• 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 |OT4| Tyler New Chief Exit Pollster at CNN

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sigh. Maybe I'm being too sensitive about this after all. Maybe BernieBro isn't really a thing worth arguing about. I just see it as a spectrum. On one end is "You must call someone by whatever ridiculous list of titles they want you to" and on the other is "Don't call people things that they feel insulted by." I guess we just disagree on where BernieBro lands.
Remember those early days when Tea Partiers cluelessly self-identified as Teabaggers? Good times.
 
I think its highly likely Hilary wins close in Arizona against Trump, Georgia she will at least close the margins (maybe get around 48% 49%), and NC shes pretty much expected to win right? demographics will say as much. I wonder how well she can do in South Carolina, Obama got 44% in both 08 and 12 so I think she can do better but probably still lose.

like you said if the order of turning democratic is: Virginia-North Carolina- Georgia- then South Carolina is next right? In the South East at least.
SC would probably be next yeah. Then Texas.

MS and AL are also two states to look out for - very high floor/very low ceiling states for the Democrats because of significant AA populations, but the white vote breaks 90-10 for the GOP.
 

ivysaur12

Banned
SC would probably be next yeah. Then Texas.

MS and AL are also two states to look out for - very high floor/very low ceiling states for the Democrats because of significant AA populations, but the white vote breaks 90-10 for the GOP.

The DAY MS and AL go blue is a day I was laugh at the fucking racists that thought the Southern Strategy would work out longterm.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
 
Honestly, most celebrities are when they enter these things. No matter who they support, even Hillary.

They mostly live in a bubble so it's not surprising.

katy-perry-story_647_102515050053.jpg


TAKE IT BACK.
 
The DAY MS and AL go blue is a day I was laugh at the fucking racists that thought the Southern Strategy would work out longterm.

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
It will indeed be a glorious day, but it did work for them for quite some time. Between 1969 and 1993 Democrats only held the White House for one term.

The real blunder was not dropping that shit like a hot potato as soon as Bill Clinton came in.
 
Honestly, most celebrities are when they enter these things. No matter who they support, even Hillary.

They mostly live in a bubble so it's not surprising.
Hey 🐥🐣's, Have Lovely Day☀️ Sunday's great 2Go 2 Movie W/Frnds Walk on beach Visit Family Eat🎂😂 Clean Drawers 💋Sum1 Love Yourself B a frnd
 
Hey ����'s, Have Lovely Day☀️ Sunday's great 2Go 2 Movie W/Frnds Walk on beach Visit Family Eat���� Clean Drawers ��Sum1 Love Yourself B a frnd

tumblr_inline_mx73ooLzD51s1vy8w.gif


WHY IS WRESTLE MANIA ON MY��LINE⁉️IS THERE
ANYTHING ABOUT ME THAT SCREAMS,NECK SCISSORS,
IRON CLAW,OR HALF NELSON��⁉IM MORE LIP LOCK & SPOON
 

HylianTom

Banned
oh my god

brb reinstalling Civ V.

Same here. I've played hundreds, if not thousands, of hours on that game. It ended-up being so damn good.


And I'd argue that while the Tea Party has seen impressive success in non-presidential years, they've also pushed the GOP too far right to win a general election. Loss of SCOTUS essentially means that they can win win win all they want at lower levels and off-years, but a hard federal judicial limit will essentially veto their efforts to go too far to the right. It's like having gutter bumpers only on the right side of the political bowling lane.

State GOP: "Here's our new backwards-ass law."
Lefty federal judiciary: "LOL, nope."
State GOP: "Dammit."
{*repeat*}

For the GOP, they have to consider: are you okay with dominating non-Presidential contests - at the expense of limiting how far to the right your success can carry you?

For the Dems, it's a bit more complicated: Bernie and his compatriots have not demonstrated an ability to drive turnout such that they'd offer similar non-Presidential dominance. In fact, they've demonstrated relatively little interest in races that don't have Bernie's name on the ballot! Given the GOP's ongoing federal implosion and the drip drip drip of demographics, we know that the country's political center of gravity - along this trajectory - will continue moving leftward. So why risk upsetting this trajectory by pushing a Leftist Tea Party?
 

Captain Pants

Killed by a goddamned Dredgeling
Assuming this year goes well, Hillary is President, etc. What does 2020 look like? I imagine the anti-Obama crowd will continue beating the same drum they have for the last 8 years just with anti-women dogwhistles instead of racial ones, but if the GOP gets crushed this year and we follow it up with four more years of competent governance, who can they nominate that stands a chance in 2020? I honestly think the GOP establishment needs Trump to take the fall this year if they want to regain their party. The crazy wing needs to take a big loss, a big direct hit, if they are going to shut up. If they steal the nomination from Trump and still lose in November, that just means that the party will keep pushing for a 'true' conservative.

I'm not saying that Trump losing this year helps them to be a nationally relevant party in 2020, because I don't see how they bounce back from this year that quickly, but I do think the Tea Party needs to get dashed upon the rocks in a national election, rather than the GOP Convention in order for them to fade away.

My dumbdumb predictions for 2020 is that if they nominate Kasich or someone of his ilk in place of Cruz or Trump this year, they'll just be back in four years... Or even better, they'll get a Palin, Bachman or a Fiorina in
2020 to try and sway women. I think that if they let Trump or Cruz take their shot at it, then they'll be able to safely go back to Romney-esque types in 2020, and that the time might finally be right for a boring moderate Republican to appeal to swing voters.

That said, I think Hillary will fill Obama's shoes nicely and that the country continues gradually shift left after 12 years of solid Democratic leadership.
 
Ya'll need to get your asses on Cher's twitter if you need help understanding the election.

Cher ‏@cher Mar 31
TRUMP SAYS"HE WOULDNT DEFINITELY WRITE OFF OPTION OF USING NUCLEAR WEAPONS ON EUROPE" On Chris Matthews.
SO TRUMP WOULD NUKE FRANCE⁉️ITALY⁉️

Cher ‏@cher Mar 30
TOO LATE TRUMP‼️EVERY
TIME I THINK U'VE SUNK AS LOW AS U CAN,U SINK LOWER☠HOW SHOULD WE B PUNISHED.WHIPPING,
WATER BOARDING,��'D AT STAKE⁉️

Cher ‏@cher Mar 28
Who'd Think a % Of ����icans,
Want lgbt Banned in����,R Anti
Women,Voting Rights,Latinos,
Muslims. Pro kkk,Say Slavery
Wasn't a bad Idea?
TRUMP☠


THIS IS THE BEST ONE EVER

Cher ‏@cher Mar 29
If trump Gets Bent,When 2 Small Women Get Rough With His Precious Little EGO&FEELINGS.WHATS HE GOING 2 DO WHEN TOUGH MEN,YANK HIS����PEEPEE⁉️
 
Same here. I've played hundreds, if not thousands, of hours on that game. It ended-up being so damn good.


And I'd argue that while the Tea Party has seen impressive success in non-presidential years, they've also pushed the GOP too far right to win a general election. Loss of SCOTUS essentially means that they can win win win all they want at lower levels and off-years, but a hard federal judicial limit will essentially veto their efforts to go too far to the right. It's like having gutter bumpers only on the right side of the political bowling lane.

State GOP: "Here's our new backwards-ass law."
Lefty federal judiciary: "LOL, nope."
State GOP: "Dammit."
{*repeat*}

For the GOP, they have to consider: are you okay with dominating non-Presidential contests - at the expense of limiting how far to the right your success can carry you?

For the Dems, it's a bit more complicated: Bernie and his compatriots have not demonstrated an ability to drive turnout such that they'd offer similar non-Presidential dominance. In fact, they've demonstrated relatively little interest in races that don't have Bernie's name on the ballot! Given the GOP's ongoing federal implosion and the drip drip drip of demographics, we know that the country's political center of gravity - along this trajectory - will continue moving leftward. So why risk upsetting this trajectory by pushing a Leftist Tea Party?
Wasn't there someone in an OT thread saying they want the GOP to abandon Trump and focus on winning the "Supreme Court elections" lol

I want that to be the new "We'll call the Supreme Court!" No one understands how any of this goddamn fucking shit works.
 

Cybit

FGC Waterboy
Assuming this year goes well, Hillary is President, etc. What does 2020 look like? I imagine the anti-Obama crowd will continue beating the same drum they have for the last 8 years just with anti-women dogwhistles instead of racial ones, but if the GOP gets crushed this year and we follow it up with four more years of competent governance, who can they nominate that stands a chance in 2020? I honestly think the GOP establishment needs Trump to take the fall this year if they want to regain their party. The crazy wing needs to take a big loss, a big direct hit, if they are going to shut up. If they steal the nomination from Trump and still lose in November, that just means that the party will keep pushing for a 'true' conservative.

I'm not saying that Trump losing this year helps them to be a nationally relevant party in 2020, because I don't see how they bounce back from this year that quickly, but I do think the Tea Party needs to get dashed upon the rocks in a national election, rather than the GOP Convention in order for them to fade away.

My dumbdumb predictions for 2020 is that if they nominate Kasich or someone of his ilk in place of Cruz or Trump this year, they'll just be back in four years... Or even better, they'll get a Palin, Bachman or a Fiorina in
2020 to try and sway women. I think that if they let Trump or Cruz take their shot at it, then they'll be able to safely go back to Romney-esque types in 2020, and that the time might finally be right for a boring moderate Republican to appeal to swing voters.

That said, I think Hillary will fill Obama's shoes nicely and that the country continues gradually shift left after 12 years of solid Democratic leadership.

This is more or less my belief - that said, I don't think even Obama would be able to win 4 elections in a row. We're reaaaaaaaally fickle, and it's only gotten kinda more swingy with the polarization. :D

If the GOP nominates someone sane (Paul Ryan would be my best bet, with Haley as a VP pick); then I think they'd be at 60/40 to win the election barring anything extremely unusual happening during the next four years (massive economic boom, for instance). I think the economic decline is here to stay, and I think the Democrats are going to be stuck with being blamed for that.
 
Am I wrong, or did he immediately disappear after the whole 'having a vagina doesn't qualify you to be President' thing?

Oh no, they kept him around after that. But, I think he's been sidelined since, you know ,they're out of southern states. I haven't seen Nina Turner out there lately either.
 
This is more or less my belief - that said, I don't think even Obama would be able to win 4 elections in a row. We're reaaaaaaaally fickle, and it's only gotten kinda more swingy with the polarization. :D

If the GOP nominates someone sane (Paul Ryan would be my best bet, with Haley as a VP pick); then I think they'd be at 60/40 to win the election barring anything extremely unusual happening during the next four years (massive economic boom, for instance). I think the economic decline is here to stay, and I think the Democrats are going to be stuck with being blamed for that.
I feel like the bar for "sane Republican" gets lower and lower every election. Paul Ryan?

I'm bracing myself for a 2020 loss but at the same time I don't really know how the Republicans get there. They need to moderate on social issues to have a chance with anyone outside of their base, but their base is so radicalized that any candidate who could do that won't make it out of the primary.
 
Assuming this year goes well, Hillary is President, etc. What does 2020 look like? I imagine the anti-Obama crowd will continue beating the same drum they have for the last 8 years just with anti-women dogwhistles instead of racial ones, but if the GOP gets crushed this year and we follow it up with four more years of competent governance, who can they nominate that stands a chance in 2020? I honestly think the GOP establishment needs Trump to take the fall this year if they want to regain their party. The crazy wing needs to take a big loss, a big direct hit, if they are going to shut up. If they steal the nomination from Trump and still lose in November, that just means that the party will keep pushing for a 'true' conservative.

I'm not saying that Trump losing this year helps them to be a nationally relevant party in 2020, because I don't see how they bounce back from this year that quickly, but I do think the Tea Party needs to get dashed upon the rocks in a national election, rather than the GOP Convention in order for them to fade away.

My dumbdumb predictions for 2020 is that if they nominate Kasich or someone of his ilk in place of Cruz or Trump this year, they'll just be back in four years... Or even better, they'll get a Palin, Bachman or a Fiorina in
2020 to try and sway women. I think that if they let Trump or Cruz take their shot at it, then they'll be able to safely go back to Romney-esque types in 2020, and that the time might finally be right for a boring moderate Republican to appeal to swing voters.

That said, I think Hillary will fill Obama's shoes nicely and that the country continues gradually shift left after 12 years of solid Democratic leadership.
I'm thinking that we are going through what GOP did with Reagan (Obama) and followed it up with HW (Hillary). I'm concerned that a Rubio like candidate but with a functioning brain could be the GOP's Bill Clinton. Only thing standing between us and that is the insanity of Trump supporters/fed up teapers. However, if GOP can spin them off in their own little party then it will pose a risk to Hillary if they run a typical Republican in 2020.
 

T'Zariah

Banned
I'm thinking that we are going through what GOP did with Reagan (Obama) and followed it up with HW (Hillary). I'm concerned that a Rubio like candidate but with a functioning brain could be the GOP's Bill Clinton. Only thing standing between us and that is the insanity of Trump supporters/fed up teapers. However, if GOP can spin them off in their own little party then it will pose a risk to Hillary if they run a typical Republican in 2020.

And that's scary.

2016 is important, yes, but I'd argue that 2020 is where we really REALLY need to win.

2016 is already a lock for Dems, we just don't know how much.
 

User 406

Banned
Sigh. Maybe I'm being too sensitive about this after all. Maybe BernieBro isn't really a thing worth arguing about. I just see it as a spectrum. On one end is "You must call someone by whatever ridiculous list of titles they want you to" and on the other is "Don't call people things that they feel insulted by." I guess we just disagree on where BernieBro lands.

Sorry man, I genuinely didn't mean that as attack snark, I just wanted to make a dumb joke. :X

That said, if we're talking about labels that don't have real historical context, any label used to delineate a segment of a group based on negative qualities of that segment will spark irritation from the larger group as well even if it isn't meant to generalize. Nothing you can really do about that, even if you try to come up with another term.


The crazy wing needs to take a big loss, a big direct hit, if they are going to shut up. If they steal the nomination from Trump and still lose in November, that just means that the party will keep pushing for a 'true' conservative.

People keep saying this, but they aren't going to go away. Those voters exist, and with a two party system, an equilibrium that doesn't leave any major voting blocs on the table is what we end up with.


As for all the worry about a Green Tea Party, keep in mind that the reason the Teapers have had such success eating through the GOP is because the GOP has done jack fuck-all to actually improve the lives of their constituents for far too long. All hate and no benefits isn't a sufficient diet anymore. For all the many faults of the Democratic party, it has had tangible successes that have improved peoples' lives, which is why the party is actually viewed favorably by its members. It's simply not the same situation.

So if the hard left wants to take a crack at primarying some D seats, why not? Maybe they can expose some places where the Democrats can actually afford to move left. Maybe we'll get rid of some corrupt deadwood. Any seat that can be taken in such a way is proof that seat was poorly held to begin with. That's how democracy works!
 
Also, general election match ups for California because WHY NOT

Hillary Clinton defeats Donald Trump by 34 points, 60 percent to 26 percent.
Hillary Clinton defeats Ted Cruz by 25 points, 57 percent to 32 percent.
Hillary Clinton defeats John Kasich by 23 points, 56 percent to 33 percent.

Bernie Sanders defeats Donald Trump by 39 points, 63 percent to 24 percent.
Bernie Sanders defeats Ted Cruz by 35 points, 61 percent to 26 percent.
Bernie Sanders defeats John Kasich by 29 points, 57 percent to 28 percent.

When asked which candidate for president they would they want sitting in the Oval Office if there were a major terrorist attack on the U.S. today, 37 percent of registered voters said Clinton, 21 percent said Sanders, 15 percent said Trump, 9 percent said Cruz and 5 percent said Kasich.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom