• 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 |OT16| Unpresidented

Status
Not open for further replies.

Blader

Member
We were assured they had a massive ground game. What the fuck happened?

In hindsight, the ground game they talked up was in Florida, NC and the Philly area. And it worked in FL, but Trump managed to get rural whites to surge to the polls too.

It really was selfish for Hillary to run in the first place. She knew she had just spent 2 years giving paid speeches to financial firms. Her email situation was discovered 3 months before she announced and she knew how bad it was even if no one else did yet.

She could never land a clean hit on Trump without emails, speeches, and foundation being thrown in her face.

Hillary didn't think her email situation was bad -- she went the private server route in the first place because she didn't think it was a big deal. You can say both the server, and dismissing its importance to the campaign early on, were judgment errors. But it's not as if she thought, "Here's something that will really sink my campaign...but let's just forget about it!" She genuinely didn't think it was an issue.

I hope his big supporter trolls are pleased.

What IS the alt-right's position on net neutrality? I can't imagine guys who live on the internet would want this.

We've just got make sure no one can obliterate everyone else in the invisible primary again, I have no idea how we do it but it must be done.

Invisible primaries aren't end-all, be-all. Bernie still managed to shore up a pretty impressive amount of support, all things considered. And Jeb won the GOP's invisible primary last year, which amounted to absolutely nothing.
 
I'd be pretty interested in how much of Hillary's win in the invisible primary is because of institutional suppression of candidates and how much was loyalty to Hillary.
 

Ecotic

Member
Hillary knew she had a large enough jar of favors collected over 25 years to win the nomination easily enough.

The question she should have asked herself in January 2015 is "Am I a good candidate?" and "Is half the nation relying upon Democrats winning in 2016 and would they be totally fucked over if Democrats lost?"
 

PBY

Banned
Have to say - in hindsight, looks like the Ds were behind the times when it comes to certain tech. "They're" stories weren't tracking the way that fake news was, and the alt-right and certain far right groups had a fucking field day putting that stuff together and getting it to go viral.

Dems totally had no answer for this.
 

royalan

Member
I'd be pretty interested in how much of Hillary's win in the invisible primary is because of institutional suppression of candidates and how much was loyalty to Hillary.

It's probably a mix of things.

--Loyalty to Hillary. I mean, she's been working her ass off within the party for literally decades.

--Her name. Hillary Clinton is the biggest Democrat at the moment who's not named Obama.

I mean, people can talk all they want about invisible primaries and whatnot, but really... Who COULD have run against her? I have a hard time thinking of a Democrat Hillary wouldn't have bowled over. Biden? Maybe. But it wasn't Hillary that kept him out of the race.
 

Blader

Member
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/donald-trump-ethics-conflicts-231454

Discuss Trump's potential conflicts of interest. Trump is going to need to be really, really careful because the media, Democrats, and some Republicans is going to be salivating to find dirt on him.

Maybe it's my enduring bad mood about this, but given that Trump was elected to the presidency despite dozens of scandals he has accrued over his lifetime, and given that Republicans have majority control over all of Congress, I can't see any dirt or scandal or conflict of interest doing anything to him. He'll never acquiesce to that kind of pressure and congressional Republicans will never dole it out in the first place.
 
What IS the alt-right's position on net neutrality? I can't imagine guys who live on the internet would want this .

I don't get why Alt-rights or similar types tend to support Republicans anyway in any capacity . They are many, many views that the GOP holds that are against the Alt-right. I guess they want to change the GOP.

Maybe it's my enduring bad mood about this, but given that Trump was elected to the presidency despite dozens of scandals he has accrued over his lifetime, and given that Republicans have majority control over all of Congress, I can't see any dirt or scandal or conflict of interest doing anything to him. He'll never acquiesce to that kind of pressure and congressional Republicans will never dole it out in the first place.

There was a reason for the bothsides-ism . There is no Hillary now.
 

BiggNife

Member
Who would even be an invisible primary candidate at this point? Hillary isnt going to run again.

I guess Booker maybe, but I don't see him getting far in an Ellison led DNC.
 
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/donald-trump-ethics-conflicts-231454

Discuss Trump's potential conflicts of interest. Trump is going to need to be really, really careful because the media, Democrats, and some Republicans is going to be salivating to find dirt on him.

This is why I think Trump won't even last 4 years. There is so much conflict of interest here. Not to mention things like his proposed tax cuts directly benefiting the Trump corporation. He's in for a fight with establishment/moderate Republicans and obviously Democrats don't like him.

Even if he does last 4 years, the amount of stuff that could be used against him will be immense. Yuuuuge, even.
 
Who would even be an invisible primary candidate at this point? Hillary isnt going to run again.

I guess Booker maybe, but I don't see him getting far in an Ellison led DNC.

Gillibrand and Booker are the only invisible primary candidates who would have questionable results in the general.
 

Blader

Member
There was a reason for the bothsides-ism . There is no Hillary now.

they don't have Hillary anymore to focus on, they all think there is a Pulitzer prize somewhere in Trump's past.

What I meant was, if (realistically, when) a Trump scandal emerges in the next couple years, I don't trust anyone in government to act on it for Trump to suffer for it in any way. His supporters won't care, and Republicans have control of all three branches of government so of course they're going to plug their ears and not do anything.
 
It's probably a mix of things.

--Loyalty to Hillary. I mean, she's been working her ass off within the party for literally decades.

--Her name. Hillary Clinton is the biggest Democrat at the moment who's not named Obama.

I mean, people can talk all they want about invisible primaries and whatnot, but really... Who COULD have run against her? I have a hard time thinking of a Democrat Hillary wouldn't have bowled over. Biden? Maybe. But it wasn't Hillary that kept him out of the race.
2008 put her in the same position but there was a host of other strong candidates like Biden, Edwards, and Dodd and they all lost to a virtual nobody with little insitutional support. Bernie wasn't going to win after conceding the south but he still mustered huge primary support in spite of being a virtual unknown.

We don't know who might have done better because no one ran, but name recognition isn't insurmountable.
 
What are you even talking about?

The primary between Hillary and Bernie was really the most contentious in modern politics. He never had a chance, But Bernie effectively kept her from pivoting until June.

As for the other candidates, don't forget there were three others. Hillary didn't make them drop out early, they saw the writing on the wall running against a behemoth. That's not Hillary's fault.

It was more abnormal for the Republish primary to have 17+ candidates than it was for the Democrats to have 5.
It ended up that way but it wasn't designed to be contentious. I'm sure other Dems were out there that wanted to run but didn't out of respect for her. There were others but really no one with an actual chance of beating her or had any sort of connections that would have caused a split in support from the establishment threw their hat in. Think Warren wanted to but didn't want to take Hillary's thunder.

But nothing we can do about it now. can tell you we aren't going to have that same problem in 2020. Will be a clown car
 
Lo and behold the media suddenly starts coming up with a bunch of stories about the harsh realities of a Trump presidency as soon as they can't talk about Clinton's "scandals and emails" ad nauseum.
 
And now NBC is cheering how a white supremacist might be wallstreets biggest enemy.

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/markets/steve-bannon-could-be-wall-street-s-worst-enemy-n684941


Our media is dead and Trump will not get called out on anything over the next four years.

What the fuck can he do? He is basically Grima, but he has to deal with Congress who will deregulate and Trump is gonna sign probably. Trump also might put in bankers in certain spots as well.

This just says the executive branch and Congress is going to fight each other and within themselves.
 

jtb

Banned
The idea that Obama was a nobody with no institutional support in the 2008 campaign is revisionist history at this point. He was a huge star. The Illinois senate primary lasted like two years, where he destroyed a big field including a self-funded candidate who spent like $20m+, and then the DNC speech solidified his status. He was a great fundraiser, raised a lot of money for Dems in the 04 and 06 cycle.

Harry Reid wanted him to run. Tom Daschle wanted him to run. His pre-campaign book (Audacity of Hope) was a best-seller before he began his campaign. Everyone just pegged him as a 2012 or 2016 threat, not a 2008 one. Of course, he made the right decision in the end and struck when his stock was highest.
 

Debirudog

Member
Apparently Cesare said Obama was too soft against Clinton.

I feel like there's just no way of knowing who's going to be the next star for the presidency.
 
T

thepotatoman

Unconfirmed Member
http://www.gallup.com/poll/197462/americans-satisfaction-makes-turn.aspx

-qokblc4dksuw4y72wq2qa.png


Wonder how low we can go with things like this or Trump/Republican approval ratings.

I still can't believe how much power Trump and the Republicans have with such increadibly poor approval ratings.
 
Apparently Cesare said Obama was too soft against Clinton.

I feel like there's just no way of knowing who's going to be the next star for the presidency.

No, I said that in 2005/2006 when I started hearing about Obama being pressed to run in 08, I dismissed his chances because I thought he was too soft to take on the Clinton machine. I didn't believe he could win when I joined the campaign either.

Needless to say I was very wrong lol.
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Cxa-iFeWQAIbxza.jpg:large


This will come back to haunt Trump eventually, right? Like Barron posting the nuclear codes on /r/The_Donald.

Well, it's something that makes sense for everyone but Trump. Like you'd expect someone to talk something over with their significant other if it's bothering them.

We're totally going to find out about his top secret plan to invade Iran on /r/The_Donald though.
 

Debirudog

Member
No, I said that in 2005/2006 when I started hearing about Obama being pressed to run in 08, I dismissed his chances because I thought he was too soft to take on the Clinton machine. I didn't believe he could win when I joined the campaign either.

Needless to say I was very wrong lol.

Yeah, I knew what you said, it was bad wording on my part. Just feels like we'll never know who's the next star gonna be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom