Super Tuesday 2016 |OT| The Final Incursion is a double Incursion (Mar 5-15 contests)

Status
Not open for further replies.
So for people paying more attention to this than me - is Trump still going to win the nomination? Is it more likely than not that he gets the amount of delegates to avoid a brokered convention, or is that unlikely at this point?

Not sure if it's just a false perception, but it seems like his momentum has slowed considerably in the last 2 weeks.
 
So for people paying more attention to this than me - is Trump still going to win the nomination? Is it more likely than not that he gets the amount of delegates to avoid a brokered convention, or is that unlikely at this point?

Not sure if it's just a false perception, but it seems like his momentum has slowed considerably in the last 2 weeks.

He will undoubtedly have the most delegates come the convention, whether he has enough to guarantee the nomination is another matter. If he has the most delegates and it is brokered and they don't select him as the nominee, implosion for the GOP.
 
I wonder if places like reddit are going to rally behind Hillary if she wins the nomination.
/Sandersforpresident isn't for sure. Like 90% of the posters say they'll vote for Jill Stein, Trump, or not at all if Clinton wins. I'm sure a large amount of that is big talk, but a lot of Sanders voters who say that are those that wouldn't otherwise or would vote independent, so it won't matter anyhow.
 
So for people paying more attention to this than me - is Trump still going to win the nomination? Is it more likely than not that he gets the amount of delegates to avoid a brokered convention, or is that unlikely at this point?

Not sure if it's just a false perception, but it seems like his momentum has slowed considerably in the last 2 weeks.
Brokered convention appears to be a much more likely possibility than it was a few weeks ago.
 
So for people paying more attention to this than me - is Trump still going to win the nomination? Is it more likely than not that he gets the amount of delegates to avoid a brokered convention, or is that unlikely at this point?

Not sure if it's just a false perception, but it seems like his momentum has slowed considerably in the last 2 weeks.

I think we'll see if his momentum has slowed tonight. Some polls had him up by quite a bit in Michigan, if he underperforms there then that's not looking good for him.
 
So for people paying more attention to this than me - is Trump still going to win the nomination? Is it more likely than not that he gets the amount of delegates to avoid a brokered convention, or is that unlikely at this point?

Not sure if it's just a false perception, but it seems like his momentum has slowed considerably in the last 2 weeks.
Ask again later tonight and on the15th.
 
/Sandersforpresident isn't for sure. Like 90% of the posters say they'll vote for Jill Stei, Trump, or not at all if Clinton wins. I'm sure a large amount of that is big talk, but a lot of Sanders voters who say that are those that wouldn't otherwise bot or would vote independent, so it won't matter anyhow.


I'm sorry but like most other subreddits, that group lives in a bubble and many seem to have no clue what they are talking about. Doubt Hillary would've had them either way.
 
Rubio may do better in Hawaii than I thought earlier -- apparently, he has been the only candidate to campaign there.

New prediction

Michigan: Trump
Mississippi: Trump
Idaho: Cruz
Hawaii: Rubio
 
/Sandersforpresident isn't for sure. Like 90% of the posters say they'll vote for Jill Stein, Trump, or not at all if Clinton wins. I'm sure a large amount of that is big talk, but a lot of Sanders voters who say that are those that wouldn't otherwise or would vote independent, so it won't matter anyhow.

/Sandersforpresident is basically the 2016 version of Hillaryis44 (the fringe of the fringe)
 
As a sanders supporter, I honestly don't see how you can vote trump on an ideology front. The guy represents all that I hate. Hes entertaining at it, but still.
 
As a sanders supporter, I honestly don't see how you can vote trump on an ideology front. The guy represents all that I hate. Hes entertaining at it, but still.

From what I can tell some are only in it for the anti-establishment part or are for accelerationism.
 
As a sanders supporter, I honestly don't see how you can vote trump on an ideology front. The guy represents all that I hate. Hes entertaining at it, but still.
Here's one example. He's for a protectionist trade policy, which blue collar voters, whose jobs have been shipped overseas, favor. Both Hillary and Sanders have been courting these voters as well, coming out against NAFTA, TPP, etc. Neither frame the issue as simply as Trump does, though. "I'll get the president of the company on the phone and say it's perfectly fine if they move manufacturing to Mexico -- but for each unit they sell in America, we put a 35% tax on it." Free trade improves the global economy and people in first world countries benefit as well... but some people lose from it, and these people are upset. I get why these people would support Trump.
 
I wonder if places like reddit are going to rally behind Hillary if she wins the nomination.

I'm expecting all the most strident of reddit will promise to vote Trump in protest because nothing says "I'm a person of character who truly cares about socialism and helping poor people" like electing Plastic Hitler. About 10% will actually bother to leave the house on Election Day though, which will hopefully be a small enough number in the big picture to not matter. Well, provided reddit doesn't use the time to come up with crazy Clinton sabotage like a lifer in prison with nothing better to do.

Of course if every state full of the average voter who went for Bernie in the Primary votes Trump, then we're gonna have a problem.
 
CdDzF4UWEAA15EK.jpg

Good for Hillary
 
He's Anti-Establishment. Thats really all that matters for some people.

From what I can tell some are only in it for the anti-establishment part or are for accelerationism.

I understand that part, and I'm glad he is running (if anything, to destroy the GOP) but his a rich business owner that has influenced government via bribes his whole life. His probably paid people bare minimum, and corned his markets into monolopiess by using his power. On an economic sense, he is everything that Sanders has fighting against the past 40 years. Top it off with race bating and religious pandering, bingo, you have the conservative message.

I also don't like that it sets the precedent that you have to be a billionaire to break through against either of the parties establishments.

When citizens united happen, the left was in an uproar. Now the issue is dismissed as a "single issue"? Well that single issue effects basically all policy. It effects both federal and state governments, in all elected positions. If we don't figure out some way to get the congress and senate, then the 2020s are going to be just as gridlocked via gerrymandering, because the donors target state and local positions to swing them republican in most cases. The presidency is only a small piece to the puzzle. That single issue is what leads to better government, and should not be laughed at by saying "Lol revolution." Right now the most important things we need to do is insure the right justices are appointed and the districts can be redrawn in 2020 to be more favorable.
 
The thing is, when it comes to campaign finance, he's not saying anything Hillary hasn't been. They'd both appoint the right judges. There's literally no space between them on this.

The reason he's derided as a single issue candidate is his inability to talk about anything else without going back to Wall Street and the Millionaires and Billionaires. He's shown no intellectual curiosity outside of that sphere. Just look at his foreign policy answers, he hasnt gotten any better over the course of this. That's the issue people have and they have that issue because the presidency is a multifaceted job and you dont always get to pick what you deal with on a specific day.
 
The thing is, when it comes to campaign finance, he's not saying anything Hillary hasn't been. They'd both appoint the right judges. There's literally no space between them on this.

The reason he's derided as a single issue candidate is his inability to talk about anything else without going back to Wall Street and the Millionaires and Billionaires. He's shown no intellectual curiosity outside of that sphere. Just look at his foreign policy answers, he hasnt gotten any better over the course of this. That's the issue people have and they have that issue because the presidency is a multifaceted job and you dont always get to pick what you deal with on a specific day.

People keep saying this,only showing their ignorance as to why some people prefer Sanders over Hillary.
 
The longer we are away from the citizens united decision, the less likely it is ever going to change. In this world of "money = free speech" with income inequality getting worse and worse due to a rigged economy....the further we are from 2010, the worse things will get and less power we will truly have.
 
The longer we are away from the citizens united decision, the less likely it is ever going to change. In this world of "money = free speech" with income inequality getting worse and worse due to a rigged economy....the further we are from 2010, the worse things will get and less power we will truly have.

Nobody cares and nothing short of a collapse of the us economy will change it.

It's time to just be happy with what you have and accept that if you have to live under the thumb of a type of oppression, "income inequality" is probably history's least oppressive and least harmful version of that.

The rich will always seek to make themselves richer. At least with the way things are in the world today the rich are forced to share more of their wealth than in the past.
 
You can frame it now however you want dude. You'll be voting for a Bernie 20 years from now anyway.

Well, hopefully the next Bernie drops the anti-data, anti-disagreement tunnel vision and can understand the importance of different sectors of the economy -- including the financial sector and the benefits of trade -- and to actually listening to experts.

I'll gladly vote for that candidate. Until then, I hope the democratic party and its voters stays committed to empirical evidence and listening to experts, even if it means electing relatively less progressive candidate. We can't lose our main advantage.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom