• 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.
Except the flip side of that is the massive portion of the base who voted for Trump will view it as a direct attack on them, further damaging relations within thr republican party, and possibly leading to a schism.

not if the candidate (say, romney) runs as an independent without explicit party blessing. publicly the RNC says "it's trump", behind the scenes Romney gets the establishment backing and superPAC support.

It's win/win for the GOP and there is no way it doesn't happen.

edit: not saying its going to be Romney because I think twice is enough for that guy, but i can see someone similar making a run at it. maybe even kasich.

Why the hell are the last Florida polls two weeks old? Geeze.

And Ohio is even older!

come on Kev, you're better than this.

Super Tuesday is such a massive event that it would substantially change the results of any poll conducted prior. There's literally no point to running polls before then. I imagine we'll have a flood of them shortly.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Why the hell are the last Florida polls two weeks old? Geeze.

And Ohio is even older!

Frequent debates and Super Tuesday would have made a poll like that useless.
 
It will do more than demonstrate that. It will hand the Republicans the White House.

While I agree he shouldn't because it would be dangerous its far from guaranteed at the moment considering you could see Trump (R/I/T) vs not-Trump (I/R/G) running as well. At which point Bloomberg might throw in too (Doubtful , would probably back Hillary in this situation). Then you've got a highly unpredictable clusterfuck.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
While I agree he shouldn't because it would be dangerous its far from guaranteed at the moment considering you could see Trump (R/I/T) vs not-Trump (I/R/G) running as well. At which point Bloomberg might throw in too (Doubtful , would probably back Hillary in this situation). At which point you've got a highly unpredictable clusterfuck.

I still don't think Bloomberg would get the 15% needed to be included in debates. Romney would, though.
 
I still don't think Bloomberg would get the 15% needed to be included in debates. Romney would, though.

Romney has family issues though. Ann Romney has MS IIRC, and the last election took a lot out of her. she ALMOST put the kibosh on his 2012 run, no way he gets the green light for 2016.
 
No.

Space weapon treaty deals with WMDs only. Lasers and conventional weapons are fair game.

You'd probably have to confine their operation pretty carefully , I'm reasonably sure that using lasers to blind is actually forbidden. But as long as they are for shooting down missiles you're probably good.
 
One thing about last night's debate is that NeoNazis really hated Trump flip-flopping again on HB1s and NeoNazis are not an insignificant group of Trump's voters. Could have some impact.
 

Grief.exe

Member
Good opinion pieces by Krugman and Biden today in the New York Times.

Excerpt from the Krugman piece

Equally important, the Trump phenomenon threatens the con of the GOP establishment that has been playing on its own base. I'm talking about the bait and switch in which white voters are induced to hate big government by dog whistles about Those People, but actual policies are all about rewarding the donor class.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Why would last night be a game changer? Rubio hit him way harder and more effectively in the last debate, not this one. It's like people forgot how bad that one was. Was it just Megan jelly?
 
Why would last night be a game changer? Rubio hit him way harder and more effectively in the last debate, not this one. It's like people forgot how bad that one was. Was it just Megan jelly?

who said last night was a game changer? These debates have long since run into "diminishing returns" territory.

no argument anyone can make up there is going to change the minds of the Trump people.
 
Why would last night be a game changer? Rubio hit him way harder and more effectively in the last debate, not this one. It's like people forgot how bad that one was. Was it just Megan jelly?

Not sure about game changer but it feels like it hurts Trump. Whether Rubio benefits or Cruz or Kasich (my pick) not sure. Reading recaps I think Cruz/Kasich did a better job of why someone should vote for them, Rubio just is there as the anti-trump but did nothing to sell himself.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Why would last night be a game changer? Rubio hit him way harder and more effectively in the last debate, not this one. It's like people forgot how bad that one was. Was it just Megan jelly?

If it was, it is because Fox News actually did their job and used real statistics and video. It's easy to deflect when that isn't there.
 

Grief.exe

Member
who said last night was a game changer? These debates have long since run into "diminishing returns" territory.

no argument anyone can make up there is going to change the minds of the Trump people.

The media might run with that narrative to attempt to derail Trump.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
At first the comparison between Paul voters and Bernie voters was strong, but I don't remember Paul voters reacting this badly when they knew it was over.
 

HylianTom

Banned
One of my favorite parts of that Nate Cohn analysis? Rubio would likely end-up winning just 3 more states, falling 4 short of the number required to even be eligible for the nomination ballot in Cleveland.

===

I feel bad for normal Bernie supporters. That's some embarrassing shit.
 

Fox318

Member
I honestly think the Dems need more debates and more media coverage.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz probably thinks that Vanna White effect strategy is going to work and I'd disagree with that.
 

CCS

Banned
I would like to see a Venn diagram showing the militants sanders crew and gamergate people.

Fun story: I was on one of the top r/sandersforpresident posts a couple of days ago (can't remember which one) and in some of the replies to the top comment people were defending gamergate. Now I'm certain this is only a very vocal minority but still, not a good look at all.
 
I would like to see a Venn diagram showing the militants sanders crew and gamergate people.

Venn Diagram? I think we call that one just a "circle"

I honestly think the Dems need more debates and more media coverage.

Good LORD no. If anything the republicans need less. There is so much damaging crap that's part of the permanent record now that none of them have a shot at the general.
 

GuyKazama

Member
A number of Republican opinion columns I've read today have moved out of the denial phase. For example:

Peggy Noonan said:
The GOP elite is about to spend a lot of money and hire a lot of talent, quickly, to try to kill Trump off the next two weeks. There will be speeches, ads—an onslaught. It will no doubt do Mr. Trump some damage, but not much.

It will prove to Trump supporters that what they think is true—their guy is the only one who will stand up to the establishment, so naturally the establishment is trying to kill him. And Trump supporters don’t seem to have that many illusions about various aspects of his essential character. One of them told me he’s “a junkyard dog.”

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/20...me_the_gop_will_never_be_the_same_377566.html
 
I would like to see a Venn diagram showing the militants sanders crew and gamergate people.

That's not really fair...it's not like the only demographic group Bernie wins consistently is young, white, single men....and it's not like he wins that group by 30(ish) points...../s
 

NeoXChaos

Member
Ccts_oWWIAA2F49.jpg:large
 
That's not really fair...it's not like the only demographic group Bernie wins consistently is young, white, single men....and it's not like he wins that group by 30(ish) points...../s

Yes because all white, single males are members of GamerGate. There's absolutely nothing irrational about the automatic assumption your opponents are sexist.
 
The only person stupid enough to accept Trump's vp offer will be someone with no political future. So probably Little Marco.

Rubio absolutely does. there was speculation he was looking at a gubernatorial run in the future before Bush imploded leaving him the only viable "establishment" candidate.

That could still happen.

Christie makes more sense here. He's done with being governor of NJ, and there's not a lot of places for him to go- congressman or senator doesn't make sense, and cabinet position only works if a republican he's close to gets into the white house.

Alternatively, i imagine that Trump has a lot of connections in the NJ/NY business world for chris christie to exploit in the private sector when this doesn't pan out.
 
Yes because all white, single males are members of GamerGate. There's absolutely nothing irrational about the automatic assumption your opponents are sexist.

That's not what was being said or argued.

Y2Kev was talking about the militant Sander's supporters, the ones that I think 99% of Bernie supporters would disavow. Of those people, I would argue that a vast majority are white, straight males. White, single males is the only group Bernie has won consistently, and by huge margins. I believe it was by 39% points in Mass.

I don't think all Bernie supporters are sexist. I think some Bernie supporters are sexist based on some of the vile things that have been spewed online about Hillary. It's not a large number of them. It's probably very small. They just happen to have large mouths, and we hear about them more than the majority of Bernie supporters who are quite lovely people.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
I said militant and I meant it. I don't have any issue with Bernie supporters! I think the roving band of Internet vigilantes though is very familiar.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom