| |
Discussion: U.S. Election 2016
Member Since: 4/6/2011
Posts: 31,849
|
Quote:
Originally posted by RihsusChrist(ATG)
Hillary's shift to the left isn't genuine...she is just "attempting" to woo Bernie supporters...Hillary will model her presidency after her husbands...who was a centrist for all intensive purposes.
Hillary's problem is that she doesn't have Bill's ideals, glad-handing skills, or charisma. She will steadily steer the US like George HW Bush did in the late 80's/ early 90's a la Reagan's 3rd term, but a more dynamic, visionary GOP nominee will make her look stodgy come 2020.
|
kii. With the GOP being a crumbing mess I doubt this will happen. If Hillary's term is even half as decent as Obama's I can see her winning a 2020 election.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 1,311
|
Quote:
Originally posted by RihsusChrist(ATG)
Hillary's shift to the left isn't genuine...she is just "attempting" to woo Bernie supporters...Hillary will model her presidency after her husbands...who was a centrist for all intensive purposes.
Hillary's problem is that she doesn't have Bill's ideals, glad-handing skills, or charisma. She will steadily steer the US like George HW Bush did in the late 80's/ early 90's a la Reagan's 3rd term, but a more dynamic, visionary GOP nominee will make her look stodgy come 2020.
|
Her shift to the left economically I do not believe. She's going to continue business as usual, and there won't be the regulation or any battle against Wall Street. The astonishing thing is that the same economic system (hardly any regulation, completely free markets) that led to the 2008 crash is still in place. There has been no serious attempt to reform or question... because it isn't in the "establishments" interests. A crash like 2008 could easily happen again.
I also think she'll still be the same Clinton we've always seen on foreign affairs.
But socially, where she'll no doubt want to try and show herself as a progressive, I do think she'll continue Obama's policy of being pretty left wing. She'll support immigrants, talk about gun control, etc etc - Problem is, none of that has a realistic chance of passing through Congress.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/4/2014
Posts: 6,751
|
Quote:
Originally posted by geo
No, it says a lot about how partisan America actually is and how the media is obsessed with a horse race.
|
2008 McCain: 173 electoral votes
1996 Dole: 159 electoral votes
1992 George HW Bush: 168 electoral votes
1988 Dukakis: 111 electoral votes
1984 Mondale: 13 electoral votes 
1980 Jimmy Carter: 49 electoral votes 
Most modern US elections weren't even close...only 2000, 2004, and 2012 had both candidates getting over 200 + electoral votes... and Romney was in the low 200's, a non threat to Obama.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/30/2011
Posts: 2,986
|
Quote:
Originally posted by RihsusChrist(ATG)
2008 McCain: 173 electoral votes
1996 Dole: 159 electoral votes
1992 George HW Bush: 168 electoral votes
1988 Dukakis: 111 electoral votes
1984 Mondale: 13 electoral votes
1980 Jimmy Carter: 49 electoral votes
Most modern US elections weren't even close...only 2000, 2004, and 2012 had both candidates getting over 200 + electoral votes... and Romney was in the low 200's, a non threat to Obama. |
Obviously they weren't close in the end, this election probably won't be either. But up until election day the media always portrays a narrative of it being too close to call or if one side is ahead they talk about potential for an upset. They're not going to proclaim one side as the winner before election day, it's bad for business.
Also, you can't just look at the electoral vote. When the media talks about the race they talk about national opinion polls. 51 - 47% may appear close for example, especially given the margin of error, but it translates to an electoral landslide as in 2012.
You can't even say Romney wasn't a threat. He clearly wasn't once the votes started coming in, but let's not act like everyone was confident beforehand Obama was going to win re-election.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/4/2014
Posts: 6,751
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Reza
kii. With the GOP being a crumbing mess I doubt this will happen. If Hillary's term is even half as decent as Obama's I can see her winning a 2020 election.
|
But you fail to miss the one positive that Trump is bringing to the GOP...their has been a naught a mention of Jesus or God from the GOP side this election. And Trump has said positive things about homosexuals. He may lose this election in epic fashion, but Trump is creating a clear path for a moderate GOP candidate on social issues to be accepted by the GOP electorate.
^ That is what the Democrats fear the most. Democrats lose their advantage on social issues, they are toast.
Quote:
Originally posted by Jacketh
Her shift to the left economically I do not believe. She's going to continue business as usual, and there won't be the regulation or any battle against Wall Street. The astonishing thing is that the same economic system (hardly any regulation, completely free markets) that led to the 2008 crash is still in place. There has been no serious attempt to reform or question... because it isn't in the "establishments" interests. A crash like 2008 could easily happen again.
I also think she'll still be the same Clinton we've always seen on foreign affairs.
But socially, where she'll no doubt want to try and show herself as a progressive, I do think she'll continue Obama's policy of being pretty left wing. She'll support immigrants, talk about gun control, etc etc - Problem is, none of that has a realistic chance of passing through Congress.
|
It's the first paragraph, and sentence about foreign affairs I'm worried about. 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/30/2011
Posts: 2,986
|
Quote:
Originally posted by RihsusChrist(ATG)
But you fail to miss the one positive that Trump is bringing to the GOP...their has been a naught a mention of Jesus or God from the GOP side this election. And Trump has said positive things about homosexuals. He may lose this election in epic fashion, but Trump is creating a clear path for a moderate GOP candidate on social issues to be accepted by the GOP electorate.
^ That is what the Democrats fear the most. Democrats lose their advantage on social issues, they are toast.
|
This is bizarre. Trump's approach may be unconventional, but let's not pretend he is some kind of social progressive. Have you forgotten what he said about abortion? He also de facto endorses Pence's approach on LGBT rights given he chose him as his running mate. And let's not start on immigration...
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/4/2014
Posts: 6,751
|
Quote:
Originally posted by geo
Obviously they weren't close in the end, this election probably won't be either. But up until election day the media always portrays a narrative of it being too close to call or if one side is ahead they talk about potential for an upset. They're not going to proclaim one side as the winner before election day, it's bad for business.
Also, you can't just look at the electoral vote. When the media talks about the race they talk about national opinion polls. 51 - 47% may appear close for example, especially given the margin of error, but it translates to an electoral landslide as in 2012.
You can't even say Romney wasn't a threat. He clearly wasn't once the votes started coming in, but let's not act like everyone was confident beforehand Obama was going to win re-election.
|
That's all that matters...the media will spin, and contrive their polls to get viewers. It's the state by state polls that matter, not the national ones.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/30/2011
Posts: 2,986
|
Quote:
Originally posted by RihsusChrist(ATG)
That's all that matters...the media will spin, and contrive their polls to get viewers. It's the state by state polls that matter, not the national ones.
|
That's my point though. Just because an election may not be close, it won't stop the media from spinning it as such.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/4/2014
Posts: 6,751
|
Quote:
Originally posted by geo
This is bizarre. Trump's approach may be unconventional, but let's not pretend he is some kind of social progressive. Have you forgotten what he said about abortion? He also de facto endorses Pence's approach on LGBT rights given he chose him as his running mate. And let's not start on immigration... |
I'm not talking about Immigration...that is an issue all to itself, not a social one.
Trump is a moderate Democrat posing as a Republican...and he had to say those things in the primary to get elected, and selecting Pence made the more conservative voters of the GOP feel more at ease.
If you look at Trumps past comments up until very recently he had very Democratic stances...the only issue Trump seems to have a concrete GOP position on is Immigration, and even he has been wavering on that.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/30/2011
Posts: 2,986
|
Quote:
Originally posted by RihsusChrist(ATG)
I'm not talking about Immigration...that is an issue all to itself, not a social one.
Trump is a moderate Democrat posing as a Republican...and he had to say those things in the primary to get elected, and selecting Pence made the more conservative voters of the GOP feel more at ease.
If you look at Trumps past comments up until very recently he had very Democratic stances...the only issue Trump seems to have a concrete GOP position on is Immigration, and even he has been wavering on that.
|
Precisely. No 'social moderate' is going to get through the GOP primaries. So why should Democrats worry?
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/4/2014
Posts: 6,751
|
Quote:
Originally posted by geo
That's my point though. Just because an election may not be close, it won't stop the media from spinning it as such.
|
Yes...but you used the word partisan, when evidence of most past elections shows the majority of the electorate being non-partisan, and voting for one particular candidate.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/30/2011
Posts: 2,986
|
Quote:
Originally posted by RihsusChrist(ATG)
Yes...but you used the word partisan, when evidence of most past elections shows the majority of the electorate being non-partisan, and voting for one particular candidate.
|
America has got a whole lot more partisan over the past few decades. You can't look at elections from the 80's or even the 90's and say that people are as willing to cross party lines today barring something truly exceptional. 2008 is considered a huge victory for modern standards, and McCain still got 46% of the vote.
Just look at some of the states Reagan or Clinton won. You really think the west coast will flip red for anyone nowadays? Or that states like Tennessee will be able to go blue?
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/15/2009
Posts: 16,903
|
It would be amazing if Republicans kept control of the house for ten straight years (2010-2020) without doing anything.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/4/2014
Posts: 6,751
|
Quote:
Originally posted by geo
Precisely. No 'social moderate' is going to get through the GOP primaries. So why should Democrats worry?
|
Trump actually made the wrong choice in selecting Pence...he caved into what was seemingly the logical choice to make for VP, but he could of choose anyone....even socially liberal GOPer John Huntsman, and his supports still would of adored him.
Pence's social views do Trump no favors with certain demographics in the general election...Trump actually could of been a transformative candidate, but he took a lot of bad advice...and went too far right in the primaries when he really didn't have too.
Socially moderate GOP candidates will have an easier time winning the GOP primary in 2020...Trump laid down that foundation this election cycle.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 1,311
|
Quote:
Originally posted by geo
Also, you can't just look at the electoral vote. When the media talks about the race they talk about national opinion polls. 51 - 47% may appear close for example, especially given the margin of error, but it translates to an electoral landslide as in 2012.
You can't even say Romney wasn't a threat. He clearly wasn't once the votes started coming in, but let's not act like everyone was confident beforehand Obama was going to win re-election.
|
The Romney-Obama race was very close. It all comes down to the margins in the battleground state.
Romney lost Florida by 75k votes.
He lost Ohio by 165k votes.
He lost Virginia by 150k votes.
He lost Colorado by 137k votes.
These aren't big margins at all. Had Romney managed to swing Florida and Ohio (which, was more than possible given the margins), then suddenly the Electoral College makes the race look really close. If he managed to swing them all, he would have been president. The "winner-takes-all" nature of the EC though distorts how close it actually was.
Added together its just under 380k votes that re-elected Obama by securing those four key states for him. It wasn't a lot.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 3,292
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Jacketh
The Romney-Obama race was very close. It all comes down to the margins in the battleground state.
Romney lost Florida by 75k votes.
He lost Ohio by 165k votes.
He lost Virginia by 150k votes.
He lost Colorado by 137k votes.
These aren't big margins at all. Had Romney managed to swing Florida and Ohio (which, was more than possible given the margins), then suddenly the Electoral College makes the race look really close. If he managed to swing them all, he would have been president. The "winner-takes-all" nature of the EC though distorts how close it actually was.
Added together its just under 380k votes that re-elected Obama and secured those four key states for him. It wasn't a lot.
|
I hope Hillary can snatch Ohio.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/4/2014
Posts: 6,751
|
Quote:
Originally posted by geo
America has got a whole lot more partisan over the past few decades. You can't look at elections from the 80's or even the 90's and say that people are as willing to cross party lines today barring something truly exceptional. 2008 is considered a huge victory for modern standards, and McCain still got 46% of the vote.
Just look at some of the states Reagan or Clinton won. You really think the west coast will flip red for anyone nowadays? Or that states like Tennessee will be able to go blue?
|
Sure...if a candidate has the "it" factor like Reagan or Bill Clinton did they can. Those 2 candidates transcended their respective political parties...most voters will respond to a candidate that presents themselves as a natural dynamic leader regardless of party affiliation.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 2,208
|
One month left right? 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 27,856
|
538 now has Clinton down as more likely to win Florida than Nevada
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/27/2016
Posts: 2,324
|
Trump is the only one who can bring change
|
|
|
|
|
|
