• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
kirblar said:
This was leaked deliberately.
Click to expand...

After reading the article I agree. So far this is the only name to really come out as being vetted. Obama could well be using this as a way to get the GOP to say they'll consider someone and then nominate someone else.
 
M

maabus1999

Member
Teggy said:
At what point do they become meaningful?
Click to expand...

When it is only two nominees. For example, there could be Dems who are voting for Sanders who may be biased in the answer if called.

And honestly, if any GOP won Ohio by more than 3%, it would be like a Regean/Mondale election which will NEVER happen.
 
Y

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
I believe GE polls are meaningful but not that Ted Cruz would ever lead. Sorry. I'm an poll Truther there.
 
C

CCS

Banned
This has TRAP written all over it. Get the Republicans to admit they'll consider, then switch out for a more qualified and more left wing candidate. Alternatively, they still say no, and that's something that can really be used in the election.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
CCS said:
This has TRAP written all over it. Get the Republicans to admit they'll consider, then switch out for a more qualified and more left wing candidate. Alternatively, they still say no, and that's something that can really be used in the election.
Click to expand...

Yep. The thing is, are Senate Republicans smart enough to see it coming? I'm guessing no, most of them are not.
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Sandoval would be a great pick. Call me crazy, but centrists should be on the Supreme Court.
 
C

Cheebo

Banned
Sandoval is aligned with Democrats on some key issues, including abortion rights and the environment. As governor, he has moved to implement the Affordable Care Act, and has said he considers same-sex marriage to be a settled issue
Click to expand...

Could be worse!

Also I cant see how in the world they can float a GOP governer then nominate a liberal and expect anything to get done. It'll be him, or someone of his ilk if Obama wants to have ANY chance of getting a hearing.
 
C

CDX

Member
HylianTom said:
One of my favorite things in the OT right now: repeated proclamations that "we've been wrong on how well Trump would do in the primary, so I can't predict what's going to happen."

What's this "we" shit? 😎
Click to expand...

Yeah. I don't get that line of thought either, that nobody in 2015 predicted Trump could be the Republican nominee.


adam387 said:
A few people asked me to redo my delegate "predictions" : cough guesses :

So I did. Here's my methodology:

Use the most recent poll from each state. In the event that two polls were released within a day of each other, use the one with the best 538 ranking and lowest MoE. If there are no polls for that state available, I immediately gave Bernie 55% of the vote for that caucus/primary. (There were only a handful of those that didn't have things for them.) When it came to undecided, I let them break 50/50. I also assumed Hillary won't be viable in Vermont. I awarded all delegates strictly proportional and not by congressional district. Basically, anything that I could do to benefit Sanders, I did. Anywhere I could take a delegate from Hillary, I did. This is, quite literally, the best I could come up for based on current polling for Bernie.



Total:
H 86
B 70

For Super Tuesday, first number is total delegates 2nd is Hillary, 3rd is Bernie.



Total to date:
H--------584
B--------431

This gives Hillary a 153 delegate lead over Bernie. He's under performing his Cook estimates by 84 delegates.

March 5th



Total to date

H---------644
B---------480

Maine on the 6th



H---------655
B---------494

March 8th



H--------756
B--------559

March 15th (ie End of the Road Really)



H---------1171
B----------835

At this point, she has a pledged delegate lead of 336. Bernie is 166 under his Cook "I can tie this" goals.

Super Delegate totals

H---------1622
B---------854

Hillary would need 761 more delegates to win the nomination.
Bernie would need 1529.

So, basically, as of March 15th, Bernie is 336 pledged delegates behind, and 768 pledged/soft delegates behind. This is the best case I can come up for for him. There are a lot of places where he could lose by a lot more than he is now.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the delegate analysis.
 
I

ivysaur12

Banned
I think this is entirely accurate:

Michael Cohen ‏@speechboy71
It's interesting how many pundits are saying "don't underestimate Trump" w/an argument that relies fully on underestimating Hillary Clinton
Click to expand...

Michael Cohen ‏@speechboy71
I mean it's possible that Hillary Clinton will be a terrible gen elex candidate & Trump will be a great one ... but it's not likely
Click to expand...
 
B

Box of Kittens

Banned
Veritigo_X said:
Once we actually know who the nominees are.
Click to expand...

Even then the further out from the election the less it tells you. The famous example is Dukakis holding a 17-point lead over Bush in July of 1988. That example is a little misleading in that it's based on a single Gallup poll taken when Dukakis was enjoying a convention bounce, but Dukakis consistently led in the polls from May until August.
 
C

Cheebo

Banned
There are two false extremes about Trump.

1. He is going to self-implode somehow, some way and Rubio will rise from the ashes.

2. He is winning the GOP primary despite the fact he shouldn't thus he will win the general because by all indications he shouldn't win that either.
 
I

ivysaur12

Banned
Cheebo said:
There are two false extremes about Trump.

1. He is going to self-implode somehow, some way and Rubio will rise from the ashes.

2. He is winning the GOP primary despite the fact he shouldn't thus he will win the general because by all indications he shouldn't win that either.
Click to expand...

yassssss Cheebo
 
M

Makai

Member
Cheebo said:
Huh.
Click to expand...
Pay your debt!

VoEXqY6.png
 
C

Crocodile

Member
brainchild said:
I agree with everything that you said, which tells me that you still don't understand my argument. The data isn't the problem, just the way it's being talked about in relation to people.

No, the use of the term 'outlier' isn't the problem. It's in telling people that they're an outlier; that they're a statistic. You don't see how that can be problematic?

First, when we talk about representation of demographics, we need to acknowledge that there is diversity of that representation. This isn't the same as representation of a statistic. Going with your Bernie supporter analogy, as a gay, black man, I may be in the minority of the population of Bernie supporters, statistically speaking, but I am no less a representation of Bernie supporters in terms of demographics than any other Bernie supporter.

Similarly, when we were talking about the Hispanic voters, the conversation jumped from discussing the statistics of some Hispanics voting for a republican, to those Hispanics not being representative of their demographic. It wasn't outright racist (as I've already clarified), but this extends beyond just talking about the data. We're no longer talking about their voting tendencies, we're now personally commenting on which people make up the Hispanic community, which is a slippery slope; it gives off the vibe that they're not the REAL hispanics, a vibe that was strengthened when dismissing Trumps win of the republican Hispanic vote as inconsequential.
Click to expand...

You're arguing for a slight that you have imagined in your head, not one that was actually ever being discussed. The question was never "Are they Hispanic?" but rather "If their voting patterns are typical and broadly representative of Hispanics across the country". This was never synonymous to "not being Black enough" or other similar questions/confrontations that happen within the Black community (and pretty much every minority community). I'd also argue that if your intent was to correlate this discussion of voting patterns to "racial purity" tests, you've done a very poor job of establishing and presenting your argument. Sorry.
 
E

Elaugaufein

Member
Plinko said:
Sandoval would be a great pick. Call me crazy, but centrists should be on the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...

A Supreme Court of centrists/moderates is no more representative than one stacked with diehards. You should definitely need to be able to be non-partisan when it comes to the law though.
 
G

gcubed

Member
Box of Kittens said:
Even then the further out from the election the less it tells you. The famous example is Dukakis holding a 17-point lead over Bush in July of 1988. That example is a little misleading in that it's based on a single Gallup poll taken when Dukakis was enjoying a convention bounce, but Dukakis consistently led in the polls from May until August.
Click to expand...

Herman Cain led Obama.

GE polls during primaries are useless
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I'll say it:

Tomorrow night's debate is Rubio's last chance. If he shines and Trump looks terrible, he probably turns the race around and wins.

If he comes out the same or worse, it's over.

It's a huge night.
 
B

Box of Kittens

Banned
Basileus777 said:
Hopefully it really is a ploy because I'd rather leave the seat empty than appoint him.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Leaking the name as a trap for Senate Republicans is one thing, but actually nominating a conservative when the balance of the court is at stake? At that point I'd actually have to hope the Republicans continue their obstruction.
 
U

UltimaPooh

Member
B-Dubs said:
Yep. The thing is, are Senate Republicans smart enough to see it coming? I'm guessing no, most of them are not.
Click to expand...

Yes, they see it coming.

You can't do great political maneuvering when one side completely disagrees with you on everything.

We might get a right leaning centrist... Or this is going to keep going right until January of next year.

