• 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 |OT13| For Queen and Country

Status
Not open for further replies.
Byeeeeeee

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/19/us/politics/campaign-ads.html

A “super PAC” supporting Hillary Clinton will begin airing ads in New Hampshire and Pennsylvania that tether Donald J. Trump to embattled Republican senators there.

The group, Priorities USA, will run ads in the Manchester, N.H., and Philadelphia markets, as Senators Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire and Patrick J. Toomey of Pennsylvania face difficult re-election battles.

The move is a new phase for Priorities. Mrs. Clinton’s lead over Mr. Trump has allowed the group to focus on down-ballot races.

This week it will also begin airing television and radio ads in Georgia, a reliably Republican-leaning state that polls show may be in play in the presidential race.
 

Joeytj

Banned
So Bill won Arkansas, but Hillary won't. What's up with that? Do they not like Clintons as much as they used to, or did the state's conservative voters become less moderate over time? Or do they just not like Hillary? Do they still like Bill in that case?

It's been 24 years since Bill was governor there and Hillary was only his First Lady. Also, Republicans still didn't have complete dominance over southern politics back then as they do now. There are few voters left that remember Clinton's governorship anyway.
 
We're 24 hours from the 3rd debate. This poll wasn't free. They just did one. This is like a waste of time and money, but whatever.

You do want polls right before the debate to see if there's a change, though.

A stupid poll would be one coming out Thursday morning.
 

Piecake

Member
Despite touting how his school “promotes free expression of ideas, unlike other universities,” Liberty University president Jerry Falwell Jr. allegedly killed a Trump-focused anti-sexual assault story in the student paper this week. Here it is anyway.

Joel Schmieg says he doesn’t know exactly what he wrote that made Jerry Falwell Jr. cut his article out of the Liberty University school newspaper. He just said that the school’s president told his editors his story criticizing Donald Trump couldn’t run.

“[My editors] read the email to me. He said, basically, the gist was that there were two articles this week about Trump,” Schmieg told The Daily Beast on Tuesday. “One was a letter to the editor from a Liberty alum, and they didn’t want two things running about him.”

Still, Schmieg said Falwell, who has endorsed Trump and stumped for him at the Republican National Convention, squashed the piece anyway. He said "everything controversial" gets sent to Falwell first.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...m-liberty-university-s-student-newspaper.html

I like how these political Christian evangelicals are being exposed for the shitbags that they are
 
This is at least partially because Democratic gerrymandering doesn't "look" like gerrymandering. Democratic voters tend to cluster anyway, you don't need to draw some crazy octopus to link them all together. The suburban nature of the GOP with Republicans as dispersed satellites means their maps look worse.

Illinois is pretty gerrymandered.
 

royalan

Member
For what?

Is this supposed to throw Clinton off her game?

5kl_DZ7.gif

His campaign has already told us.

Their goal is to be as nasty as possible in the hopes that the media will behave predictably and characterize this as a messy, negative election where BOTH SIDES! are equally participating in the mud slinging, and while Trump voters will stay energized, sensitive Clinton voters will throw their hands up and stay home.
 

Joeytj

Banned
Obama's brother said this about Gaddafi in Libya:

Malik also blasted Clinton’s performance as secretary of the State Department for exacerbating the chaos and violence in the Mideast. Malik said ousted Libyan leader Moammar Khadafy had been a good friend. “Check out the situation in Libya now,” he said.

No wonder he gets along with Trump. Trump was a big fan of Gaddafi too.

Anyway, this means we can look forward to "There's Pat Smith! She lost her son in Benghazi Hillary, because of you!"

And now "Your idea to go into Libya was a disaster, even Obama's half-brother knows it, he's in this audience tonight!"

I'm honestly thinking of just skipping this debate and not watch, just follow your reactions, maybe.
 

Mario

Sidhe / PikPok
The more I think about it, the more I come to the conclusion that the only impact the "rigged" rhetoric from Trump will have on the election itself is that it will depress his own voter turnout e.g. if the election is rigged, why bother?

Nobody on the Clinton or independent side is buying it. And I don't really think we'll see much in the way of voter intimidation at the polls either, so don't expect a meaningful impact there (at least, no more shenanigans than usual).

Post election is a different story as I'm sure there will be widespread outrage at the outcome from Trump supporters, and whatever media, legal, political fallout occurs from Trump not cleanly conceding if at all. But overall I think continuing down the "rigged" path only hurts Trump himself for November 8th.
 
Obama's brother said this about Gaddafi in Libya:



No wonder he gets along with Trump. Trump was a big fan of Gaddafi too.

Anyway, this means we can look forward to "There's Pat Smith! She lost her son in Benghazi Hillary, because of you!"

And now "Your idea to go into Libya was a disaster, even Obama's half-brother knows it, he's in this audience tonight!"

I'm honestly thinking of just skipping this debate and not watch, just follow your reactions, maybe.

I can see Trump just going full on MASTER TROLL and just saying "Obama backs me on this and says you should be in jail! and he's in the audience tonight supporting me!" without clarifying which Obama he's talking about
 

studyguy

Member
Obama's half brother oh no! Now Obama will never win reelection!

I can see Trump just going full on MASTER TROLL and just saying "Obama backs me on this and says you should be in jail! and he's in the audience tonight supporting me!" without clarifying which Obama he's talking about

Sorry, but this seems entirely beyond Trump to be that clever.
I'd wager he points to Obama's half brother in the crowd stating 'See even he agrees with me!' and the camera pans to him only to confuse literally everyone in America. Trump pushed out name after name during the town hall expecting people to know who the fuck they were like if we all read breitbart on the daily. The man is dumb as a rock.
 
Obama's brother said this about Gaddafi in Libya:



No wonder he gets along with Trump. Trump was a big fan of Gaddafi too.

Anyway, this means we can look forward to "There's Pat Smith! She lost her son in Benghazi Hillary, because of you!"

And now "Your idea to go into Libya was a disaster, even Obama's half-brother knows it, he's in this audience tonight!"

I'm honestly thinking of just skipping this debate and not watch, just follow your reactions, maybe.

Is Trump really that stupid that he would try to bring up Libya? Couldn't Hillary literally just quote him word-for-word of his own personal blog where he supported invading Libya?

yes yes
 
Can anyone give me a link to explain why the gerrymander might backfire on the Republicans,especially in a wave election? I'd be interested to learn more.

Because in order to secure more R seats, gerrymandering will decrease R representation from heavily R areas to make multiple R seats.

Think taking a R+10, and one neck and neck district, you can spread those Rs to make it 2 R+5 districts.
 

Piecake

Member
Can anyone give me a link to explain why the gerrymander might backfire on the Republicans,especially in a wave election? I'd be interested to learn more.

They worked it so that all the democrats were like in 1-4 districts and would win with 80% dem vote while the republican district got double to triple that with 50-55% of the vote.

A wave election where we see depressed Republican turnout throughout the whole nation could flip a lot of gerrymandered republican districts sitting normally at 51-55% republican
 

Bowdz

Member
I thought this debate was going to be seated at a table? FoxNews just did a walk through and it's duel lecterns again.
 
Can anyone give me a link to explain why the gerrymander might backfire on the Republicans,especially in a wave election? I'd be interested to learn more.

Generally, what you try to do is put as many of a certain demographic, we'll call Dem-leaners into a few districts as possible. When you do that, the result is a lot of districts with a GOP lean but not overtly GOP.

For instance, a district in 2012 might have gone to the GOP candidate +6. In an election where the GOP candidate would win, it might be +10.

What you do is try to set up as many districts as possible where you believe you should be able to win without an unforseen collapse. They're GOP safe but not heavily GOP (you can reverse the parties of course).

Let's say a state is 50/50 with 10 seats. You give the Dems 2 districts that are 80/20 Dem/GOP, then 7 districts that are 55/45 GOP, and 1 that is 75/25 GOP or something of that nature.

edit: to answer a backfire, if there is a wave, those suddenly leaning GOP districts start losing and instead of a normal 50/50 split, they get creamed.
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
TermLimitTrump wants 6 years for House members and 12 for Senators.

We briefly discussed it earlier. I've yet to see any compelling arguments that term limits will do anything good.

Edit: Wait, as the length of the terms, or the total servable years?
 

studyguy

Member
I thought this debate was going to be seated at a table? FoxNews just did a walk through and it's duel lecterns again.

I'm surprised it isn't in a boxing ring.
CNN was airing commercials for it and they had the voice over from the movie/television guy calling it FIGHT OF THE CENTURY or something to that effect.
 

Joeytj

Banned
Can anyone give me a link to explain why the gerrymander might backfire on the Republicans,especially in a wave election? I'd be interested to learn more.

Dems are "locked out" of gerrymandered districts up to a certain point. If there is enough of a wave election, the dam breaks and a bunch of districts go blue at once.

Democratic voters are mostly urban, right? So, they slice Democratic districts and mix them (gerrymander) up with mostly Republican suburban neighborhoods and rural areas so as to dilute the power of Democratic voters in the cities.

Problem is, what happens when even suburbs start going blue or turnout is highest from Democratic voters? Diluting a voting bloc goes both ways, so now previously "safe" gerrymandered districts will be endangered because they also don't have 100% Republican voters.
 

SexyFish

Banned
I'm surprised it isn't in a boxing ring.
CNN was airing commercials for it and they had the voice over from the movie/television guy calling it FIGHT OF THE CENTURY or something to that effect.
Everytime that announcer comes on and I here some version of "IT ALL COMES DOWN TO THIS" I drink myself into a coma.
 
Can anyone give me a link to explain why the gerrymander might backfire on the Republicans,especially in a wave election? I'd be interested to learn more.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ig-gerrymander-could-backfire-in-a-major-way/

The Pennsylvania pattern holds up nationally, where the GOP holds numerous marginal districts. The chart below shows PVI ratings for all of the GOP’s House seats. Republicans hold 37 districts rated R+2 or lower and 18 at R+3 or R+4, for a total of 55 marginal districts. Democrats, by contrast, hold half as many.

the short story here is that to pack democrats into the fewest number of heavily democratic districts possible, the GOP had to dilute heavy republican districts to turn competitive "toss up" seats into "safe republican."

Think of it as having one R +10 district, one R +1 district- and redrawing lines so you have an R+6 and an R+5 district.

ordinarily these would be "safe republican" seats, and democrats would have a hell of a time flipping a seat that USED to be competitive.

in a wave election though where you inexplicably end up with democrats with a +8 or +9 turnout, BOTH republican seats end up getting wiped out instead of just the one that would have flipped otherwise.

they've created a ton of seats that are vulnerable to getting flipped, and eliminated a lot of their "heavily republican" seats that could stand up to that kind of wave.
 
@guycecil
.@prioritiesUSA will begin advertising on TV & African American radio in Georgia on Thursday as we continue to expand the map for Hillary.

Interesting that they're doing Georgia instead of Arizona.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Hillary 45
Trump 39

Fox News

Edit: It's not a big jump. He gained 1.
 
Thanks for the gerrymander explanation guys. So even if the Democrats win in 2016, they will most likely lose the majority in 2018. Hopefully they ram as much legislation as much as possible and then run on that with the expectation that they will lose. Maybe, just maybe,people will see what a working government is like...

But knowing Democrats and liberals, they will probably get cold feet again and try to neuter many of these legislations like what happened to Obamacare and then run away from thier own sitting president in 2018 and lose anyway.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom