• 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.
Hillary can't even pull away from literally the worst presidential nominee in decades.

A competent person like Cruz could run a solid campaign and win.

Cruz couldn't even convince moderate Republicans to back him over Kasich even when Kasich was eliminated from the race.

Cruz appeals to literally no one other than people that believe the rapture will occur within the next five years. His numbers with everyone other than self identified very conservative Republicans were trash throughout the entire primary and his favorability numbers with Republicans went into the trash by the end of the primary.

It's going to be someone like Trump again in 2020 but not Cruz.
 
Hillary can't even pull away from literally the worst presidential nominee in decades.

A competent person like Cruz could run a solid campaign and win.

I think you're diablosing a little too much here.

Prior to the FBI thing, Hillary was running pretty far ahead of Trump. Some tightening was always going to happen, although I don't think it's a permanent closing. If you look at polls from this time last year (or even a bit later during the RNC) there were polls fairly consistently showing Romney ahead. CBS had it as Romney +1 in July of 2012. YouGov had Romney +1 this time in 2012.

We are too partisan for anyone to really win by massive margins anymore. There are just too many things deeply baked into the electorate. And, with Hillary, that's maybe doubly true.

Why I think 2020 is a different monster is, you know, look at her approval ratings. Running for office, people hate her. BUT, once she's in office, everyone chills the hell out. Why? Because, number one, she's damn good at her job. Two, she doesn't have to pretend to not be ambitious. One of the worst things a woman can be called is ambitious.

tl:dr Everything's fine.
 
Hillary can't even pull away from literally the worst presidential nominee in decades.

A competent person like Cruz could run a solid campaign and win.
This is just so wrong, I'm sorry. I was actually rooting for Cruz over Trump because I thought he'd be easier to beat in the general.
 
Another latino-centered poll:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/...mp-after-convention-1st-day-n612666?cid=sm_tw

The poll also asked Latinos who they would vote for and 72 percent said they would vote for Hillary Clinton, with only 17 percent saying they would vote for Trump. This is consistent with the results from Latino Decisions all year, and with the recent numbers coming from the NBC/Wall Street Journal/Telemundo poll, where they found only 14 percent support for Trump among Latinos.

Smaller sample: 300.
 
I actually expect Rubio to focus more on issues and less on attacking. I think he is going to want to distance himself from the toxic side of the party for future benefit.
 

itschris

Member
O2bUMoC.jpg


https://twitter.com/aseitzwald/status/755817946920783872

That Christie speech did seem pretty crazy to me.
 

Which is why I wish NBC would figure out what in the hell is going on with Survey Monkey's latino sample. They're giving Trump something like 26-32% support depending on the poll. If it's a methodology issue, then they need to figure that out if they want to be taken seriously.

Also, as a whole, we need to get better about non-white samples in polling, I think. As our nation is going to continue to get more and more diverse, we need to be better able to model the the electorate.
 

Slacker

Member
I actually expect Rubio to focus more on issues and less on attacking. I think he is going to want to distance himself from the toxic side of the party for future benefit.

You never know, but I can't imagine this would be the case. Does Rubio actually know any issues?
 
If I was the GOP I'd be shitting a brick over that NBC poll of Latino voters.

Which words on the list below describe the Republican Party? [Randomize list]
.....................Yes No
Young............ 13 87
Old ................77 23
Happy........... 20 80
Angry .............73 27
Anti-Immigrant 76 24
Respects Latinos 22 78
Optimistic ........31 69
Negative attitude 76 24
 
So, here's my take on the RNC.

Generally speaking, in a convention, there's only 3-4 speeches that matter. Generally there's, only 1 or 2 that actually matter. A lot of people just tune in for these speeches and don't give a fuck until the conventions. it's when they see what's going on and what to do. Conventions also help rile up your base but for the purposes of undecided/swing voters or leaners, these few speeches are all that matter.

The obvious one is the nominee. These speeches do matter a lot. This is when they put out their vision and hopes and make their case. Obama was obvious amazing at these.

There's the VP speech that matters...somewhat. People often don't know the VP and are curious. The VP just has to come across as competent (where Palin failed and pretty much everyone else hasn't. Even Ryan, whose speech was a bunch of lies, at least appeared competent).

Then there's the spousal speech. This speech only matters in the sense that you can't fuck up because no one will bash the spouse (well, until Bill comes along).


And finally, the X factor speech which is a surrogate. These speeches aren't always there but one example is Bill's 2012 speech. That one mattered. In 2012 it was supposed to be Christie but he botched it for Romney. Trump has no one and this year it will be Obama (more on that in a second) and possibly Bernie (while Bill's speech, due to unique circumstance, will matter less).


So, Trump only has 3 speeches and the easiest one, Melania's, was horribly botched. People are talking about it. Like, people who don't care about politics are talking about it. That's bad. Really bad. But not enough to kill Trump.

IMO, Pence will come off cornbread and that's fine.

On Hillary's side, unless the VP is Warren, I expect cornbread there too.

I think Hillary's speech will matter, but she is so known, I think it will matter less than usual.

Bernie can matter because he can help with the youth turnout. If he can really push for her it will help a bit.

But at the end of the day, I think these convention speeches really, truly, come down to 2 speeches.

Trump vs Obama.

Obama is going to make the strongest case for Hillary Clinton this election. Stronger than she could ever make. He will have to do for her what Bill did for him. Obama has the real power to motivate the leaners and youngsters to go out there on election day and say "I know it's not sexy, but we can move forward with her." I think he can make a great case about how Trump's values are not American values. That they don't represent this country and this people and our way of life. That it is not the American way, not the American Dream, and not America.


But for Trump, his speech will be 1 of his only chances to win this election. He has 3 choices.

1. Teleprompter boring speech which will do nothing.
2. Somehow manage to make a good speech that isn't crazy.
3. be Trump, off the cuff, nonsensical.

If he does #3, which is what I'd imagine he'd do, a lot of people who are really giving Trump their first hard look are going to say to themselves "oh my god...it's worse than I have been hearing. Nope." And then Obama comes in less than a week later and seals the deal.


There is nothing the RNC has shown so far that indicates to me Trump is even remotely capable of not fucking it up. And thank god for that.

And next week we're going to be saying "Thanks, Obama."
 

Bowdz

Member
I hope dems don't piss away this goodwill. Dems really need to take this chance to bring our community into the fold like they have for black community.

I guarantee that one of the first bills they try and pass is immigration reform. It will be up to Ryan if he wants to further tank the GOP with Hispanics by not bringing it up for a vote in he House or he can bring it up for a vote and essentially guarantee his primary loss in 2020.
 

Zeke

Member
I guarantee that one of the first bills they try and pass is immigration reform. It will be up to Ryan if he wants to further tank the GOP with Hispanics by not bringing it up for a vote in he House or he can bring it up for a vote and essentially guarantee his primary loss in 2020.
Gonna cross post this from the OT thread
Agreed but like I said we are more than just immigration. Dems need to recognize that systemic racism is still an everyday issue for many in our community. Negative police encounters, brutality and murder at the hands of police are also issues. Lack of socio-economic mobility, subpar education and high incarceration rates are also very real problems for many within our communties as well. The civil rights movement is widely celebrated (and rightly so) but what about the Mexican American civil rights movement? It is hardly ever talked about or recognized or celebrated for its accomplishments. Dems need recognize these things and bring it to the front and reach out to us. The ball is in their court and they need to strike while they have our attention.
This is what I mean by not pissing away goodwill. Our community is so much more than just immigration. Dems need to recognize this and build on it and keep reaching out on more than just immigration.
 

Bowdz

Member
Gonna cross post this from the OT thread

This is what I mean by not pissing away goodwill. Our community is so much more than just immigration. Dems need to recognize this and build on it and keep reaching out on more than just immigration.

Great post and I completely agree. I hope they take some of those points to heart.
 
Which is why I wish NBC would figure out what in the hell is going on with Survey Monkey's latino sample. They're giving Trump something like 26-32% support depending on the poll. If it's a methodology issue, then they need to figure that out if they want to be taken seriously.

Also, as a whole, we need to get better about non-white samples in polling, I think. As our nation is going to continue to get more and more diverse, we need to be better able to model the the electorate.

Probably too expensive to fix, I assume?

But I do agree pollsters need to improve their ability to poll latinos.

But no worries, Trump will "fix the hispanic problem!"
 
Gonna cross post this from the OT thread

This is what I mean by not pissing away goodwill. Our community is so much more than just immigration. Dems need to recognize this and build on it and keep reaching out on more than just immigration.

This is true. Police reform, criminal justice reform, and some college education payment reform will affect everyone though. I think dems do need to be more specific on how they will focus on the Latino community. Their policies will help them but the same is true for low income whites who have been lost to the Republican Party. It's important not to think that the democrats will get Latinos because they don't have a choice.
 

digdug2k

Member
Obama is going to make the strongest case for Hillary Clinton this election. Stronger than she could ever make. He will have to do for her what Bill did for him. Obama has the real power to motivate the leaners and youngsters to go out there on election day and say "I know it's not sexy, but we can move forward with her." I think he can make a great case about how Trump's values are not American values. That they don't represent this country and this people and our way of life. That it is not the American way, not the American Dream, and not America.
I'm really hoping Obama does a better speech than "I know its not sexy, but its what we've got" for Hillary. I'm hoping they all do, "I know Hillary Clinton. I worked with her. She's amazing. I've never been more excited to vote for someone" speeches.

That said, I thought Bernie did an OK job of that when he endorsed and it didn't seem to matter much to the leaners then either. I think Hillary has the most chance to push them. Many have built a caricature of her in their head. She's the only one that can knock it down. She's a good public speaker too. I don't doubt she can do it.
 
So, here's my take on the RNC.

Generally speaking, in a convention, there's only 3-4 speeches that matter. Generally there's, only 1 or 2 that actually matter. A lot of people just tune in for these speeches and don't give a fuck until the conventions. it's when they see what's going on and what to do. Conventions also help rile up your base but for the purposes of undecided/swing voters or leaners, these few speeches are all that matter.

The obvious one is the nominee. These speeches do matter a lot. This is when they put out their vision and hopes and make their case. Obama was obvious amazing at these.

There's the VP speech that matters...somewhat. People often don't know the VP and are curious. The VP just has to come across as competent (where Palin failed and pretty much everyone else hasn't. Even Ryan, whose speech was a bunch of lies, at least appeared competent).

Then there's the spousal speech. This speech only matters in the sense that you can't fuck up because no one will bash the spouse (well, until Bill comes along).


And finally, the X factor speech which is a surrogate. These speeches aren't always there but one example is Bill's 2012 speech. That one mattered. In 2012 it was supposed to be Christie but he botched it for Romney. Trump has no one and this year it will be Obama (more on that in a second) and possibly Bernie (while Bill's speech, due to unique circumstance, will matter less).


So, Trump only has 3 speeches and the easiest one, Melania's, was horribly botched. People are talking about it. Like, people who don't care about politics are talking about it. That's bad. Really bad. But not enough to kill Trump.

IMO, Pence will come off cornbread and that's fine.

On Hillary's side, unless the VP is Warren, I expect cornbread there too.

I think Hillary's speech will matter, but she is so known, I think it will matter less than usual.

Bernie can matter because he can help with the youth turnout. If he can really push for her it will help a bit.

But at the end of the day, I think these convention speeches really, truly, come down to 2 speeches.

Trump vs Obama.

Obama is going to make the strongest case for Hillary Clinton this election. Stronger than she could ever make. He will have to do for her what Bill did for him. Obama has the real power to motivate the leaners and youngsters to go out there on election day and say "I know it's not sexy, but we can move forward with her." I think he can make a great case about how Trump's values are not American values. That they don't represent this country and this people and our way of life. That it is not the American way, not the American Dream, and not America.


But for Trump, his speech will be 1 of his only chances to win this election. He has 3 choices.

1. Teleprompter boring speech which will do nothing.
2. Somehow manage to make a good speech that isn't crazy.
3. be Trump, off the cuff, nonsensical.

If he does #3, which is what I'd imagine he'd do, a lot of people who are really giving Trump their first hard look are going to say to themselves "oh my god...it's worse than I have been hearing. Nope." And then Obama comes in less than a week later and seals the deal.


There is nothing the RNC has shown so far that indicates to me Trump is even remotely capable of not fucking it up. And thank god for that.

And next week we're going to be saying "Thanks, Obama."

I agree with you, although I slightly disagree on the Veep speeches (But more on that in a second).

Hillary has her core groups pretty well sewn up, I think. Where Obama is going to be most helpful is acting as a character witness for her. It's the humanizing speech we'd normally associate with a spouse. Bill is too partisan to be able to do that, but Obama is perfectly poised to do it. Especially given their relationship from 2008 onward. In a way, he (along with Bernie, I'd argue) can give fence sitters permission to vote for her.

That's why I think Bernie's speech is actually super important. No one really thinks Bernie and Hillary like each other that well. (I think they're less close than Obama/Clinton after 2008). They probably don't loathe each other, but there's no love lost between them. If he can make an argument, not just to his supporters but to people at large, "Look. We don't have to agree with her 100%, but my god, look at the alternative" we'll be sitting pretty.

That's why the DNC needs to be more about the Democratic party than purely about Hillary Clinton. Make this about what we, as a party, have done and will do. We're the party of love, not hate. Bridges, not walls. Inclusion not exclusion. We're not angry. We're not bitter. We're not going to spend 4 days calling for Trump's head on a platter. The entire theme of the party needs to be about Obama and Hillary appearing as states(wo)man like as possible.

But. I think on the GOP side the Veep speech is actually really dang important, especially with how poorly the rollout went. Weekend Update just did a thing showing delegates didn't even know who Pence was when given a lineup of boring, white dudes. If he delivers a decent speech, he can attempt to negate the shit storm that's going to be coming his way soon. Because, I do think Hillary's surrogates (ie Warren) are going to tie his anti-gay, anti-woman rhetoric around his neck hard. Because we need to de-legitimize him. We can't let the GOP own a narrative where fence sitters can say "Well, Trump's a mess, but at least he has someone stable in Pence!"

For Hillary's Veep, I agree. Just don't choke on a dick on live TV, and we'll be okay.
 
I'm really hoping Obama does a better speech than "I know its not sexy, but its what we've got" for Hillary. I'm hoping they all do, "I know Hillary Clinton. I worked with her. She's amazing. I've never been more excited to vote for someone" speeches.

That said, I thought Bernie did an OK job of that when he endorsed and it didn't seem to matter much to the leaners then either. I think Hillary has the most chance to push them. Many have built a caricature of her in their head. She's the only one that can knock it down. She's a good public speaker too. I don't doubt she can do it.

To clarify, I was saying the voters would be saying "it's not sexy, but it's what we've got," not Obama.

I think Obama is going to make an amazing case for Hillary enough for them to go from "ugh, not Hillary" to what I said earlier.

and while I agree on Hillary, perceptions are hard to change. I think Obama is the one that can do it.
 

watershed

Banned
I'm really hoping Obama does a better speech than "I know its not sexy, but its what we've got" for Hillary. I'm hoping they all do, "I know Hillary Clinton. I worked with her. She's amazing. I've never been more excited to vote for someone" speeches.

That said, I thought Bernie did an OK job of that when he endorsed and it didn't seem to matter much to the leaners then either. I think Hillary has the most chance to push them. Many have built a caricature of her in their head. She's the only one that can knock it down. She's a good public speaker too. I don't doubt she can do it.
Did you watch Obama's emdorsement speech? If you did you would know Obama isn't going to give a "I know its not sexy..." whatever speech. He's not a bitter Sanders supporter.
 
I agree with Black Mamba,

my take is that the Trump camp is really missing that former GOP President to bless him, or former candidate who was close enough.

Obama is going to kill it next week and I firmly believe that Barack's speech will outshine Hillary's but that's okay. We know that campaigning is not her forte.

But Trump doesn't have a George H.W. Bush, doesn't have a George W. Bush, doesn't have John McCain or Mitt Romney

Trump has nothing.

Hillary has BIll Clinton, Bernie Sanders and above all: Barack Obama

the contrast between fire & brimstone versus hope and rainbows are going to be glaring
 
I agree with you, although I slightly disagree on the Veep speeches (But more on that in a second).

Hillary has her core groups pretty well sewn up, I think. Where Obama is going to be most helpful is acting as a character witness for her. It's the humanizing speech we'd normally associate with a spouse. Bill is too partisan to be able to do that, but Obama is perfectly poised to do it. Especially given their relationship from 2008 onward. In a way, he (along with Bernie, I'd argue) can give fence sitters permission to vote for her.

That's why I think Bernie's speech is actually super important. No one really thinks Bernie and Hillary like each other that well. (I think they're less close than Obama/Clinton after 2008). They probably don't loathe each other, but there's no love lost between them. If he can make an argument, not just to his supporters but to people at large, "Look. We don't have to agree with her 100%, but my god, look at the alternative" we'll be sitting pretty.

That's why the DNC needs to be more about the Democratic party than purely about Hillary Clinton. Make this about what we, as a party, have done and will do. We're the party of love, not hate. Bridges, not walls. Inclusion not exclusion. We're not angry. We're not bitter. We're not going to spend 4 days calling for Trump's head on a platter. The entire theme of the party needs to be about Obama and Hillary appearing as states(wo)man like as possible.

But. I think on the GOP side the Veep speech is actually really dang important, especially with how poorly the rollout went. Weekend Update just did a thing showing delegates didn't even know who Pence was when given a lineup of boring, white dudes. If he delivers a decent speech, he can attempt to negate the shit storm that's going to be coming his way soon. Because, I do think Hillary's surrogates (ie Warren) are going to tie his anti-gay, anti-woman rhetoric around his neck hard. Because we need to de-legitimize him. We can't let the GOP own a narrative where fence sitters can say "Well, Trump's a mess, but at least he has someone stable in Pence!"

For Hillary's Veep, I agree. Just don't choke on a dick on live TV, and we'll be okay.

Everything you said before the VP speech is exactly what I'm intending to argue. We're on the same page.

I disagree on Pence. Nobody is going to not vote for Trump because of Mike Pence. Attacking Pence might help with some turnout on the margins but I mean, I don't see how Mike Pence isn't completely overshadowed by Trump in this election.

I think Pence has 2 things left this entire campaign. This speech and his debate. As long as he doesn't nothing horribly stupid in either, he will be completely gone from the campaign.
 
Everything you said before the VP speech is exactly what I'm intending to argue. We're on the same page.

I disagree on Pence. Nobody is going to not vote for Trump because of Mike Pence. Attacking Pence might help with some turnout on the margins but I mean, I don't see how Mike Pence isn't completely overshadowed by Trump in this election.

I think Pence has 2 things left this entire campaign. This speech and his debate. As long as he doesn't nothing horribly stupid in either, he will be completely gone from the campaign.

My thoughts on Pence are more about a preemptive strike, to be clear. We need to discredit him so if they try and use him to fix the Trump fuckups it falls on deaf ears. Warren's been doing a good job of that. I don't think we need to focus on him, but we need to take a few jabs at him to make sure he has blood coming out of his...whatever.

That's why I wish she would pick a great debater, and a great personality to be the Veep. It would be good to body check him at a debate, but that's just me being a mean girl. :p
 
I wish people would stop referring to melania as "beautiful."

A woman's worth should not be tied to her looks unless of course that is literally part of her job (I mean, like an exotic dancer or something).

What does her looking good have to do with anything at all? It's pretty fucking sexist.
 

mo60

Member
I think you're diablosing a little too much here.

Prior to the FBI thing, Hillary was running pretty far ahead of Trump. Some tightening was always going to happen, although I don't think it's a permanent closing. If you look at polls from this time last year (or even a bit later during the RNC) there were polls fairly consistently showing Romney ahead. CBS had it as Romney +1 in July of 2012. YouGov had Romney +1 this time in 2012.

We are too partisan for anyone to really win by massive margins anymore. There are just too many things deeply baked into the electorate. And, with Hillary, that's maybe doubly true.

Why I think 2020 is a different monster is, you know, look at her approval ratings. Running for office, people hate her. BUT, once she's in office, everyone chills the hell out. Why? Because, number one, she's damn good at her job. Two, she doesn't have to pretend to not be ambitious. One of the worst things a woman can be called is ambitious.

tl:dr Everything's fine.

Like I said before I do think hilary will win probably by 10% or higher, This election is a bit different than the previous elections despites hilary's issues.She's facing a candidate that is literally Goldwater tier. Her share of the popular vote will be between 51% and 53% in the end on election night. I'm not sure if her favourability ratings will ever be above water, but that won't matter much in this election.
 
I wish people would stop referring to melania as "beautiful."

A woman's worth should not be tied to her looks unless of course that is literally part of her job (I mean, like an exotic dancer or something).

What does her looking good have to do with anything at all? It's pretty fucking sexist.

Considering she's a trophy wife, aren't her looks basically the only thing that matters?
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
She can't pull away because candidate quality means fuck all in a hyperpolarized political climate.

Cruz would also lose.

The problem is the country is too partisan and there's "my team" and "your team" in politics to the nth degree.

There's a very good chance Hillary would have lost to another candidate but Cruz isn't one of them. Neither is Carson or Huckabee or many of the other morons and ultra conservatives.

Cruz is much much worse. At least Trump can be funny and some people actually like him. Cruz is barely liked (at leat that's the impression) by his family.

Also, Obama couldn't "pull away" in 2008 even if he was super charismatic and was facing a hates Republican Party.

Cruz couldn't even convince moderate Republicans to back him over Kasich even when Kasich was eliminated from the race.

Cruz appeals to literally no one other than people that believe the rapture will occur within the next five years. His numbers with everyone other than self identified very conservative Republicans were trash throughout the entire primary and his favorability numbers with Republicans went into the trash by the end of the primary.

It's going to be someone like Trump again in 2020 but not Cruz.

Lmao, okay bro.

I think you're diablosing a little too much here.

Prior to the FBI thing, Hillary was running pretty far ahead of Trump. Some tightening was always going to happen, although I don't think it's a permanent closing. If you look at polls from this time last year (or even a bit later during the RNC) there were polls fairly consistently showing Romney ahead. CBS had it as Romney +1 in July of 2012. YouGov had Romney +1 this time in 2012.

We are too partisan for anyone to really win by massive margins anymore. There are just too many things deeply baked into the electorate. And, with Hillary, that's maybe doubly true.

Why I think 2020 is a different monster is, you know, look at her approval ratings. Running for office, people hate her. BUT, once she's in office, everyone chills the hell out. Why? Because, number one, she's damn good at her job. Two, she doesn't have to pretend to not be ambitious. One of the worst things a woman can be called is ambitious.

tl:dr Everything's fine.

This is just so wrong, I'm sorry. I was actually rooting for Cruz over Trump because I thought he'd be easier to beat in the general.

While Hillary's numbers are a bit depressed from even a couple weeks ago, Trump's numbers are absolutely stagnant.

Trying to outdo Diablos bro?

Wow. Didn't think I'd get so many replies.

However, Adam is the only one who got what I meant. Obviously, since Trump is the candidate, I'm not talking about 2016. I'm talking about 2020. Completely different situation.

Think about it: Hillary wins (which I'm sure we all hope she does). Gets to make 2 or 3 Supreme Court Justice decisions, which freaks out all republicans (and maybe some moderates, depending on who she chooses). ACA premiums keep rising like they have been (even though they were going to anyway without ACA, the messaging from the GOP will be that it's the ACA's fault). All it would take is some sort of economic setback to possibly swing the pendulum back toward the republicans. We're going to get 4 solid years of republicans blaming Hillary for everything. I don't like Cruz. I think he's a bad guy. But I think he's competent, and I think in the right situation he could pull off a victory.

It's not that crazy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom