• 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 |OT2| we love the poorly educated

Status
Not open for further replies.

sangreal

Member
CcVuBX3WoAAZ8cK.jpg

Jeb Bush called, he want's his answer back
 
I feel like the media is just trying anything they can at this point. Of all the things Trump has said, him not condemning David Duke quickly and strongly enough is the big controversy? Just doesn't make sense.
 

Makai

Member
where is kharvey to tell us we are all idiots for doubting nate and trump will collapse any day?

It really says something when Cruz and Rubio can't even hit Ben Carson numbers let alone Trump numbers
The last thing I saw them say in like December was that he was always incredibly unlikely and now he is slightly likelier but still incredibly unlikely. I think most of those guys are going to say there was always a small chance he would win and God rolled the dice.
 
I feel like the media is just trying anything they can at this point. Of all the things Trump has said, him not condemning David Duke quickly and strongly enough is the big controversy? Just doesn't make sense.

I mean "I don't want to condemn a group without looking into them" when you're talking about the Klan is clearly white supremacist winking. Even Trump fans can figure that one out.
 
The last thing I saw them say in like December was that he was always incredibly unlikely and now he is slightly likelier but still incredibly unlikely. I think most of those guys are going to say there was always a small chance he would win and God rolled the dice.

They'll say Nate's methods were right and that no one could have predicted this. Despite plenty of people having predicted it as early as last Summer.
 

Diablos

Member
So 30% of Sanders supporters would refuse to vote for the Democratic nominee in the general election - disregarding the overestimation factor anyway. I feel an OT thread coming on.
Was it this bad during the height of angst between Hillary and Obama back in 2008?
 

sangreal

Member
Was it this bad during the height of angst between Hillary and Obama back in 2008?

worse

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...-half-of-clintons-supporters-wont-back-obama/

According to the exit polls, half of Clinton's supporters in Indiana would not vote for Obama in a general election match up with John McCain. A third of Clinton voters said they would pick McCain over Obama, while 17 percent said they would not vote at all. Just 48 percent of Clinton supporters said they would back Obama in November.

that's just indiana but rinse and repeat across the states

e: just thought I should point out that Obama ultimately won Indiana
 

sphagnum

Banned
Was it this bad during the height of angst between Hillary and Obama back in 2008?

First result on Google:

According to the exit polls, half of Clinton's supporters in Indiana would not vote for Obama in a general election match up with John McCain. A third of Clinton voters said they would pick McCain over Obama, while 17 percent said they would not vote at all. Just 48 percent of Clinton supporters said they would back Obama in November.

Obama gets even less support from Clinton backers in North Carolina. There, only 45 percent of Clinton supporters said they would vote for Obama over McCain. Thirty-eight percent said they would vote for McCain while 12 percent said they would not vote.

Obama voters appear to be more willing to support Clinton in November. In Indiana, 59 percent of Obama backers said they'd vote for Clinton, and 70 percent of Obama backers in North Carolina said they'd support the New York Democrat.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...-half-of-clintons-supporters-wont-back-obama/
 
Was it this bad during the height of angst between Hillary and Obama back in 2008?

This is also a higher number than we've seen in other polls. Either you just more 'intense' support online or Sanders' supporters are struggling with the fact that Clinton's going to win.
 
On behalf of Hillary 08 supporters, I apologize for anyone who had to deal with one of us who said they wouldn't support Obama. I know PUMAs didn't really exist, but the very concept pisses me off.
 

HylianTom

Banned
Occasionally, a random figure from the GOP shows up and has an absolute filthy mouth. You're not going to hear this kind of stuff on the shows.
That's one of my favorite features of the chat.

My fingers are crossed that someday Scalia's Ghost hangs-out with us on Super Tuesday; he can tell us what he really thinks, and maybe he can give us a sneak-peek at the afterlife!
 
In an article about Trump impugning the integrity of the judge presiding over his case for being Latino.
A one-year apprenticeship that Trump University students were promised ended after students paid for a three-day seminar. Attendees who were promised a personal photo with Trump received only the chance to take a photo with a cardboard cutout. And many instructors were bankrupt real estate investors.
Classic.
 

Araris

Neo Member
Was it this bad during the height of angst between Hillary and Obama back in 2008?

Yes, I believe the polling average back in 2008 had it at 38% of Hillary supporters saying they wouldn't vote for President Obama. Given the mentioned poll saying 33% of Sanders supporters wouldn't vote for Secretary Clinton I want to point out that another poll from last week had it at 17% so it's probably somewhere between those two numbers atm. At the end of the day I'd expect at least 9/10 of his supporters to vote for the Secretary.
 
They'll say Nate's methods were right and that no one could have predicted this. Despite plenty of people having predicted it as early as last Summer.

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/703714652098846720

‏@NateSilver538
"With the exception of the 2016 election," will be a common phrase in PhD dissertations in 2044.

Yeah, pretty much.

I do think that Silver can have valuable things to say, but he needs to realize that being given a platform has given him the illusion that his opinions are particularly important, i.e., he's turned into a pundit. He also needs to at least explore the possibility that his model of the primaries was wrong. Now I'm actually sympathetic to the idea that people often misunderstand probabilistic forecasts, and in particular that if a good model says that something is unlikely to happen, well, you should still expect it to happen sometimes. That having been said, if the first time you deploy your model it whiffs big time, you need to accept the idea that the model could be wrong and it wasn't just bad luck.

Honestly though, I'm not sure he has the humility to do either.
 
2008 featured a once in a generation candidate, and Hillary Clinton. The race energized the democrat party, plus it happened two years after an unpopular president spurred major midterm victories for democrats. The stage was set for a historic primary.

There is very little excitement or interest in 2016's race because everyone knows who is going to win, and the field was/is incredibly weak.

In short I wouldn't extrapolate low primary turnout to the general election for democrats. It's going to be a huge election. I can't wait until convention week. Assuming Trump is the nominee, imagine the disaster the RNC will be - from the prime time speakers to everything else. Compared to Bill Clinton, President Obama, and Hillary Clinton at the DNC.
 
Notice, Rubio never said he would win the delegates, just that he'd get them. I wonder if the GOP thinks it would be better to steal this thing with Rubio and ride the shit storm of Trump than to just let Trump burn the whole thing down.
 

NeoXChaos

Member
2008 featured a once in a generation candidate, and Hillary Clinton. The race energized the democrat party, plus it happened two years after an unpopular president spurred major midterm victories for democrats. The stage was set for a historic primary.

There is very little excitement or interest in 2016's race because everyone knows who is going to win, and the field was/is incredibly weak.

In short I wouldn't extrapolate low primary turnout to the general election for democrats. It's going to be a huge election. I can't wait until convention week. Assuming Trump is the nominee, imagine the disaster the RNC will be - from the prime time speakers to everything else. Compared to Bill Clinton, President Obama, and Hillary Clinton at the DNC.

Is there any truth to this?

Alex Seitz-Wald ‏@aseitzwald 24m24 minutes ago
@mshew @sahilkapur @neeratanden just wait until Romney, Dole, Tim Scott, Rubio, Bush etc. etc. endorse Trump. Partisans will rationalize it.
 

sangreal

Member
Notice, Rubio never said he would win the delegates, just that he'd get them. I wonder if the GOP thinks it would be better to steal this thing with Rubio and ride the shit storm of Trump than to just let Trump burn the whole thing down.

even the brokered convention fantasy doesn't work out. The pluarlity of the delegates there will be trump diehards and the majority will probably be people at least willing to consider trump. The delegates are not controlled by the RNC
 
Notice, Rubio never said he would win the delegates, just that he'd get them. I wonder if the GOP thinks it would be better to steal this thing with Rubio and ride the shit storm of Trump than to just let Trump burn the whole thing down.

Trump voters (id say all of them are republican) would both disown the GOP and not even vote, or trump would run 3rd party and it would be a sure in for Hillary.

That's actually the easiest way for us to win a lot in congress and presidency.
 
What's amazing is that Bush dropping out has had no virtually no effect on Rubio's numbers.

by the time bush dropped out, his support was in the low single digits anyway. what do you expect to happen when someone polling at 4% or so nationally gives up?

nothing at all. Might as well expect Fiorina and Santorum dropping out to swing the race.
 

A Human Becoming

More than a Member
Nate Silver's "but if so-and-so drops out, Trump can't win!" line is gone. No more.
You're not being entirely fair here. That's generally what happens in this thread regarding Nate Silver.

Five Thirty Eight is all about looking at data and being skeptical. Nate has been questioning for a while whether Trump has a low ceiling. That's different than saying he'll lose once the field narrows. His thinking now is more that Trump has a solid floor with the potential to expand.

People take any possibility he mentions as his belief. When new information arises he reconsiders his position. I'm not saying his rationale is purely based on data, but it's more so than most.
 
What's funny is this "drop out to consolidate" strategy was what Scott Walker proposed when he dropped out. That was on September 21st. He may have been right.

But it's too late now.
 
even the brokered convention fantasy doesn't work out. The pluarlity of the delegates there will be trump diehards and the majority will probably be people at least willing to consider trump. The delegates are not controlled by the RNC

Ya, I don't have the numbers on how it would work, unless the establishment stacks the delegate selection process or something. I don't know how the GOP picks their actual delegates, though.

Trump voters (id say all of them are republican) would both disown the GOP and not even vote, or trump would run 3rd party and it would be a sure in for Hillary.

That's actually the easiest way for us to win a lot in congress and presidency.

Oh, I believe they're fucked either way. No question. However, I think Trump is more toxic to the brand than just 2016. I mean, we still throw Palin in their face 8 years later. We could run on the party of Trump for another cycle. I think that the GOP is going to go into prevent defense mode. If they feel they'll lose it all, they'll cut off an arm or a leg to save the whole.

What's funny is this "drop out to consolidate" strategy was what Scott Walker proposed when he dropped out. That was on September 21st. He may have been right.

But it's too late now.

Did it cause you physical pain to realize Scott Walker may have been right on something, or was that just me?
 
Was it this bad during the height of angst between Hillary and Obama back in 2008?
It was so bad that the fact that Obama turned around, made her Secretary of State and now they are so close they are practically Rey and Finn from Star Wars kinda opened my eyes as to what kind of person you have to be in order to be a politician. It's like real life WWE. I don't doubt for a second even if Bernie goes scorched earth on Hillary as she pulls away that they won't make up and be buddy buddy in the general. She'll probably even offer him a cabinate position if he wants it (don't think he will)
 

NeoXChaos

Member
It was so bad that the fact that Obama turned around, made her Secretary of State and now they are so close they are practically Rey and Finn from Star Wars kinda opened my eyes as to what kind of person you have to be in order to be a politician. It's like real life WWE. I don't doubt for a second even if Bernie goes scorched earth on Hillary as she pulls away that they won't make up and be buddy buddy in the general. She'll probably even offer him a cabinate position if he wants it (don't think he will)

Bernie will be a thorn in Hillary's side in the senate. She should get him out and into the cabinet
 

HylianTom

Banned
Yeah, Bill Clinton was my first vote. Imagine how geeked I was when Louisiana went blue. My uncles were extra-bitter a few weeks later at Thanksgiving; they largely blamed women. In a way, it was hysterical.

I want Republicans to try and steal it from Trump at the convention just so I can see Trump's reaction

The great thing: we'll know beforehand if something's up because the RNC's rules committee meets one week before the convention itself begins. If Trump has enough delegates to win nomination during the first floor vote and the committee suddenly changes the rules so that delegates are no longer bound to honor state votes on the first ballot, we'll know in advance that the convention will go bonkers with foul play.
 

Owzers

Member
It's going to look real funny if Rubio endorses Trump after calling him a con man

I was watching a little bit of Rubio's rally, i find this whole thing to be pathetic. Don't follow that guy who says he can make your life better, follow me! Trump's bankrupted four companies, while i make a nice salary and don't manage my money well, and i don't even show up to my job anymore because i want this one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom