He gets a lot of 'he says whats his mind' credit. Which of course mean equating a lack of a filter with telling the truth
-
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 |OT10| Jill Stein Inflatable Love Doll
- Thread starter Aaron Strife
- Start date
- Status
He gets a lot of 'he says whats his mind' credit. Which of course mean equating a lack of a filter with telling the truth
Spoiled Milk
Banned
PoliGAF |OT11| benjipwns wasn't going to be happy either way.
benjipwns
Banned
You think I don't have a rational interest in one candidate winning simply because of what will happen here and elsewhere?
I DID make his thread five months before he actually entered the race.
Black Republican
Member
Jill Stein Inflatable Love Doll
uh did i miss something? lol
uh did i miss something? lol
Yup. Trump is perceived as answering questions more directly, even if he will change his answer in a few hours. But even then, he will me direct. Hillary is not always like that.
As for my previous "ball game" comment. I didn't mean it was over, I meant that that's what the fundamental advantage is. No matter the point in the campaign, Hillary's numbers on competence have been high. It's just a matter of getting people (all people) to the polls.
Those are just awful numbers for Clinton. She has to turn that around.
Trump put the birther issue to rest and we are moving on.
Honestly. On this front. What is she going to do? You even admit yourself Donald in reality just lies. He just says what's on his mind. Clinton doesn't have that leeway. That's just not who she is at all.
It's not going to change with Clinton just coming out and talking. People unfortunately believe she's a liar. Yet MANY people still believe she has what it takes to be president.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
Can't turn it around. I don't think that favorability / trust ratings are exactly correlative with vote intention though, and are particularly not useful this year.
Election 2016 |OT| ALL SHALL LOVE ME AND DESPAIR
INCEPTION
I'd pay to see that movie... Sounds like a Krull for the modern-era.
She can't. That's the image and you can't turn that around in your 70s. The best example for this was the fracking answer in the debates. The answer was perfect, but it was perceived as duplicitous.
Haven't seen the cable shows but the network shows have been a mess of Pence and Conway deflecting away from the birther story. Conway claimed the friday presser wasn't an attempt to promote his hotel and that he's a "fun lovin' guy" like we saw on Fallon. Oh and Alex Castellanos on MTP made a joke about having sex with Sofia Vergara, referred to Hillary as Nana Clinton and said there's no doubt Obama has an "otherness" about him and he may be an anticolonial globalist.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
The anti colonial thing is a deep cut from Obama's first term. That's old school.
Maybe not, but every day from here to Nov 8 Clinton and her campaign need to ask themselves what they can do to try.
I'm growing increasingly concerned that the campaign is just writing off areas where they assume they can't make headway.
Young people? Nope.
Trust/favorables? Can't change it.
That's dangerous.
metalslimer
Member
Its amazing that the week of Trump going after a gold star family doesn't match Hilary fainting.
I believe it was saying that it was how much they trust the media. So 14% of Republicans trust the media.
Aaron Strife
Banned
If they're going to include Michigan and Wisconsin I don't see what's wrong with then including Arizona and Georgia.The problem is that neither one of those states is a swing state. They're both consistently R. Arizona has a republican governor, two republican senators, and went to Romney by 9 points in 2012 53-44.
Georgia isn't much better- Republican governor, two republican senators, and went to Romney by 8.
Hillary's campaign isn't seriously contesting these as she is in places like OH, PA, VA, etc. and neither is Trump: Hillary has 1 office in GA and 2 in AZ. Trump has 3 offices in GA and 1 in AZ.
If the campaign isn't taking these two seriously as "battlegrounds" (look at the offices present everywhere else!) why is Yougov including them? The answer is "headlines and narrative" and not much else.
It's nice that polling shows AZ being "close", but state polling can vary a lot in terms of quality- there isn't a consistent pattern of good polls from a single pollster there to show the results are legitimate, and AZ in particular has an astronomically large hispanic population that is difficult to poll, as well as a constant stream of retirees moving in from elsewhere in the US.
It's BS to include either in the same discussion as VA/CO/OH/NC...Even PA (which I don't really consider a swing state either) at least has a track record of voting in republican governors and senators fairly consistently even if it has voted democratic for president every year since 1988. That's not true of GA and AZ.
Ignore downballot/midterm results because they don't mean shit. Maryland and Massachusetts have GOP governors right now. People don't vote in those years. Analysts tried to draw a connection between Walker and Snyder's victories and Romney possibly being competitive in 2012 and it ended up being zilch. Obama won Michigan by a wider margin than Romney won Arizona or Georgia.
It's important to keep tabs on those states because 1, Clinton bought ad space there. That's a far more significant investment than say, opening up an office in Columbia. 2, polls show the two candidates close there. You address this but dismiss it, but until Trump breaks out in either state we shouldn't write them off. 3, they're both fundamentally competitive states.
I've said it before, but Arizona is the secret swing state that no one has picked up on. R-leaning, to be sure - Rubio or Kasich would have no problem carrying it this year. But the population trends that have made Colorado, New Mexico and Nevada competitive or even safe for Democrats have also been happening in Arizona. Obama's campaign probably would have invested significantly there if not for McCain's home state advantage forcing them to concede it. In 2012, he didn't play in any state he didn't win initially (even dropping Indiana which was a fluke anyway), so Arizona went another cycle without any attention.
Georgia is similar, although Obama did actually compete there in 2008 and got 47%. He didn't compete at all in 2012 and barely dropped support. Democrats have a high floor in Georgia due to a large black population, but a low ceiling as there are few swingable white voters. But with every year, Georgia's population diversifies, lifting that floor and ceiling higher and higher. What's happening there is likely to soon define Southern politics as a whole - black voters increase in population and thus political power. Like Arizona, it still leans Republican by default, but Trump makes it a race.
If you went back in time to 2004, people would find the notion that Virginia and North Carolina are swing states to be preposterous. The fact that Virginia is even pretty much off the table this year - for the Republicans - would be even moreso. Georgia and Arizona should be seen as new frontiers for Democrats. Especially as we're losing ground in some Midwestern states (barring a wave in 2020 I think this is the last year Iowa goes blue, and Ohio will lose its bellwether status pretty soon), we need to capitalize on that brewing Southern resurgence to make up for it. And I have no problem with elevating Georgia and Arizona to the same status as Florida and North Carolina.
Well she is giving a speech targeted at millennials tomorrow. She also had a "signed" tweet last night saying she's going to spend the rest of this campaign pushing for young people and families. Hopefully it isn't all blowing smoke.
Spoiled Milk
Banned
EDIT: Oh my god, I didn't know you made that thread.
metalslimer
Member
She is going to try but I'm convinced that nothing is really going to work besides those people actually seeing her doing good things in office.
Manmademan
Member
To be honest I agree with you. MI and WI probably *shouldnt* have been included as battlegrounds- but they WERE part of the 11 original states in the battleground survey. AZ and GA were not, and were included arbitrarily a month or so back.
it actually isn't. clinton's campaign has no shortage of money, but boots on the ground are a lot harder to come by, relying heavily on volunteers that believe you have a legitimate chance of winning. In person GOTV efforts have much more impact on turnout than ads do, and there is a direct correlation between number of offices present for GOTV efforts and margin of victory in 2008 and 2012. Romney's campaign specifically addressed this one as one of the reasons they lost in places they did not expect to.
Yes, I did- for a very good reason. There isn't reliable polling in those places- and much of the reason there isn't a lot of reliable polling is because its not contestable. This is every poll in Arizona since the beginning of august:
Not only is there an extremely sparse amount of polling there from legitimate pollsters, no pollster has bothered to run a poll there more than once. The only pollster who has run more than one poll recently there at all was OH insights, going back to june. There's not enough here to conclude that any kind of polling there is legitimate in any direction.
9 points in 2012 isn't "R leaning", that's solid R, until we see some kind of shift in the electorate that says otherwise. it doesn't exist.
I'm going to need to see the receipts on this. CO, NM, NV were all carried easily by democrats in more than one election, and all of those have democrats at varying levels of elected office. AZ does not.
This is a terrible argument- Obama was well known to compete everywhere he possibly could in 2008 and 2012. If he didn't put resources in arizona, it was because it was a lost cause, much as it is this year.
The point you're missing is that NC and VA didn't happen overnight- both of those two states have a clear pattern of demographic change overtime as well as demonstrable history of an increase in democratic voting that's putting democrats into elected office at the state level. This does not apply to AZ or GA.
GA is beginning to move in that direction, but it's not quite there for 2016 outside of a complete disaster on the republican end.
AZ and GA are absolutely not battleground states or swing states by any reasonable definition. If they WERE, they should have and would have been included in the original 11 state aggregate yougov had to begin with. They were not, for blindingly obvious reasons. Throwing them in later wasn't due to any kind of movement in polling (again, see the complete lack of reliable polls in AZ at all) but instead to create narrative- something we KNOW Yougov is doing, since the poll they released today has "race tightens in battleground states" when the actual data shows no such thing- only the barest of statistical noise. It's an extremely transparent attempt to generate clicks and draw eyeballs.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Yeah, she just needs to make sure not to come out like this.
Just talk up minimum wage, student loan reform, child care, all that good stuff.
Yeah, she just needs to make sure not to come out like this.
Just talk up minimum wage, student loan reform, child care, all that good stuff.
Oh shit here comes day boi student loan forgiveness waddup
cartoon_soldier
Member
So you're saying Stein finally has a chance
He's voting for Johnson?
Big Brother
Hillary's first Senate campaign.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
it's encouraged by the prevalent attitude among her supporters that the reason she isn't making any headway is because everyone is sexist, or because all millennials are dumb, or because the media isn't on her side, or whatever other one of various excuses is selected. There's this pretty harmful notion that literally none of the fault for this rests with Clinton herself or her campaign strategy, which means that obviously there's nothing she needs to change about the way she's campaigning. Like, obviously some of the problem rests with those things. But all of it? Are we really going in that deep? Would it not be easier in that case for the Clinton campaign to dissolve the people and elect another?
hi benji
A libertarian thinking about other people?
idon'tbelieveyou.gif
Finale Fireworker
Member
Colin is a libertarian who wears his stateless heart on his free-market sleeve.
Oh yeah. He brings it up fairly often on their various programs and proudly flaunts his Johnson/Weld 2016 shirt. Kind of funny how someone so supposedly patriotic cares more about stroking his ego and protest voting than voting for the candidate that would be best for the country he loves so much.
Yup. I always found it funny when he talks about what happened in 2007/08 yet advocates libertarian beliefs like that wouldn't be the most sure-fire to ensure something like that happens again -_-
This is crazy, btw. Hopefully Hillary can expose him at the debates.
He's not a libertarian, he's a Republican.
benjipwns
Banned
I think you might have seen it wrong?
look at those fucking Democrats in 2005 lol
excelsiorlef
Member
Wow if he does those are some incredible principles.
benjipwns
Banned
I hereby state, and mean all that I say, that I never have been and never will be a candidate for President; that if nominated by any party, I should peremptorily decline; and even if unanimously elected I should decline to serve.
I owe it to The Gilman.
What this says to me is that almost all of Trump's base buys his bullshit. While even a vast number of Democrats don't believe Hillary.
It's a scary number when you're thinking about turnout.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked