Support NeoGAF

[OrangeGrayBlue]

For what it's worth, as we go into NV, SC and Super Tuesday, the polling aggregates underestimated Bernie in Iowa by 3.8 points and in New Hampshire by 9.1 points. Just something to consider when predicting the results of upcoming races or analyzing polls going forward.

For instance, the PPP polls that came in for Super Tuesday states today likely overestimate Clinton's position. In fact, I'd say Bernie is poised to win Oklahoma given that PPP only gave Clinton a +2 for the state. PPP overestimated Clinton in New Hampshire by 25.4 points and in Iowa by 7.8 points.

If I recall, PPP was usually pretty favorable to Clinton in the '08 primaries too. I'd be interested in knowing how their methodology differs from most.

 

[Holmes]

For instance, the PPP polls that came in for Super Tuesday states today likely overestimate Clinton's position. In fact, I'd say Bernie is poised to win Oklahoma given that PPP only gave Clinton a +2 for the state. PPP overestimated Clinton in New Hampshire by 25.4 points and in Iowa by 7.8 points.

Their last New Hampshire poll was from over a month before the primary so it hardly counts though.

 

[brainchild]

Not sure I'd call Warren a good politician either but she certainly doesn't have the authenticity issues that plague Clinton. She's generally viewed as honest and has some accomplishments she can point to, which arguably is not the case with Clinton.

While I don't believe Warren is a viable national candidate the thing I love about her is that she effortlessly explains complex issues in the simplest language. It's a teacher trait that a lot of people, including Obama, do not possess.

She has generally high favorability ratings and is surprisingly well known. Her public image is cemented so much that I don't believe that she would modulate much because a lot of people supporting her would be doing so based on her general public perception, not just her policies. This is very similar to Trump where because of his public image, he didn't need to start acting presidential because his public image was/is part of his appeal.

I feel that people are really taking Trump's and Bernie's success for granted so far. Sure, the pressures of adjusting your persona aren't as great as they are when you're a woman, but there ARE standards. Just looking at them before all of this and how they presented themselves, conventional wisdom would have someone groom them and their mannerisms for the nomination, yet they've completely ignored all of that and have just run their campaigns as themselves.

That's not something everyone can do and I applaud them both doing their own thing.

 

[Kyosaiga]

Andrea tantaros is the worst television personality of all time. Every time juan williams tries to say anything, she arches her eyebrow and puts on her well practiced look of disgust like she's hearing the most pinko commie drivel. "Really, juan? Is the sky blue?Really?" its like sean hannity crossed with your pissy ex gf

I can honestly say I despise the woman. She's a fucking awful human being.

At least with Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Beck, etc you can easily tell they're in it for the money tho they may have some genuine right wing views.

Andrea is dead ass serious with her delusions. I can't wait for her salty reactions on Outnumbered when Hillary wins the Presidency

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

Their last New Hampshire poll was from over a month before the primary so it hardly counts though.

I was thinking that too, but CNN's poll from a similar time frame had Sanders at +27, and then their final poll just days before had Sanders at +26. Similarly, Monmouth's poll from around that time had Sanders at +14 while their final poll pegged him at +10 so it seems reasonable to infer that PPP would've had results within a few points of their 1/4-1/6 poll if they'd conducted another poll just before the primary.

 

[Allard]

Thanks. Pretty much what my thinking was, but I couldn't think off the top of my head if Bernie Sanders or anyone else had done something similar.

I don't understand how someone could be so dismissive of a party and then turn around and expect their support.

I don't think Bernie is looking for that support necessarily, if he was he wouldn't be using the 'establishment' language. Bernie is someone to the left of the only party that has any national significance to his message and wants to change the dialogue. I think he is actually trying to be president but early on most assumed his real entrance to be a voice for very specific policies he cared about that he felt was not getting enough chance on the national stage. I still think that is the case which partly why I think for the most part he has still ran a very mild and less hostile campaign then he could have. The problem for Bernie, however, is he has hired people to his staff that do not have the same feeling, they want to win and they don't seem to care the damage it might cause to the potential message Bernie has been trying to make.

