• 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 |OT8| No, Donald. You don't.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
You know what, though? Trump is at least immediately talking about it and putting forth a message. Hillary and the democrats don't do that as well. They need to.
 
So let me get this straight...

A reality star buffoon held a glorified Klan rally where he outlined his proto-fascist plan for America last week and now his buddies over in Russia release some emails to distract our ADD media and populace away from the white nationalist? And they fall for it?!

We are gonna give this country over to this fucking disgusting human being over some goddamn emails?
 

pigeon

Banned
You know what, though? Trump is at least immediately talking about it and putting forth a message. Hillary and the democrats don't do that as well. They need to.

what the fuck are you talking about

trump is literally responding to the democratic statements
 

Iolo

Member
You know what, though? Trump is at least immediately talking about it and putting forth a message. Hillary and the democrats don't do that as well. They need to.

This is a guy who didn't put out any messaging for hours about his VP pick, or Hillary's!

He has like 2 surrogates to push his message, other than Twitter.

Jesus people.
 
You know what, though? Trump is at least immediately talking about it and putting forth a message. Hillary and the democrats don't do that as well. They need to.

This is not a message. This is the ranting of a drunk person who wrestled their phone away from his handlers.

The Democrats handled this just about as well as we could. We had POTUS, Clinton, Bernie, DWS, the DNC all issue statements in support of what happened.

Rambling on Twitter is not a response.
 

Teggy

Member
‏ @realDonaldTrump

The @CNN panels are so one sided, almost all against Trump. @FoxNews is so much better and the ratings are much higher. Don't watch CNN!

Keeps saying he doesn't watch CNN, but keeps complaining about CNN. Also, this notion that higher ratings = better news...
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
This is not a message. This is the ranting of a drunk person who wrestled their phone away from his handlers.

The Democrats handled this just about as well as we could. We had POTUS, Clinton, Bernie, DWS, the DNC all issue statements in support of what happened.

Rambling on Twitter is not a response.

This is a guy who didn't put out any messaging for hours about his VP pick, or Hillary's!

He has like 2 surrogates to push his message, other than Twitter.

Jesus people.

what the fuck are you talking about

trump is literally responding to the democratic statements

Are we really worried about Trump and his series of tweets?

It was a joke, everyone. I had something similar about democrats earlier but was joking here because the subject doesn't mean anything. Sorry--should have better indicated my sarcasm.

This situation means almost nothing. Nobody will be talking about it after the convention.
 

Boke1879

Member
It was a joke, everyone. I had something similar about democrats earlier but was joking here because the subject doesn't mean anything. Sorry--should have better indicated my sarcasm.

This situation means almost nothing. Nobody will be talking about it after the convention.

Man I just don't know who's joking anymore. It seems everyone is on edge and worried about everything. I mean I guess it has merit lol.

That said can you imagine what we'll be talking about come September?
 

Sibylus

Banned
- Every four years, do a mail-in survey of the American people similar to a census to gauge political leanings and categorize the equivalent of temporary parties accordingly. The number of parties for the election will be determined by the amount of overlap between categories on the issues.

- After party options have been categorized, citizens will be notified of their options (and will be sent results of which party they're most closely aligned with if they participated in the census)

- Have the electoral college accommodate for the amount of candidates that will run in the general election based on the amount of parties involved

- Distribute a level of power in the executive branch that reflects the amount of support each candidate received in the general election; all candidates will become executive officers and their votes will be weighted according to the support they received from their constituents

I'm not going to draft up a whole new constitution for you in this post, but a new constitution is what we would need in order to pull this off.

What we have now is not satisfactory and just because we have an option that is less shit than another option, it doesn't mean that not choosing either shitty option makes a citizen personally responsible for the shitty things that happen to this country.

After the amounts of shit you gave me for theorycrafting representatives by sortition... shucks, brainchild. You made a doozy.

It's tantamount to an oligarchy as others have already pointed out, and in times of war or crisis, the executive branch will be paralyzed or self-defeating when inevitable factions form around choice of response and strategy.
 

Man God

Non-Canon Member
Fear mongering worked with relatively safe Republican candidates like Romney and McCain, it should also work against Trump. It has really turned out the voter registration in Latino communities and he is polling historically bad among blacks.

I don't buy that he has a chance for a second. He might do surprisingly well in the popular vote but the numbers for the electoral college just don't seem to work out.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I think between the demographics Florida, and Kasich fucking over Trump in Ohio, I think it's all a done deal.

I'm still curious as to the actual expected demographics. Is the amount of Hispanic likely voters expected to rise compared to 2012? If so, how much? Are the current polls using that information? I haven't seen that info anywhere.
 

thefro

Member
I'm still curious as to the actual expected demographics. Is the amount of Hispanic likely voters expected to rise compared to 2012? If so, how much? Are the current polls using that information? I haven't seen that info anywhere.

Tons of folks have moved from Puerto Rico to Florida due to the current economic situation in Puerto Rico.
 

TheFatOne

Member
Meant to post this yesterday, but that Michael Moore thread reminded me. Can someone help me understand 538s model. I can't figure out why Clintons chance of winning Florida dropped from 70% to essentially tied with Trump in the last couple of weeks. What it looks like to me is that two polls showed Trump ahead in Florida, and they are weighing that trend in their calculations. Also is there a good primer on Nates model? I could use something to do while at work today.

I'm still curious as to the actual expected demographics. Is the amount of Hispanic likely voters expected to rise compared to 2012? If so, how much? Are the current polls using that information? I haven't seen that info anywhere.

This is a good article on the current demographics in Florida.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...hispanic-voter-registration-grows-in-florida/
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Tons of folks have moved from Puerto Rico to Florida due to the current economic situation in Puerto Rico.

Do you have numbers or information on their likelihood of voting?
 
I'm still curious as to the actual expected demographics. Is the amount of Hispanic likely voters expected to rise compared to 2012? If so, how much? Are the current polls using that information? I haven't seen that info anywhere.

FT_16.03.09_floridaHispVoters_registrations.png


Among all Floridians, registered Democrats outnumber Republicans in 2016. This is due in part to Hispanics, who accounted for 88% of growth in the number of registered Democrats between 2006 and 2016. During this time, the number of Hispanic registered voters increased by 61%, while the number of Hispanics identifying as Democrats increased by 83% and those having no party affiliation increased by 95%. The number of Hispanic Republican registered voters has grown too – but much more slowly (just 16%). As a result, among Hispanic registered voters in 2016, 678,000 were registered as Democrats, 610,000 indicated no party affiliation and 479,000 were registered as Republicans. (It’s worth noting that not all registered voters cast a ballot, and voter turnout has a large impact in swing states like Florida.)

However, in Miami-Dade County – home to 46% of the nation’s Cuban-American population – Republicans still outnumber Democrats among Hispanic registered voters. In 2016, there were 260,000 Republicans and 213,000 Democrats, both decreases of about 5,000 from 2014. But even in this Cuban stronghold, statewide trends hold true. Among Hispanic registered voters between 2006 and 2016, the number of Democrats increased 62% while the number of Republican registered voters was flat.
 

dramatis

Member
Oh, so you're arguing that it's not unfair to Sanders to advantage Clinton because Clinton is more personally deserving? I think the response goes similarly - the important kind of fairness here is not fairness to candidates but fairness to voters who support candidates. I expect that many Sanders supporters would eventually get here even if it's not where they start out. The idea would be that it is not fair to Sanders' supporters, who are largely members of the Democratic coalition and will vote for the Democratic nominee, etc., to disadvantage their choice just because Clinton is more personally deserving (obviously they would probably dispute this and say that she's not more personally deserving on account of being super-corrupt).
I feel like all this postulating about fairness, but not one person ever questioned if the process of selecting a presidential nominee is fair to women or to minorities. A woman wins and suddenly there's loads of complaints about how the system is rigged. When has a political system ever been rigged for a woman or minority? What about fairness to women or minorities who have had all the disadvantages that being female or minority has awarded them in public life and politics?

I mean, it's very silly to argue whether this is fair to Sanders supporters when this subject was not raised for Hillary supporters in 2008, or whatever losing supporters were in previous primaries. No fairness was awarded to Hillary or to Obama, or to their supporters. Nobody would be saying "is this fair to Hillary supporters?" if Hillary had lost, they'd be telling the AA and Latinos to get in line and vote for Sanders. It's really shitty to be complaining about how rigged the system is against an old white man.
 

HylianTom

Banned
Is there even a chance Hillary loses Virginia?
I don't really think so.

Trump has no operation; Clinton has inherited Obama's behemoth machine. Richmond is a swing area in the state; Kaine is well-liked there. The state has been moving away from the GOP already because of population growth, but I think this is the year where Virginia goes from Tossup to a Wisconsin-like Likely Blue state.

If this is a horror movie where the GOP is in a haunted house, Hillary winning Virginia is the first door to slam shut all by itself.
 
After the amounts of shit you gave me for theorycrafting representatives by sortition... shucks, brainchild. You made a doozy.

It's tantamount to an oligarchy as others have already pointed out, and in times of war or crisis, the executive branch will be paralyzed or self-defeating when inevitable factions form around choice of response and strategy.

It is obvious that I should have done a better job at explaining how the selection of parties would work because for some reason people got the impression that the government would be responsible for making up the parties, which is not at all what I meant to convey in my proposal.

Anyway, maybe one of these days when I'm super bored I'll draft up a constitution outline that clarifies my ideas. For now, you can just ignore it.

BTW, your sortition idea still sucks :p
 

TheFatOne

Member
Do you have numbers or information on their likelihood of voting?

I don't have the numbers on the likelihood of voting, but I do know that it's 31% Cubans and 27% Puerto Ricans in terms of the Hispanic vote in Florida. I also know that Puerto Ricans lean Democrat while Cubans lean Republicans. I'll see if I can pull up some numbers.
 
Someone needs to take Trump's phone away from him!

This was a softball. You could have scored some easy points on this. Instead, he's sent like 15 Tweets today. Some of them praise Bernie. Some of them attack Bernie. Some of them talk about Crooked Hillary. Some of them talk about Kaine.

My god, get a SIMPLE message and run with it.

"The treatment of Bernie and his supporters shows that politics is rigged. That's why we need an outsider to bring about change!"

There done. Pin that shit and STFU.

God, he's so fucking stupid.
 
I don't have the numbers on the likelihood of voting, but I do know that it's 31% Cubans and 27% Puerto Ricans in terms of the Hispanic vote in Florida. I also know that Puerto Ricans lean Democrat while Cubans lean Republicans. I'll see if I can pull up some numbers.

also that the cuban lean is decidedly less pronounced than it once was while the rican lean is as strong as ever
 

Aceun

Member
My god, get a SIMPLE message and run with it.

"The treatment of Bernie and his supporters shows that politics is rigged. That's why we need an outsider to bring about change!"

There done. Pin that shit and STFU.

God, he's so fucking stupid.

Shhh... you're giving them ideas!!
 

TheFatOne

Member
The crazy thing about Florida is that with Puerto Rico in shambles it might just be that Puerto Ricans doom the Republican party. More and more Puerto Ricans are leaving the island every day. The situation out there is grim from what all my family is saying, and friends are telling me. Republicans used to just be able to rely on the Cuban vote to help carry Florida, and pretty soon that may not be the case anymore. If Florida flips blue Republicans are doomed. Shit is crazy to think about as a man who is Puerto Rican.

also that the cuban lean is decidedly less pronounced than it once was while the rican lean is as strong as ever

Yup. I'm trying to find the numbers, but as I understand it younger Cubans lean Democrat now. Can't quite remember the age cutoff for that though. Will come back with some numbers in a bit.
 
The crazy thing about Florida is that with Puerto Rico in shambles it might just be that Puerto Ricans doom the Republican party. More and more Puerto Ricans are leaving the island every day. The situation out there is grim from what all my family is saying, and friends are telling me. Republicans used to just be able to rely on the Cuban vote to help carry Florida, and pretty soon that may not be the case anymore. If Florida flips blue Republicans are doomed. Shit is crazy to think about as a man who is Puerto Rican.

The Cuban vote is not as partisan as it used to be. Plus, the overall percentage of Cubans making up the Latino/Hispanic vote is down. It was like 40% in 1990, and it's in the upper 20s now. The PR vote share is increasing. The GOP needs to figure out another niche to carve out for itself among Florida's demographics. There arent enough white people to sustain them.
 

andthebeatgoeson

Junior Member
word up.

Prepare for the emails to start asking for more money and getting calls from "Unknown" asking for money :p

I'm glad I donated, but I could do without the phone calls lol
They did the same thing after Barry. I think the love will wear off quicker and i might be liable to get 'yelling old guy' on my national record.

I have less patience for phone BS
 

Sibylus

Banned
It is obvious that I should have done a better job at explaining how the selection of parties would work because for some reason people got the impression that the government would be responsible for making up the parties, which is not at all what I meant to convey in my proposal.

Anyway, maybe one of these days when I'm super bored I'll draft up a constitution outline that clarifies my ideas. For now, you can just ignore it.

One objection I'd like to expand upon (because I'm biased and think it's interesting) is that of multiple executives in a system with equal powers.

There are examples of how this can break down in practice, and my favourite is an old one that I feel still has a lot of relevance to the hypothetical. Republican Rome's system of two executive consuls broke down in spectacular fashion during the Second Punic War, with military command and strategy vacillating on a daily basis between two executives who didn't much care for each other. That sort of vacillation lost battles and nearly resulted in the collapse of the nation. The fix? One executive vision and strategy to recover, avoid further debilitating losses, and win the war in the long run through attrition and opportunity. In the Roman case that was through the invocation of a dictator term (then a political office of emergency, not yet the legal justification for permanent dictatorship), but what I'm getting at is the massive disadvantages of investing equal powers into multiple executive figures and the comparative strength of one executive vision. Think long on that one, and good luck in your thought experiments.
 

Valhelm

contribute something
I'm still curious as to the actual expected demographics. Is the amount of Hispanic likely voters expected to rise compared to 2012? If so, how much? Are the current polls using that information? I haven't seen that info anywhere.

The Florida Hispanic electorate is changing. As you probably know, Florida has a lot of Cuban Americans, traditionally one of the most loyally Republic ethnic blocks in the US. Despite being well under 1% of our population, Cuban Americans are politically active and pretty affluent, dominating Miami politics and being vitally important in Florida elections. Had Cuban Americans not supported George W. Bush so strongly in 2000, Al Gore would have won Florida outright.

But since Obama's tenure, Cuban Americans have become less conservative. I'd bet a plurality of Cuban American millennials went for Bernie. I'm expecting most Cuban voters to side with Trump in November, but it won't be the kind of solid majority that could put him over the edge. Because Florida is such a politically divided state, our elections are always nail-biting. From 1992 to 2012, only one race saw the winner take a solid 51% of the vote, and that was George W. Bush in 2004. GWB was hugely popular with Cubans, which helped him with this win.

The wild card in 2016 will be Puerto Ricans, who tend to be less affluent, less Republican, and less likely to identify as white than Cubans. Puerto Ricans share a lot more in common with the Hispanic electorate at large, and are arriving in Central Florida in pretty large numbers. Traditionally, Florida outside of the Miami area hasn't had a large Hispanic population. But this is changing, and making Florida more Democratic. The ongoing economic turmoil on the island has sent hundreds of thousands of Puerto Ricans to Florida and New York, where they can immediately vote -- because they're already US citizens.
 
Im suprised DWS said she was going to resign so quickly. It makes her and the DNC look even more guilty. Up until now it could just be opinion based.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom