-
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
- Thread starter Makai
- Start date
- Status
can someone explain to me what the "Draft Romney" movement is? I've heard many rumors recently saying Rubio may lose his support to a Romney-backed movement, but what does that even mean? Is Romney then in the primary race all of a sudden by April or something? Is he just the mouthpiece representing the RNC in a doomsday scenario of a Trump nomination? both sound fucking wild to me
gutter_trash
Banned
I think you need to insert quotation marks on that word lol.
From a quick googling it looks like a movement for Romney to enter the race as the establishment surrogate. Not sure why they would bother with a wet noodle like Romney but hey, forethought obviously hasn't one of their strong suits.
Why? Saddam Hussein is more liberal than Bill Clinton so I think it's fine. Really Bill Clinton is more of an Iranian politician. Hillary is to the slight left of khameni.
FloydtheFathead
Member
I kinda feel sorry for him.. Truly I do. There is no good way out for him either..
But then I think of 2012 and going back to the well with all the bullshit.. And then I don't.
Yes, the movement is real. Ridiculous, given that he's a twice loser already.
Everything is looking good for the Dems indeed.
User 463088
Banned
Oh Lord, I'm reading that Reddit thread of the people who are calling Mass. These people are not serious. You don't push like this a day before the election. These should be confirmed supporters and it should be GOTV. They're bragging about going off script. Oh Lord.....
It sure is easy when the counter arguments put forth are absolute caricatures.
Obama just gave them a clear path to nuclear weapons.
Ya, since they didn't have a clear path before we took away the majority of their centrifuges, Uranium/Plutonium stockpiles, Plutonium plants, and have the threat of constant inspections.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
The Past Frontrunner infographic has finally flipped over to having every frontrunner at this point leading from here on out.
https://twitter.com/pastfrontrunner/status/704305197846167553?lang=en
Interesting how Trump obtained his frontrunner status way, way before all 4 of those guys. Guess this election season was more 2000 than 2008 or 2012.
https://twitter.com/pastfrontrunner/status/704305197846167553?lang=en
Interesting how Trump obtained his frontrunner status way, way before all 4 of those guys. Guess this election season was more 2000 than 2008 or 2012.
User 463088
Banned
Hillary is 55/38 in the CNN poll, btw. Didn't see that posted. Swing of +3 to her since the last poll.
Because the guy who was incessantly hyped for being the only viable establishment candidate continues to be an empty suit who doesn't come remotely close to living up to expectations.
His robotic behavior was bad enough. Over the weekend he tried to steal smear tactics out of Trump's playbook and it just made him look petty and desperate. Dick jokes, really? He's a pathetic whiny empty suit; a loser who has a very dim future in politics.
brainchild
Banned
Even I don't do this. You must like torturing yourself.
Cesare Borgia
Banned
A couple years ago I would have said Mark Warner but that seems unlikely after his near loss in 2014. Perhaps Tim Kaine though? It's a safe pick but from an electoral perspective it would be very hard for Hillary to lose the election if she wins Virginia. Another safe, even less exciting pick would be Tom Vilsack. I can think of a few similar picks in that mold.
The problem is that the democrat bench isn't impressive right now, and perhaps the most exciting candidates are stationed in safe blue states: Cory Booker and Kamala Harris. Hillary will likely look for someone young-ish and exciting. I just don't buy the Julian Castro idea, which seems too cynical to me; it's the the type of move I'd expect from a desperate campaign, not one poised to win. Plus he's from Texas and isn't particularly exciting.
User 463088
Banned
They're calling people after 9:00! They're going off script on GOTV calls. They're arguing for 40 minutes with Cruz supporters.
I can't. This is one of those times when well meaning volunteers hurt rather than help.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
They'll only replace him with someone similar that will continue going against the will of the base. I'm quite fascinated by this circumstance--the constant catering to the rich is finally coming back to bite the GOP. The lower- and middle-class GOP base are the Trump voters.
User 463088
Banned
Cesare Borgia
Banned
I'd bet money that when Reince steps down in November or December he'll be replaced by a woman. Perhaps even Fiorina...
RustyNails
Member
The old guard still has lot of power and Khamanei is the final dictator. They disbarred Ayatollah Khomenie's (the original revolutionary) son from running because he is a reformist. They feared Khomenie's son would delegitimize Khamanei and the ruling elites.
User 463088
Banned
Donald Trump giving a concession speech after Hillary wins the Electoral College by more votes than Obama did in 2008. We've taken back the Senate....and gotten damn close in the House.
BELIEVE.
Hahahaha
The Barre Montpelier Times Argus (Newspaper serving the capital of Vermont) endorsed Hillary over Bernie.
Hahahahahaha.
Snowman Prophet of Doom
Member
Nobody knew just HOW weak the too-many GOP candidates would end up being, how divided and bitter the Republican constituency really is, and how little substance a candidate could bring to the table and still attract a large mass of followers. It's their fault for not consolidating behind a single candidate six months ago when it became clear Trump had a hardcore following that would buoy him, it's their fault for rigging their primaries in such a way as to consolidate delegates for the person who leads after Super Tuesday, and it's their fault for not only not modulating on illegal immigration, but getting MORE hardcore on it over time such that a racist douchebag like Trump would eventually drive over the cliff on it. Trump hasn't ascended on the virtue of his own strengths, he's gamed the system to his advantage, and will probably damage the national reputation of the Republican party for at LEAST a decade. It's just wonderful, like how Republicans would feel if Kanye were in the same position.
I want Reince to dish on TV when he's done. Michael Steele has surprised me as one of MSNBC's most entertaining commentators, and watching him react to this season has been a real treat; you can almost see the thought bubble over his head: "thank GOD I'm not tangled-up in this shite!"
What's really surreal and illustrative of the GOP's problem: I can see party leaders and figureheads hyperventilating on TV and Twitter, and then I can go to Breitbart or FreeRepublic and see portions of the party base just shrugging it off and cheering Trump on.
The case studies of former front runners who fell off I think lead a lot of people (Nate Silver) to mislead themselves about the strength of Trump's support all along. This is one of the main reasons why it drives me insane how shallow Silver's analysis was this cycle and how people kept defending him despite that. Trump had near universal name recognition, consistently falling negatives, and incredibly robust support (Like 25 points in an incredibly crowded field, which almost never fell). His early leads were a sign of strength for a variety of reasons, but a lot of pundits like Silver couldn't look at it past the perspective of recent historical anecdotes. Which I guess makes sense given how fresh 2012 was (even comparing to 2012 made no sense for SO MANY reasons). And of course, part of the problem is limited sample size for presidential elections. But a real discussion of Trump's support would have looked at historical robustness conditional on high name recognition, it would have acknowledged the trend of his falling negatives and asked how that effects things, and it would have looked at how media mentions affect final voting, and it would have looked for thresholds where the electorate stopped looking back.
Instead we got lazy shit talking about "Lots of people decide in the last week, therefore we can ignore everything", obviously terrible analogies with Giuliani, underpants gnomes theories about Rubio consolidation, and irrelevant bragging on meaningless numbers to make Trump's support seem smaller than it really is ("he has 25% support of a very small share of the total electorate no one should be impressed by this!").
Silver really became his own worst enemy this cycle, and exposed his severe limitations as an analyst. It's not clear he's actually capable of doing anything aside from running a simple regression, applying Bayes rule, and running his mouth like the rest of the media circus. Maybe he should join politico?
Spoiled Milk
Banned
What is this inter thread chaos
Also, maybe someone should have locked that topic. It went pretty nuts.
VendettaRed07
Member
Hillary speaking in Mass today
Going for the kill; I like it.
Going for the kill; I like it.
Elaugaufein
Member
Because it's a nuclear option. Their goal in the case Trump gets the nomination isn't to win the Presidency , it's to motivate non-Trump Rs to turn out and vote R down ticket by giving them a candidate they can turn out to back, while Trump Rs vote R down ticket too. That gives them the votes to hold the House/Senate even if their electoral college numbers are best represented as a smoking crater.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Ever since Reagan became the establishment in 1980 I think people have gotten too caught up in the idea that the establishment always wins.
It's more like between 1980 and 2000 the establishment candidates were popular and now they're not.
It's more like between 1980 and 2000 the establishment candidates were popular and now they're not.
GregLombardi
Member
He is speaking the truth now?
He really doesn't have a clue, does he?
It's like he's just throwing darts at a board hoping something will stick.
FloydtheFathead
Member
CNN plastering David Duke all over their screen and Hewitt is the embodiment of the It's Fine Dog..
I meant just picking someone who has in recent memory completely failed to take down a sitting president in a pretty sad campaign. If you are going to go nuclear, pick someone who isn't obviously a loser. Though I guess they wouldn't want to waste young blood that might be tainted on defying their constituents wishes that they could possibly use to run in the future.
VendettaRed07
Member
Funny hearing all the people saying how the David duke thing has disqualified Trump
Says a lot about you if he hadn't been disqualified already
Says a lot about you if he hadn't been disqualified already
gutter_trash
Banned
A dictator being left on social programs and socio-economics does not make him a Liberal.
Liberalism is much more than socio-economics.
It's all about rights, equality and freedom of speech
*** edt, or did my sarcasm meter not go off?
BoboBrazil
Member
Damn all the news channels are playing this David Duke/Trump comment. He needs to get in front of this and have a news conference today or its going to cost him the election.
What's cynical?
Macho Madness
Member
Since 2004 in both parties, everyone who was leading in the polls as of today went on to win the nomination.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked