Orbis Tabula
Member
I dunno. A permanent Democratic majority just sounds too good to be true. The GOP will somehow stumble in to a win before long.
-
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 |OT5| Archdemon Hillary Clinton vs. Lice Traffic Jam
- Thread starter Spoiled Milk
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, I think Dems will be dominant, but that we'll see anomalies that interrupt their dominance like '76(Dem won narrowly in part thanks to Watergate) and '04(GOP won by tap-dancing around Ground Zero/terrah!). It might be self-inflicted, it might be external events..
I'm not saying a Republican won't be elected, I'm just saying there's gonna be a Democratic dominance due to demographics.
.
Orbis Tabula
Member
For the 64 years from 1869 to 1933, Republicans controlled the White House for 48 years. 75% of the time.
For the 36 years from 1933 to 1969, Democrats controlled the White House for 28 years. 78% of the time.
For the 40 years from 1969 to 2009, Republicans controlled the White House for 28 years. 70% of the time.
There are always exceptions (Cleveland, Wilson, Eisenhower, Carter and Clinton), but for the most part a single party tends to dominate over a generation
Orbis Tabula
Member
Damn, alright. Well a man can dream. I'd love to see this happen. Thanks for the data!
Biden wanted Warren as his VP:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/joe-biden-elizabeth-warren-223104
Interesting!
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/joe-biden-elizabeth-warren-223104
Interesting!
balladofwindfishes
Member
I'm kind of really starting to get the feeling she's going to be the VP. Or is at least on the very short list.
All good points. Thanks, all.
Demographics will make a difference in the coming elections but I'm curious if Latinos could be the ones who help a potential GOP nominee in 2020/2024. Depending on how Clinton handles Immigration Reform and her outreach to the Latino community, the Democratic support from Latinos could be more dynamic than many would expect.
The Dems won't always have Trump to run against.
Demographics will make a difference in the coming elections but I'm curious if Latinos could be the ones who help a potential GOP nominee in 2020/2024. Depending on how Clinton handles Immigration Reform and her outreach to the Latino community, the Democratic support from Latinos could be more dynamic than many would expect.
The Dems won't always have Trump to run against.
Honestly, I'm really warming up to it, especially if Massachusetts Dems have a decent candidate who's able to win the replacement Senate election in mid-2017.
Ted Nugent at this point has got to be pretty much the definition for the type of person you don't want supporting you.
No kidding. He's like if every stereotype about Trump voters came together in one person.
balladofwindfishes
Member
The "off the reservation" and Warren jokes write themselves.
Oh man, that'd be a fun ride. The GOP might as well alienate Native Americans while they're at it.
I love how Warren is clearly shaking Trump and he doesn't know what to do, but Trump fans keep cheering him on for taking on big mean Warren the bully. No self awareness at all.
Oh man, that'd be a fun ride. The GOP might as well alienate Native Americans while they're at it.
I love how Warren is clearly shaking Trump and he doesn't know what to do, but Trump fans keep cheering him on for taking on big mean Warren the bully. No self awareness at all.
LTTP, but I personally think we should look into Thorium reactors which get rid of most of the problems of conventional Uranium fission. They produce up to two orders of magnitude less waste, are harder to weaponize, and we would have an estimated 1000 years worth of energy. The main drawbacks are higher startup costs, but this is alleviated over the life of the plant.
I've seen a lot of promising talks about these as beam based reactors, which can be turned off because the material is subcritical.
wikipedia said:
I've seen a lot of promising talks about these as beam based reactors, which can be turned off because the material is subcritical.
FloydtheFathead
Member
Man.. With Trump and if she selects Warren, they will have hit and offended every single ethnic/minority group possible this election.
I try hard to keep up the scoreboard and I can't think of a group they really wouldn't have shit on.
I agree. Not one person currently in the GOP leadership has the stones to pull the party out of the mess they are in and part of me thinks it will get worse after the election. The GOP somehow would make the obstruction under Obama seem like a day at the beach
gutter_trash
Banned
Petty much this.
Even Rubio lost his balls when it came to comprehensive immigration reform and then backtracked to appease the far-Right.
Remember Reagan and Bush 41 debating like gentlemen about "a path to citizenship"? lol. They sounded like Democrats
Republicans of today have been radicalized when compared to the Rinos of old
balladofwindfishes
Member
Who do they even have at this point to run in 2020?
4 years is about as long as it takes to start establishing a proper run, so someone should appear qualified and able to run for 2020 at this point... and yet, none come to mind.
4 years is about as long as it takes to start establishing a proper run, so someone should appear qualified and able to run for 2020 at this point... and yet, none come to mind.
Coriolanus
Banned
As was mentioned before, the problem is heightened by the feedback loop caused by the midterms, so even if they get rekt in a prez year, they'll prolly do very well indeed in 2018 with nigger nigger nigger, aaaand then you're back to square 1.
Howard Dean 2.0, mate. #believe
Thequietone
Member
We'll just see the same old faces saying "See? I told you Trump would lose. Pick me I'll succeed where Trump failed."
What the Republicans need is a moderate who is willing to stand against the prejudice and hate of the more extreme members of the party, willing to risk their career in order to make a principled stand to bring the party back towards the centre, and who the establishment will whole-heartedly back in doing so rather than behaving in a weasely, cowardly fashion.
*crickets*
*crickets*
Cesare Borgia
Banned
Picking Warren seems like the type of decision Joe Biden would make, but it would not be a good decision; and I say that as someone who admires the man and would have been working for him if he ran.
Warren offers little to a national ticket. She fires up the base but I do not believe that is of paramount importance in an election year when you're running against Donald Trump and have Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, and Joe Biden tag teaming him. She is 66, from a liberal state (with a republican governor btw), is not a good retail politician, and has no foreign policy experience.
I hate to sound like a broken record but Tim Kaine makes far more sense. He is 58, from a key "swing" state, is a good retail politician, and has foreign policy experience. He also is a former governor, thus allowing both parts of the ticket to cast a stark experience difference between them and Donald Trump.
Why do so many liberals not get that Elizabeth Warren does more good in the senate than as VP? I'm far from sold that anyone Clinton picks will have a major role in the administration like Biden or Cheney. I'd rather have her in the senate influencing legislation. And while MA's GOP governor could only appoint a republican replacement for a few months before a special election is held...I'd rather not risk some type of fluky scenario where republicans keep the senate by 1 seat due to making a mediocre MA politician VP.
Warren offers little to a national ticket. She fires up the base but I do not believe that is of paramount importance in an election year when you're running against Donald Trump and have Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, and Joe Biden tag teaming him. She is 66, from a liberal state (with a republican governor btw), is not a good retail politician, and has no foreign policy experience.
I hate to sound like a broken record but Tim Kaine makes far more sense. He is 58, from a key "swing" state, is a good retail politician, and has foreign policy experience. He also is a former governor, thus allowing both parts of the ticket to cast a stark experience difference between them and Donald Trump.
Why do so many liberals not get that Elizabeth Warren does more good in the senate than as VP? I'm far from sold that anyone Clinton picks will have a major role in the administration like Biden or Cheney. I'd rather have her in the senate influencing legislation. And while MA's GOP governor could only appoint a republican replacement for a few months before a special election is held...I'd rather not risk some type of fluky scenario where republicans keep the senate by 1 seat due to making a mediocre MA politician VP.
Coriolanus
Banned
balladofwindfishes
Member
This gives me hope that if she becomes president, she'll be a highly effective, popular president.
This supports my theory that once she is in office, and assuming she is at least moderately successful, her favor ability will increase substantially. I think some portion of people who dislike her actually dislike the idea of her rather than disliking her herself.
Drek might be harsh but yeah, I get why people love Star Wars, it just does nothing for me. It is literally the most basic, root story in Western civilization with some lasers
Macho Madness
Member
BotoxAgent
Member
Pennsylvania as a toss up
EL Oh EL
EL Oh EL
That's a lot of toss ups.
Coriolanus
Banned
Same could be said for obama back then, to be fair. "Well yes, they racist, but once they get to know him and see how well he does...
The House is likely to block any potential progress to attempt to turn her into a one term president.
2020 could be scary if the Republicans can field a legitimate threat.
There's a fight with reality going on here
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Sure, I can get behind that. Electoral maps like these should assume a 50/50 national vote, and who the hell knows what the electoral map looks like with Trump as the candidate.
It'd probably say more if the states all line up almost exactly like the Obama elections.
balladofwindfishes
Member
That worked so well for them in 2012.
Ah, I was unaware of that. Yeah, agree.
Yes. We have to fight the immediate problem and we have no other realistic way to produce the energy needed.
If the GoP can find a moderate with wide appeal, Hillary could possibly lose re-election.
If they keep their anti-women, anti-LGBT, anti-minority platforms it's gonna be hard for them to win a nationwide election. The voter share of whites is shrinking, so there needs to be inter-sectional appeal
I think most would agree but Warren is also the strongest ticket booster Clinton an probably pick as a way to unify the party. Right now that is more important than the marginal difference between her and "generic D senator from Massachusetts" in the senate. Trump winning is too real a threat to not put forth the strongest unified ticket possible.
shinra-bansho
Member
I'm not sure how getting into a twitter war with Trump somehow propelled her to being the strongest ticket for so many people...
She's still a bad pick.
She's still a bad pick.
Macho Madness
Member
balladofwindfishes
Member
Triggered by Comic Sans
cartoon_soldier
Member
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/reid-mcconnell-must-agree-trump-women
Reid going Scorched Earth on GOP
Reid going Scorched Earth on GOP
- Status