias said:
Anderson: "Mr. Sanders, 83% of the American population believes the Bible is the Word of God. What do you say to those Americans, and your opponent on the Republican ticket, that feel you don't hold the same beliefs in God?"

Sanders: "Anderson, I don't begrudge anyone what they want to believe. Believe it! Do what you will. In fact, I think the Bible has a great deal to teach us about modern issues. When those Pharaohs were hoarding all that treasure and wealth and beating on the downtrodden Jews, what did the Jews do Anderson? What did they do? Revolution Anderson . . . REVOLUTION! Maybe with a little help from God . . . maybe not . . . but it was a revolution Anderson . . . over income inequality. Now about those bankers in Egypt . . ."
Click to expand...

This was Bern's voice in my head

Crab said:
Presumably the same way Kennedy did, given Catholics aren't scripturalist.
Click to expand...

What? What does this even mean? Pretty sure every Catholic I know (because I was unfortunately raised as one) gets pretty miffed if you don't believe the bible as THE TROOF.
 
Drek said:
Keep in mind that New Hampshire is an open primary where independents can vote for either side. Many anticipated a strong preference for the GOP ticket as it would make more difference than voting one way or the other in a clear Sanders win.

This was likely the reason why so many of the GOP candidates wound up in the running behind Trump.

As for Iowa, it is a traditionally right leaning state with a very strong evangelical right that shows up in primaries. It isn't representative of the nation as a whole and other than being first has basically zero real relevance in selecting a candidate.



If Rubio and Bush continue to squeak into the double digits they aren't going anywhere. Same for Kasich and Christie. The Republican party is heading towards a brokered convention and these guys will get to take their delegates with them in such an event. That is HUGE bargaining power.

For example, consider this possible strategy: One of Rubio or Kasich winds up a close 3rd to Trump and Cruz, all together holding about 2/3rds of the delegates with the other 1/3rd divided between the other candidates. The winner then could form a convention coalition with the other candidates by: making the lower delegate winner of Rubio/Kasich the VP, promising Christie the first Supreme Court seat that opens, offering Carson either Surgeon General or Sec. of HHS, etc.. Jeb Bush would toe the party line and gladly walk off into the sunset being remembered for a "selfless act" in blocking Trump and Cruz. Then they would composite enough delegates together to nullify either of Trump or Cruz and continue to run off ballots until everyone falls in line.

It might result in Trump running as a 3rd party candidate, but then they also might be able to drag Bloomberg in making it a four horse race with an independent siphoning away at each party. Great for the GOP as if no one hits 270 they get to pick from the top three finishers themselves in the House and Senate.
Click to expand...

The South Carolina primary actually has a clause whereby delegates can't vote for anyone except the person who won them, unless that person has dropped out, in which case they must vote for the person who take 2nd. I didn't know this until just now, but it's right there in the rules. Does anyone know how many of the other Rep primaries do this? It can't be many or brokered conventions wouldn't be possible/solveable.
 
daedalius said:
What? What does this even mean? Pretty sure every Catholic I know (because I was unfortunately raised as one) gets pretty miffed if you don't believe the bible as THE TROOF.
Click to expand...

Formal Catholic doctrine do not believe the bible is the literal, unchanged word of God. Divinely inspired yes - but Catholic doctrine is not the same as evangelical.

Now, Catholiscism is a broad church and most people in it don't follow all it's teachings one way or the other, but the formal stance of the church isn't to believe in a 6000 year old earth and the events of Genesis, for example.
 
Crab said:
Except wait, I must be misremembering history. Kennedy can't possibly have been elected because polls at the time consistently found Americans wouldn't vote for a Catholic. Apologies, y'all.
Click to expand...
He did kinda go out and gave a speech trying to assure people he wasn't a tool of the Pope.

He was actually a tool of the Jewish Bankers who actually controlled the Capitalist system and was assassinated by a patsy set up by those same bankers (who were Jewish) right when he was about to undermine Communism for good, thankfully LBJ was more amenable to harming the country (on orders of the bankers, who were Jewish) through the Great Society to let the Soviets catch up. On the orders of the bankers. The Jewish ones.
 
neurosisxeno said:
You realize a system that includes a basic income still incentivizes people to work hard correct? The basic income just replaces something like welfare and unemployment, and if you work it essentially acts as a minimum wage. The trade off is it allows people like stay at home mom's, inventors, and students--or in the case of Sweden professional gamers and other nontraditional careers--to have spending money while not having to work shit jobs for slave wages. It's overall a better system, and if Capitalism continues at the rate it's going we will need it as Globalization spreads out the total number of jobs and various professions are completely replaced or wiped out. People have a huge hard on for mentioning automation which threatens to completely eliminate entire industries. What do we do when we have 350,000,000 people and only enough jobs for 150,000,000 of them? Start having Hunger Games or some shit?
Click to expand...

If robots turn out to be as efficient as you claim, then productivity should shoot through the roof rather than being currently forecasted in the dumps. Also, we won't have to worry about the population aging because society will easily be able to handle the burden like it's done in the past when the dependency ratio was higher. You know because the robots are that good and will raise living standards with ease.
 
Maledict said:
Formal Catholic doctrine do not believe the bible is the literal, unchanged word of God. Divinely inspired yes - but Catholic doctrine is not the same as evangelical.

Now, Catholiscism is a broad church and most people in it don't follow all it's teachings one way or the other, but the formal stance of the church isn't to believe in a 6000 year old earth and the events of Genesis, for example.
Click to expand...

This is the literal opposite of every catholic I know.
 
Crab said:
The South Carolina primary actually has a clause whereby delegates can't vote for anyone except the person who won them, unless that person has dropped out, in which case they must vote for the person who take 2nd. I didn't know this until just now, but it's right there in the rules. Does anyone know how many of the other Rep primaries do this? It can't be many or brokered conventions wouldn't be possible/solveable.
Click to expand...

No idea but you're right that it can't be too many. People bitch about super delegates on the democratic side but they exist to prevent a brokered convention, the GOP hasn't installed something similar because they have historically toed the line pretty consistently even in primaries. Their nomination process is not designed for this kind of chaos.
 
Crab said:
Gosh, I wonder who is being selective with the polls now?

http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/188957/voting-begins-sanders-popular-clinton-dems.aspx
Click to expand...

Bahaha, did even read what your own link? I was talking about familiarity .

Clinton does still maintain the upper hand in overall familiarity with Democrats. For the most recent two-week rolling average ending Jan. 31, 93% of Democratic adults know Clinton well enough to have an opinion about her, while 75% of Democrats know Sanders. But Sanders' name recognition has improved by 26 percentage points over the course of the campaign, and the vast majority of those who have learned about Sanders view him favorably.
Click to expand...

You still prove my point and helped my argument as it is currently that
Someone with a higher favorability rating is going to do better in match ups with someone that doesn't have it has much. Ben Carson is slightly better or is as competitive when it comes to match ups with Clinton. It can also be the case that sometimes someone that isn't that well known, is going to have better favorability ratings.
Click to expand...
Are you stealthy saying I'm right on purpose?
 
daedalius said:
This is the literal opposite of every catholic I know.
Click to expand...

You can't know many Catholics, then. The official church stance is that the Bible is divinely inspired but written by people who were fallible and also subject to misinterpretations if the layman attempts to follow it directly in any case. Hence,

Vatican II said:
In determining the intention of the sacred writers, attention must be paid, inter alia, to literary forms for the fact is that truth is differently presented and expressed in the various types of historical writing, in prophetical and poetical texts, and in other forms of literary expression.
Click to expand...

The solution is for the layman to follow the teachings of the clergy who have dedicated their lives to understanding and interpreting the Bible fully. Hence why the Pope embraces evolution and the like.
 
A Human Becoming said:
So Poli-GAF, if South Carolina results are as they are polling now* with Trump receiving 36%, Cruz 20%, and Marco Ruboto at 13%, how does the rest of the Republican nomination play out? Could Jeb? really push forward getting fourth place at 10%?

*The last poll taken was January 23rd, so these percentages may have changed significantly.
Click to expand...

If Trump dominates South Carolina, he's on track to winning the nomination.

The GOP plan for beating Trump is basically to assume that the polls are not correct and that people will change their minds because Trump is Trump.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Sports betting |OT|
7
10K
Hideous Snake replied
ItalianGAF |OT| - Italia
3
957
Azzurri replied
Food |OT| GAFeteria
2
77
17K
SLoWMoTIoN replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2016 |OT16| Unpresidented
395 396 397 398 399
20K
1M
PKrockin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
Top Bottom