He is a liberal who wants to hijack another parties message in the hopes of moving it further to his side, I don't see it as much different then other former primary nominees like Ron Paul, Huckabee or Kacinich who seem to enter the race for similar reasons, still the hope of getting president but ultimately there to send a message on the national stage. He just happened to get much, much farther then those mostly because the field is so small due to the shadow of the political titan that is HRC and because his message did resonate with a very specific group of people who feel neglected. I honestly do not believe he will be close to a proper advocate for down ticket democrats should he get the actual nominee, instead that will be left for other leaders who desperately do not want to see the party crash just because it didnt get the nominee they may have wanted. Until he can show me tangible effect now that he wishes to help other dem noms and shows me a path other then wishful thinking, I will always feel he has no wish or care for the dem party, he literally using them because there is no other platform for him to stand on, he has no loyalty or care for it, especially if some of those colleagues happen to be more conservative dems who are always worried about being destroyed in the GE.

 

[Holmes]

I was thinking that too, but CNN's poll from a similar time frame had Sanders at +27, and then their final poll just days before had Sanders at +26. Similarly, Monmouth's poll from around that time had Sanders at +14 while their final poll pegged him at +10 so it seems reasonable to infer that PPP would've had results within a few points of their 1/4-1/6 poll if they'd conducted another poll just before the primary.

I mean, CNN did shit the bed for Iowa (their last poll had Sanders +8%) and New Hampshire (they had him about 5% better than he did) so I'd feel good in Nevada if I were Clinton and reading their poll. But the thing is, every state is different and must be polled differently. Just because a pollster does bad in one state doesn't mean it'll be the same in another. That's probably why (non-university) local pollsters are (usually) better, like DRM/Selzer. I mean, ARG overstated Sanders in Iowa and then overstated Clinton in New Hampshire. And then there's always late movement (which causes much bigger swings in primaries than in general elections) and caucus ground game on top of that. So much to consider.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

I mean, CNN did shit the bed for Iowa (their last poll had Sanders +8%) and New Hampshire (they had him about 5% better than he did) so I'd feel good in Nevada if I were Clinton and reading their poll. But the thing is, every state is different and must be polled differently. Just because a pollster does bad in one state doesn't mean it'll be the same in another. That's probably why (non-university) local pollsters are (usually) better, like DRM/Selzer. I mean, ARG overstated Sanders in Iowa and then overstated Clinton in New Hampshire. And then there's always late movement (which causes much bigger swings in primaries than in general elections) and caucus ground game on top of that. So much to consider.

Ehhh, CNN was only off by 3.6% in New Hampshire, which is closer than anyone else got. Strictly in terms of Nevada, I think the state is too unpredictable. I was mostly referring to the Super Tuesday results PPP provided earlier today, which has historically been favorable to Clinton.


Also worth noting that the CNN NV poll had a sample of 282 people with a 6.5% MOE. With the results being +1 Clinton, it's pretty much useless as a signifier of who stands a better chance to win.

 

[brainchild]

I guess the part that frustrates me is that I think she is super likable if she just stopped trying to overthink it and was herself, warts, flaws, dominance and all. From what my friends who work for her tell me about her and everything else, I think her personality actually super duper fits the modern times. I just sort of wish she was confident enough to just say "authenticity > current state for me", and use it.

EDIT: The rise of Trump and Sanders should be a sign that authenticity, regardless of policy agreement, is a really powerful thing. I don't know if this makes me a feminist or not, but I hate it that she can't be herself for whatever reason. In the 90s, it made sense. I don't think it makes sense now. That, I guess, is the basic point brainchild and I are trying to make.

I somehow missed this post, but I just wanted to say that, going forward, I think that all female politicians should do this. In Hillary's own words: "I want to break down all the barriers". I think one of the barriers that needs to be broken down is the barrier of gender norms and societal expectations.

Unfortunately, it may be a little too late for Hillary to do this because her image is pretty well cemented at this point, but it's not too late for other women. Can you imagine if Nina Turner was the VP? That would knock down quite a few barriers. Not just because she's a black woman, but because her manner of speaking is so passionate and down to earth, which would be unprecedented for her gender in such a prominent position.

 

[gutter_trash]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/17/politics/obama-cuba-visit/index.html

President Obama plans to be the first President to visit Cuba since Coolidge

Dumb ass Marco Rubio spews out Cold War nonsense and continues to hurt his own people with his stupid words.

 

[brainchild]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/17/politics/obama-cuba-visit/index.html

President Obama plans to be the first President to visit Cuba since Coolidge

Dumb ass Marco Rubio spews out Cold War nonsense and continues to hurt his own people with his stupid words.

Dumb indeed.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

I somehow missed this post, but I just wanted to say that, going forward, I think that all female politicians should do this. In Hillary's own words: "I want to break down all the barriers". I think one of the barriers that needs to be broken down is the barrier of gender norms and societal expectations.

Unfortunately, it may be a little too late for Hillary to do this because her image is pretty well cemented at this point, but it's not too late for other women. Can you imagine if Nina Turner was the VP? That would knock down quite a few barriers. Not just because she's a black woman, but because her manner of speaking is so passionate and down to earth, which would be unprecedented for her gender in such a prominent position.

I'm curious as to who Bernie would pick for VP. He can't go with the obvious choices because it would totally undermine his establishment rhetoric, which leaves him with people like Nina Turner, Keith Ellison and so forth but they're not exactly electorally great options. I mean, Keith Ellison is one of two muslims in congress and Nina is only a state senator.

Warren is an obvious choice, but I don't know that she'd want the position, nor am I sure it would be in everyone's best interest for her to take it.

 

[Makai]

Hillary is the only VP pick that makes sense.

 

[brainchild]

I'm curious as to who Bernie would pick for VP. He can't go with the obvious choices because it would totally undermine his establishment rhetoric, which leaves him with people like Nina Turner, Keith Ellison and so forth but they're not exactly electorally great options. I mean, Keith Ellison is one of two muslims in congress and Nina is only a state senator.

Warren is an obvious choice, but I don't know that she'd want the position, nor am I sure it would be in everyone's best interest for her to take it.

Personally, I feel that if 'unelectable' Trump can dominate in the way that he has, now would be the time for an anti-establishment candidate to nominate an 'unelectable' VP that diversifies his ticket a bit more. It doesn't have to be Nina Turner, but somebody like her would be welcomed.

Warren should stay where she's at. She'd get more done in congress than she would as VP.

Hillary is the only VP pick that makes sense.

From Bernie's perspective? Absolutely not.

 

[tmarg]

Hillary is the only VP pick that makes sense.

I don't think Hillary would want it.

 

[CrimzonSamurai]

Hillary is the only VP pick that makes sense.

She wouldn't take it. He'd go with some local "uncorrupted" yet establishment-friendly politician like that mayor everyone really liked at the 2012 Dem convention whose name I can't recall or find at this exact moment embarrassingly enough.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

She wouldn't take it. He'd go with some local "uncorrupted" yet establishment-friendly politician like that mayor everyone really liked at the 2012 Dem convention whose name I can't recall or find at this exact moment embarrassingly enough.

Ironically enough, Julian Castro is far and away the favorite for Hillary's likely VP choice.

 

[Veritigo_X]

Jeff Weaver VP.

 

[CrimzonSamurai]

Ironically enough, Julian Castro is far and away the favorite for Hillary's likely VP choice.

Yes! Julian Castro that's it. I'm aware of that but I think he'd make a good choice for either her or Bernie. He fills in all their blind spots, for different reasons of course.

 

[brainchild]

Jeff Weaver VP.

Hell no, he already needs to be fired as his campaign manager. Bernie would do well to distance himself from that moron.

 

[Suikoguy]

Hell no, he already needs to be fired as his campaign manager. Bernie would do well to distance himself from that moron.

Chief of Staff it is!

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

Yes! Julian Castro that's it. I'm aware of that but I think he'd make a good choice for either her or Bernie. He fills in all their blind spots, for different reasons of course.

I actually think he's a terrible choice for Hillary. He is a terribly stiff, scripted politician and that makes the Hillary/Castro ticket look like a couple cyborgs against a Trump/Hulk Hogan ticket.

 

[brainchild]

Chief of Staff it is!

Hahaha... still no.

I actually think he's a terrible choice for Hillary. He is a terribly stiff, scripted politician and that makes the Hillary/Castro ticket look like a couple cyborgs against a Trump/Hulk Hogan ticket.

LMAO

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

Case in point:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jx1XDOZkbZU

It's like he literally studies Obama's speaking pattern and mannerisms and emulates it. Except you can tell he's faking it, so he comes across especially politician-y.

 

[CrimzonSamurai]

I actually think he's a terrible choice for Hillary. He is a terribly stiff, scripted politician and that makes the Hillary/Castro ticket look like a couple cyborgs against a Trump/Hulk Hogan ticket.

I think they can play that off as "young but dedicated." Although I'm not really familiar with him outside of his convention speech and that his name is on Hillary's VP short-list, so I don't really have ground to stand on.

Edit:

Case in point:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jx1XDOZkbZU

It's like he literally studies Obama's speaking pattern and mannerisms and emulates it. Except you can tell he's faking it, so he comes across especially politician-y.

Oh, wow, ok. That's rough.

 

[brainchild]

Case in point:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jx1XDOZkbZU

It's like he literally studies Obama's speaking pattern and mannerisms and emulates it. Except you can tell he's faking it, so he comes across especially politician-y.

You say that as if Obama's prose isn't pre-meditated and calculated, lol. Obama's persona is not entirely authentic either, but the difference is that he happens to be one of the best in the business in making it palatable (and even appealing) to the average American.

 

[Spoiled Milk]

Fun fact. Hillary is going to be the second oldest president ever elected.

 

[brainchild]

Fun fact. Hillary is going to be the second oldest president ever elected.

You're not in the White House yet, Kristoffer.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

You say that as if Obama's prose isn't pre-meditated and calculated, lol. Obama's persona is not entirely authentic either, but the difference is that he happens to be one of the best in the business in making it palatable (and even appealing) to the average American.

Right. It works for Obama because he's exceptionally good at what he does. When Castro tries it, I feel like I'm watching an actor play a politician (not a specific one, just "a politician") in a comedy sketch. Might as well be kryptonite given every indication we have of what's been popular in 2016.

 

[Spoiled Milk]

You're not in the White House yet, Kristoffer.

I already held my own inauguration party. It's a done deal!

 

[brainchild]

Right. It works for Obama because he's exceptionally good at what he does. When Castro tries it, I feel like I'm watching an actor play a politician (not a specific one, just "a politician") in a comedy sketch.

Lol, so true. I felt the same way about O'Malley at his last town hall meeting. When he took off his jacket and rolled up his sleeves for the Q&A, talking about how it was impossible for him to sit down when doing a Q&A with the people, I just about lost it.

I already held my own inauguration party. It's a done deal!

Juxtapositioning this post with your avatar gave me a good chuckle.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

Lol, so true. I felt the same way about O'Malley at his last town hall meeting. When he took off his jacket and rolled up his sleeves for the Q&A, talking about how it was impossible for him to sit down when doing a Q&A with the people, I just about lost it.

Yeah, O'Malley was god awful at being a person and we saw how far that got him, which is why I really hope Hillary doesn't run with Castro. I think she should extend an olive branch to the Sanders democrats and pick someone from the more progressive end of the party. Who that would be? Idunno, but Hillary's got the establishment dem vote already and you don't need to pander to Latino voters against Trump. She needs to appeal to the liberal end of the party.

 

[brainchild]

Yeah, O'Malley was god awful at being a person and we saw how far that got him, which is why I really hope Hillary doesn't run with Castro. I think she should extend an olive branch to the Sanders democrats and pick someone from the more progressive end of the party. Who that would be? Idunno, but Hillary's got the establishment dem vote already and you don't need to pander to Latino voters against Trump. She needs to appeal to the liberal end of the party.

Agreed.

 

[Hazmat]

Yeah, O'Malley was god awful at being a person and we saw how far that got him, which is why I really hope Hillary doesn't run with Castro. I think she should extend an olive branch to the Sanders democrats and pick someone from the more progressive end of the party. Who that would be? Idunno, but Hillary's got the establishment dem vote already and you don't need to pander to Latino voters against Trump. She needs to appeal to the liberal end of the party.

I agree that she doesn't need to pander to the Latino vote if the opponent is Trump, but does she really need to pander to the far left if the nominee is Trump?

 

[shinra-bansho]

Meh. She needs to appeal to the Electoral College.
On the assumption that anyone even cares who the VP pick is anyway, which they probably don't. The maxim is probably just: first, do no harm.

Optics dictate male, younger but not so young to be a neophyte. Governor experience would be good.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

I agree that she doesn't need to pander to the Latino vote if the opponent is Trump, but does she really need to pander to the far left if the nominee is Trump?

I don't think she needs to pander to anyone if the nominee is Trump. I'm mostly inserting my own selfish desires here.

 

[danm999]

If it's Trump she doesn't need to pander. Not being Trump will be enough.

 

[brainchild]

I agree that she doesn't need to pander to the Latino vote if the opponent is Trump, but does she really need to pander to the far left if the nominee is Trump?

Maybe to the salty Bernie base that might resent her for 'stealing' Bernie's nomination.

 

[tmarg]

The usual logic is to try to pick a VP from a swing state and hope they can carry it for you.

If Hillary needs to be trying to win back the far left at the end of this primary, that's a really bad place to be, even if Trump means the republicans won't be in a place to immediately take advantage. I don't think it has gotten anywhere near that point.

 

[Spoiled Milk]

The usual logic is to try to pick a VP from a swing state and hope they can carry it for you.

If Hillary needs to be trying to win back the far left at the end of this primary, that's a really bad place to be, even if Trump means the republicans won't be in a place to immediately take advantage. I don't think it has gotten anywhere near that point.

Then Julian Castro is a bad pick, right?

 

[shinra-bansho]

Big, fat mess.

 

[brainchild]

Big, fat mess.

You guys are hilarious.

 

[tmarg]

Then Julian Castro is a bad pick, right?

Honestly, I know very little about Julian Castro. I have no idea if he'd be a good pick.

 

[Hazmat]

Maybe to the salty Bernie base that might resent her for 'stealing' Bernie's nomination.

They're mostly either going to fall in line or they won't vote at all. The salty ones that won't vote for her were either part of a cult of personality around Sanders or just straight-up aren't Democrats, and in neither case will a liberal Democrat at the bottom of the ticket motivate them.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

Honestly, I know very little about Julian Castro. I have no idea if he'd be a good pick.

There's not much to know. He was the mayor of San Antonio for a while, a largely ceremonial position in that city, and is now the secretary of HUD. And uhhh... he's young and Hispanic.

Edit- he doesn't speak Spanish, though, so he's not even a great option for his pandering.

 

[brainchild]

They're mostly either going to fall in line or they won't vote at all. The salty ones that won't vote for her were either part of a cult of personality around Sanders or just straight-up aren't Democrats, and in neither case will a liberal Democrat at the bottom of the ticket motivate them.

You're probably right, but as another poster said, it's extending an olive branch to the base. The gesture carries more significance than the substance.

 

[kirblar]

Then Julian Castro is a bad pick, right?

Yes.

Kaine/Warner are the two blatantly obvious picks. Probably Warner, Kaine's indicated he's not interested.

 

[watershed]

Castro genuinely impressed me with his DNC speech in 2012. At a convention that had strong speeches by Biden, Bill Clinton, and Obama. it's gotta say something that Castro managed to impress.

Edit: What happens if Rubio wins the GOP nom and picks Haley as his VP? The dem ticket is gonna look really old and white in contrast with either Bernie or Hillary at the top of the ticket.

 

[danm999]

Edit: What happens if Rubio wins the GOP nom and picks Haley as his VP? The dem ticket is gonna look really old and white in contrast with either Bernie or Hillary at the top of the ticket.

You might get third party Trump.

 

[OrangeGrayBlue]

Castro genuinely impressed me with his DNC speech in 2012. At a convention that had strong speeches by Biden, Bill Clinton, and Obama. it's gotta say something that Castro managed to impress.

Edit: What happens if Rubio wins the GOP nom and picks Haley as his VP? The dem ticket is gonna look really old and white in contrast with either Bernie or Hillary at the top of the ticket.

I question the extent to which Hispanic voters would support Rubio for such shallow reasons. Also, he's Cuban which is probably worse than being white in terms of winning over Mexican voters.