I'll be shocked if we get a new justice befor then.

I'll also be shocked if this actually has any bearing on the electtion. The GOP will do what they do best... Deflect and will still get close to 50 percent of the vote or more.
 
Z

Ziltoidia 9

Member
Plinko said:
I'll say it:

Tomorrow night's debate is Rubio's last chance. If he shines and Trump looks terrible, he probably turns the race around and wins.

If he comes out the same or worse, it's over.

It's a huge night.
Click to expand...

The lower the amount of people on stage, the better Trump does, I feel. Is it because he is able to single people out?
 
B

Bowdz

Member
Plinko said:
I'll say it:

Tomorrow night's debate is Rubio's last chance. If he shines and Trump looks terrible, he probably turns the race around and wins.

If he comes out the same or worse, it's over.

It's a huge night.
Click to expand...

I have to admit, I'm pretty nervous for Trump. He is going to be receiving incoming from all sides tomorrow.
 
B

Basileus777

Member
Plinko said:
I'll say it:

Tomorrow night's debate is Rubio's last chance. If he shines and Trump looks terrible, he probably turns the race around and wins.

If he comes out the same or worse, it's over.

It's a huge night.
Click to expand...

None of the debates have had more than a short term effect, I wouldn't expect this one to be a game changer either.
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Ziltoidia 9 said:
The lower the amount of people on stage, the better Trump does, I feel. Is it because he is able to single people out?
Click to expand...

Perhaps. I think that everyone is afraid to attack him for fear of retaliation, or at least they have in the past.

BoboBrazil said:
Rubio will be getting it too from Cruz and Kasich.
Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure on this one. I have a feeling Cruz and Rubio team up.

Basileus777 said:
None of the debates have had more than a short term effect, I wouldn't expect this one to be a game changer either.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but with less guys on stage and next Tuesday being a huge day, it's really the last chance for voters to change their mind.

Trump has one major benefit here if Rubio/Cruz team up: It adds to his narrative that the RNC and establishment is out to rig the election from outsiders. That plays big to the general base. As I said last week, I can't wait to see how badly the RNC stacked this audience. It is going to be hilarious.
 
B

Bowdz

Member
BoboBrazil said:
Rubio will be getting it too from Cruz and Kasich.
Click to expand...

I have a feeling Cruz will be hitting Trump just as hard, if not harder, than Rubio tomorrow. That Politico report that said his top backers are pushing him to hit Trump not Rubio makes it seem like Cruz is getting pushed HARD to primarily go after Trump. I still think Kasich will be riding his can't-we-all-just-get-along wave and try to stay above the fray.
 
P

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Seriously--who in the world cares if Sandoval is a republican? Look at what he has sided with democrats on in the past. THAT is what really matters. "Republican" means a totally different thing in certain areas of the United States.
 
P

PBY

Banned
Plinko said:
Seriously--who in the world cares if Sandoval is a republican? Look at what he has sided with democrats on in the past. THAT is what really matters. "Republican" means a totally different thing in certain areas of the United States.
Click to expand...

Naw man

It matters
 
K

kirblar

Member
Plinko said:
Seriously--who in the world cares if Sandoval is a republican? Look at what he has sided with democrats on in the past. THAT is what really matters. "Republican" means a totally different thing in certain areas of the United States.
Click to expand...
The views on business are what concern parts of the coalition.
 
E

Elaugaufein

Member
Plinko said:
Seriously--who in the world cares if Sandoval is a republican? Look at what he has sided with democrats on in the past. THAT is what really matters. "Republican" means a totally different thing in certain areas of the United States.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure the union movement would be less than enthusiastic about you classifying them as not really mattering.

ETA - To be fair to Obama: You could replace Scalia with a magical dice that joined the majority if it was 6 or more and decided all other decisions 50/50 and it'd still lead to a better court on average.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2025 Edition
2 3
106
9K
Mr Hyde replied
Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5 6
263
53K
Topher replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2023 Edition | 20th anniversary thread
2 3 4 5 6
268
61K
DGrayson replied
GAF Museum - The Greatest OTs of All Time (or at least, some of the great ones)
|OT|
4
2K
Komatsu replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2022 Edition
3 4 5 6 7
333
78K
zephiross replied
Top Bottom