40 replies to this topic

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

I used to think I knew something about American politics. But if there's one thing 2016 has shown, it's that all my education, knowledge, training, and experience amount to a big, steaming pile of excrement this time.

 

First, there's Donald Trump. I couldn't have been more wrong about Trump. On these very forums (and in many other places) I poo-pooed his candidacy, scoffed, and made light of his chances. I thought he'd be out by Thanksgiving, certainly by Christmas. In my wildest dreams I never imagined he would make it so far, much less be the odds-on favorite for the Republican nomination. Don't get me wrong — I'm thoroughly enjoying watching him singlehandedly destroy the Republican party. But I never saw it coming. 

 

But I consoled myself with the fact that these were Republicans, conservatives, and therefore not my people. The Democrats were a group I understood much better. And there, at least, my prognostications were more on the money. I called Bernie Sanders' early successes, as well as Hillary Clinton's pulling ahead and eventually clinching the nomination. Until Tuesday night, when Michigan delivered a huge (YUGE!) upset to the Lady Clinton by giving Bernie the win.

 

And now? Who knows? Certainly not me! Trump seems like a lock; at this point it's hard to see how someone overtakes him to claim the nomination. What they could do, and what all the pundits are talking about, is drive the process all the way to the convention by denying Trump the 1,237 delegates needed to lock up the nomination. Then they could nominate Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan or whatever other loser gets the gold watch this year. Because if that happens Trump will almost certainly run as an independent, and almost certainly make it his mission to humiliate the eventual GOP nominee.

 

As for the Democrats... Again, who knows? On its face it still looks like the advantage is with Clinton. She has won 742 delegates to Bernie's 542, and she is way ahead in the superdelegate race (461 to 25). But here's the thing: Those superdelegate pledges are soft. They don't actually vote until June, when the elected delegates have all been won. If Bernie starts to rack up more wins, and more won delegates, then more superdelegates will move to his column. There are still 2,761 delegates left to win (not counting superdelegates). Bernie would need to get 67% of them to win the nomination (or 62% counting the remaining superdelegates), a daunting task, to be sure. But if he starts to win and gets on a roll some of Hillary's superdelegates might defect. Under normal circumstances I would say that such a path was virtually impossible, but this year? I wouldn't make any bets.

 

I know nothing, and I kind of like it. It's nice to have a race in which the outcome is not already a forgone conclusion. 2008 was exciting; 2016 is even more so. Interesting times indeed.

[Manoka]

Well at least you admit what we've all known for years.

[King Biscuit]

Yes Futureboy, your insight from the 23rd Century has done little to help your case.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

Yes Futureboy, your insight from the 23rd Century has done little to help your case.

 

23rd? WAAAAAY later than that!

[rotty]

lol, futureboy

[the rebel]

What they could do, and what all the pundits are talking about, is drive the process all the way to the convention by denying Trump the 1,237 delegates needed to lock up the nomination. Then they could nominate Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan or whatever other loser gets the gold watch this year. Because if that happens Trump will almost certainly run as an independent, and almost certainly make it his mission to humiliate the eventual GOP nominee.

If they tried that instead of going for what the voters wanted and replaced Trump instead which would be suicide for the party so I doubt it.

But if they did imagine if Trump went independent and then won!!!

Becoming a then unaffiliated President...

Edited by the rebel, 11 March 2016 - 04:05 AM.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

I think if they did it, it would be in recognition of the fact that they would lose. I think there are elements within the party who would rather lose than let Donald Trump win as a Republican.

 

I doubt that Trump's support would be sufficient to win as an independent, but as I said in the original post, what do I know? This year has turned everything on its head. What I will say is that the math for winning as an independent is daunting, bordering on near impossibility. That said, there are undoubtedly states where an independent Trump could and would win, at least in a three-way race. And remember, you only have to win a plurality of a state's popular vote to get all of that state's electoral votes.

 

So let's say, for the sake of argument, that the nominees are Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney, and Trump runs as an independent. Take a state like Idaho, which usually splits about 65-35% in favor of the Republican. There is a large Mormon contingent in Idaho (second only to Utah), who would undoubtedly vote for Romney; let's call that 25%. Like other Democrats, Hillary Clinton could expect to get around 35%. That would leave Trump with around 40% of the vote and the win in Idaho.

 

But more likely than not, a Trump independent run would propel the Democrat, in this case Hillary Clinton, to the White House. This is because Trump's presence would suddenly put states into play for the Democrats that would not normally be considered. Take Texas. The Lone State State is reliably red, but the margins are not as wide as in Idaho, usually around 60-40%. In 2012, Romney got 57% to Obama's 41%. In the three-way scenario described above, it is not difficult to see how Hillary Clinton could actually win Texas. Say Romney and Trump split the normally-Republican vote 25-35%, and Clinton gets the typical Democratic 40%, suddenly Texas' electoral votes are in the D column for the first time since 1976. This scenario could play out in many red states. This is why so many Republicans think Trump's real motivation is to get a Democrat elected.

Throw Bernie Sanders into the mix instead of Hillary and the math becomes even weirder!

[Manoka]

The weird thing is that this is looking to be basically a 4-candidate election.

 

Sanders and Clinton. Trump vs. other republicans. 

 

 

Usually it's dichotomous. The newest election may not even be determined by a 50% winner, but a 25%+ winner. Someone with 30% of the votes may become the president. That's going to be weird.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

It has happened. Bill Clinton, for example, never won a popular majority. In 1992 he only got 43% of the popular vote. That could easily happen again.

[Manoka]

It has happened. Bill Clinton, for example, never won a popular majority. In 1992 he only got 43% of the popular vote. That could easily happen again.

 What I mean is, someone could win with just about a quarter of the votes. O_O

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

I don't think so, at least not in a three-way race. But if there were four or five major candidates, then I think someone could win with only 25% of the popular vote. Such is the nature of the Electoral College.

[the rebel]

Donald Trump, this is a nice election piece on the dangers of Clinton becoming President:

https://www.instagra.../p/BDBS8bYGhWr/

It caught me off guard, laughed and it is quite funny. Sound needs to be on.

[Redezra]

Maybe, just maybe, the scary russians and the scary jihadis need to be treated as the threat level they are: Minor. At best.

 

The real problems are economic. Stagflation, the collapse of traditional growth models, fiscally paralyzed governments. That's going to bring down your civilization a lot faster than some guy in a balaclava with a gun.

[ᗅᗺᗷᗅ]

But those things are hard to explain and hard to understand, Red. Trump appeals because he is saying the knee-jerk, simplistic things that reflect the resentment that a lot of working-class whites, especially males of a certain age, feel. The people supporting him aren't looking for real solutions, they are looking to have their own preconceived notions reinforced. The world is changing and they are afraid, they want Daddy Trump to make them feel safe. It is difficult for people like you and me to grasp, because we operate on reason, and approach problems from an evidence-based approach. Try to think of it as studying another species' behavior. These creatures are guided by primitive emotions. Don't expect too much of them.

[Redezra]

But those things are hard to explain and hard to understand, Red. Trump appeals because he is saying the knee-jerk, simplistic things that reflect the resentment that a lot of working-class whites, especially males of a certain age, feel. The people supporting him aren't looking for real solutions, they are looking to have their own preconceived notions reinforced. The world is changing and they are afraid, they want Daddy Trump to make them feel safe. It is difficult for people like you and me to grasp, because we operate on reason, and approach problems from an evidence-based approach. Try to think of it as studying another species' behavior. These creatures are guided by primitive emotions. Don't expect too much of them.

 

Ugh, they're imbeciles, the lot of them. Why do we let everyone vote again?

[Haflinger]

If the superdelegate votes matter, the Clinton campaign will make sure that each one of them is offered a paid 3-year vacation at the resort of their choice as long as they vote correctly. I don't see Sanders making inroads there.

 

That's only if they matter though, which isn't yet certain. Sanders might just beat them with popular vote.

[Shokkou]

But those things are hard to explain and hard to understand, Red. Trump appeals because he is saying the knee-jerk, simplistic things that reflect the resentment that a lot of working-class whites, especially males of a certain age, feel. The people supporting him aren't looking for real solutions, they are looking to have their own preconceived notions reinforced. The world is changing and they are afraid, they want Daddy Trump to make them feel safe. It is difficult for people like you and me to grasp, because we operate on reason, and approach problems from an evidence-based approach. Try to think of it as studying another species' behavior. These creatures are guided by primitive emotions. Don't expect too much of them.

 

Ugh, they're imbeciles, the lot of them. Why do we let everyone vote again?

Or perhaps it's because it's amusing to finally see leftists confronted with someone better at smarmy self-congratulation than they are.

[the rebel]

Surprised on the polls lead for NY

Edited by the rebel, 14 April 2016 - 05:06 PM.

[Thrash]

Not surprised at all. Trump will easily take NY/NJ/PA.

 

I'm so confident of it that I considered changing affiliations to vote for Sanders, but that Dem party primary is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy beyond rigged.

[the rebel]

Not surprised at all. Trump will easily take NY/NJ/PA.

I hear Cali is going to be the deciding state.