• 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 |OT6| Delete your accounts

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bowdz

Member
My predictions:

New Mexico: Clinton
New Jersey: Clinton
California: Clinton (super close)
Montana: Sanders
North Dakota: Sanders
South Dakota: Sanders

I really sounds like we won't know the outcome of California until Wednesday unless one or the other absolutely sweeps certain counties.
 
What are the predictit prices on Trump making less per year than Kev?

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/maybe-trump-really-does-make-less-than-500k-a-year

Almost a month ago, I brought you the news that - rather bizarrely for a purported billionaire - Trump receives a tax credit in New York which is restricted to married couples making less than $500k a year. The news is based on the on-going reporting of Aaron Elstein of Crain's New York Business. Trump's folks insisted it was a mistake and said, well of course Trump's makes more than a half million dollars a year. But now Elstein reports that Trump got the deduction again this year? Brand new documents!
 
After this weekend's shit show ( and Trump's quintuple down ), who could realistically still say yes to being his VP?

There's no way anyone who actually wants a future in politics would say yes. So, who does that leave? Palin? Who else?
 

pigeon

Banned
Also, Matt Yglesias with the ultimate hot take: electing Hillary Clinton would be good because she would be a role model to other women and women are better than men.

vox said:
Screen%20Shot%202016-06-01%20at%2012.22.45%20PM.png

Jennifer L. Lawless and Danny Hayes, authors of Women on the Run: Gender, Media, and Political Campaigns in a Polarized Era, help us understand the precise causal mechanism. There are lots of reasons women may be disinclined to run for office — including the broad suite of structural barriers related to gender norms and family life that tend to limit women's access to all manner of high-powered jobs — but one reason is the perception that a woman candidate is likely to be unfairly disadvantaged.

The election of a high-profile woman gives other women residing in the state confidence that a woman can win, making them more likely to run and making more women likely to win....

Electing a woman governor has a bigger impact than electing a woman attorney general. That is no surprise — the governor is a higher-profile, more important role. But even so, governors are relatively obscure. A 2007 Pew survey showed that just 66 percent of the public could correctly name their state's governor.

The president, by contrast, enjoys near-universal name recognition. Indeed, even back in 2007 Clinton was correctly identified by 93 percent of respondents. Consequently, you would expect an impact that's quite a bit larger than the gubernatorial one.

But the impact would also exert itself across a much larger scale, since the president covers the entire country and not just one state. It would also have knock-on effects, since if a Clinton presidency inspired one additional woman senator she, in turn, would inspire more down-ballot runs....

Even all this would be of pretty narrow concern except for the fact that it turns out that gender is a significant driver of legislators' behavior.

John Sides summarized some of the research last March:

For one, women are more likely than men to advocate for issues often associated with women’s interests — child care, women’s health, abortion, pay equity and the like. There are many studies, but see Michele Swers’s two books to start with. This shows up, for example, in in floor speeches and legislative debates, where women are more likely to discuss issues in terms of women’s interests. (Women are also more likely than men to give floor speeches, period.) [...]

Other research suggests that women may be more effective legislators than men. Craig Volden, Alan Wiseman and Dana Wittmer find that, within the minority party, women are able to get their sponsored bills further through the legislative process. Sarah Anzia and Christopher Berry have shown that women sponsor and co-sponsor more bills than men do, and deliver about 9 percent more funding to their districts.

What's even more striking is that these differences seem to grow with scale rather than shrink.

Tali Mendelberg, Christopher Karpowitz, and Nicholas Goedert show that "when women are many, they are more likely to voice women’s distinctive concerns about children, family, the poor and the needy." What's more, when women are more numerous and therefore more vocal on these topics, men become more vocal too, and "these effects are associated with more generosity to the poor."

http://www.vox.com/2016/6/6/11829852/clinton-woman-effect
 

Aceun

Member
I say:

New Mexico: Hillary
New Jersey: Hillary (close)
California: Hillary
Montana: Bernie
North Dakota: Bernie
South Dakota: Bernie
 

ampere

Member
What are the predictit prices on Trump making less per year than Kev?

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/maybe-trump-really-does-make-less-than-500k-a-year

I was gonna call this out as old news, but WTF, that is from last week

Why would he apply for a tax break for $300 that could be publicly stating an income threshold? I'm confused


https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/updates/2016/06/02/trump-literally-said-all-those-things/
 
It's like she was born to run against this guy. He's perfect for her. And she doesn't have to worry about hurting Trump's supporters' feelings. Fate!

Clinton also seems to be getting a free bonus from Republicans who should be Trump's surrogates actually doing work that benefits her campaign instead of his.
 

gcubed

Member
Trump's the perfect candidate for any Dem. Its a tragic commentary on the GOP primary voters that he ever got this far.

not even their voters, its just the GOP in general for having "someone different" vs 17 "someone the sames"

if they didn't have the clown show for the first few months, he never would have won
 
Bernie's totally got CA, guys. His campaign has a concert/rally this afternoon. Anyone who'd actually promote this guest list combination of washed-ups, unknowns and crazies surely has things in the bag!
Join Bernie Sanders in San Francisco for a GOTV Concert featuring Dave Matthews, Fantastic Negrito, Fishbone, Yarn and special guests Dr. Cornel West, Shailene Woodley and Danny Glover.
ONE DAY left. The media seems largely uninterested in Sanders claiming it's not going to be over. As they should be. Because it will be over.
 
Bernie's totally got CA, guys. His campaign has a concert/rally this afternoon. Anyone who'd actually promote this guest list combination of washed-ups, unknowns and crazies surely has things in the bag!

ONE DAY left. The media seems largely uninterested in Sanders claiming it's not going to be over. As they should be. Because it will be over.
Get ready for the finger wagging of your life if you say it's over!
 
You think that's going to stop a narrative from taking hold? A billionaire taking a tax break meant for average joes, I wonder how that's going to play...
Yeah, but I don't think anyone thinks he *actually* only makes <500k.

He and his supporters will say "hey that's business!" and move on to something else. I don't think he's going to lose his base support over this, but it's another talking point for democrats to win over the moderates (just like his tax returns).
 
Bernie's totally got CA, guys. His campaign has a concert/rally this afternoon. Anyone who'd actually promote this guest list combination of washed-ups, unknowns and crazies surely has things in the bag!

ONE DAY left. The media seems largely uninterested in Sanders claiming it's not going to be over. As they should be. Because it will be over.

it would be delicious if Hillary wins SF.
 

gcubed

Member
just for my own sanity i want him to lose California. There will be a narrative about him winning it in the media because why not. She wins CA and all thats left is DC and thats just a spanking of mass proportions.
 

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Yeah, but I don't think anyone thinks he *actually* only makes <500k.

He and his supporters will say "hey that's business!" and move on to something else. I don't think he's going to lose his base support over this, but it's another talking point for democrats to win over the moderates (just like his tax returns).

His base will stick with him, but it's shit like this that can make it easier than it already is define him as a greedy, childish, petulant asshole who only cares about making money and not helping people.
 

mo60

Member
I think Trump is intentionally going to cities with large minority populations. http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews....allas-houston-and-san-antonio-next-week.html/

He'll be in Houston and San Antonio, where the Texas Democratic Convention will be happening at the same time. San Antonio is 50% hispanic lol.

LMAO. It will be funny if this strategy of his pissed off enough minorities in Texas to make texas likely to go to the democrats in the Fall. It currently isn't going to the democrats in the fall, but anything is possible at this point.
 
I think Trump is intentionally going to cities with large minority populations. http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews....allas-houston-and-san-antonio-next-week.html/

He'll be in Houston and San Antonio, where the Texas Democratic Convention will be happening at the same time. San Antonio is 50% hispanic lol.

Tinfoil time: He wants violent protests to negate his racism with cries of violence against his supporters. This way he gets the higher ground in that exchange. Sick. He doesn't even really need to campaign in Texas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom