2018 - Elections and Trends

[Mapache 1,117]

Here are the last 10 Presidential Candidates ranked by popular vote percentage :


Barack Obama  (08)  69,498,516  52.9%
Barack Obama  (12)  65,915,795  51.1%
George W Bush (04)  62,040,610  50.7%
Al Gore     (00)  50,999,897  48.4%
John Kerry    (04)  59,028,444  48.3%
Hillary Clinton (16)  65,853,514  48.2%
George W Bush (00)  50,456,002  47.9%
Mitt Romney   (12)  60,933,504  47.2%
Donald Trump (16)  62,984,828  46.1%
John McCain   (08)  59,948,323  45.7%


Out of those 5 elections only one person had less of a chunk of the popular vote than Trump. John McCain who had a disaster of a campaign.

Out of those 5 elections only 3 were won by the person with the most total votes.

Only one Republican has won the Popular Vote since 1988. That was GWB in 04.

Edited July 1, 2018 by Mapache

[Newy25 7,703]

On 6/27/2018 at 1:50 PM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I don’t think there’s been any point in my life when I’ve learned so much.  

It’s probably the most fascinating time in US history.

But make no mistake, these are the dark times.

This just shows how young and naive some of you are. There have been times in our country where we  have been in an entire world at war where millions of people were being killed. We lived in a world where the two biggest super powers were pointing their nuclear weapons at each other. 

 

We have an asshole at president who says outrageous shit and gets people worked up with political theatre and outright lies. 

 

Some perspective people. 

 

Edited July 1, 2018 by Newy25

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

22 minutes ago, Newy25 said:

This just shows how young and naive some of you are. There have been times in our country where we  have been in an entire world at war where millions of people were being killed. We lived in a world where the two biggest super powers were pointing their nuclear weapons at each other. 

No shit?  Hate to break it to you but the world is still at war and the superpowers still have nukes pointed at each other.  We just don’t have the body counts.

Our reality TV President is in the process of dismantling the post WWII international order and he’s two klicks away from aligning us with the Axis powers. 

What could possibly go wrong? 

Edited July 1, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Newy25 7,703]

20 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

No shit?  Hate to break it to you but the world is still at war and the superpowers still have nukes pointed at each other.  We just don’t have the body counts.

Our reality TV President is in the process of dismantling the post WWII international order and he’s two klicks away from aligning us with the Axis powers. 

What could possibly go wrong? 

You are an idiot. And proved my point for  me about having no perspective 

[Bojack 2,082]

I think this is the best political ad I've ever seen.

 

 

[BabaYaga 15,328]

13 hours ago, Newy25 said:

he’s two klicks away from aligning us with the Axis powers. 

We're going to align with Germany, Italy, and Japan.  We're so fucked....

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

 

[pdmd_api 11]

 

Seeing a number of older Surly posters in particular freak out about Ocasio-Cortez has been particularly satisfying.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

2 minutes ago, pdmd_api said:

Seeing a number of older Surly posters in particular freak out about Ocasio-Cortez has been particularly satisfying.

The backlash against her has been remarkable.  

She’s too left!

She’s too young!

She’s why Republicans will win again!

 

She’s sincere, young, energetic, idealistic, compassionate, and not bought by special interest.

Her political party or ideology is secondary after that in today’s political world.

She is the establishment’s worst nightmare.

I wish the conservative movement had their own version of Ocasio-Cortez.

[Blotto 23,584]

7 minutes ago, pdmd_api said:

Seeing a number of older Surly posters in particular freak out about Ocasio-Cortez has been particularly satisfying.

Kimberly Clark should come out with red colored Depends emblazoned with MAGA. Their stock would skyrocket come Q3/Q4.

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

10 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The backlash against her has been remarkable.  

She’s too left!

She’s too young!

She’s why Republicans will win again!

 

She’s sincere, young, energetic, idealistic, compassionate, and not bought by special interest.

Her political party or ideology is secondary after that in today’s political world.

She is the establishment’s worst nightmare.

I wish the conservative movement had their own version of Ocasio-Cortez.

Her real problem is that she has little to no real world work experience.  I like her, but I would be surprised if she's effective in Congress.  Crowley, while sharing her political leanings, knew how to work with others, and more importantly, knew that he needed to work with others.   As much as young idealists believe they can change everything, they can't do that without help. She'll need Democrats on her side that come from districts that aren't nearly as liberal.  Otherwise, she's just going to be the Dem version of the tea party, vote no on everything (and fucking up left of center reforms in the process) while putting out uncompromised leftist bills that don't get much support and don't even see the floor.   We will see when she has to vote to save DACA while compromising on some of her immigration stances.

The modern conservative movement can't have someone like Ocasio-Cortez.  The modern movement is almost entirely about individuals getting rich in the private sector.  At 28, a modern conservative is working for dad's business, or just getting started in finance.  The closest thing you have to a conservative O-C is Stephen Miller who is mostly about xenophobia rather than conservative economics.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

Just now, FondrenRoad said:

Her real problem is that she has little to no real world work experience.  I like her, but I would be surprised if she's effective in Congress.  Crowley, while sharing her political leanings, knew how to work with others, and more importantly, knew that he needed to work with others.   As much as young idealists believe they can change everything, they can't do that without help. She'll need Democrats on her side that come from districts that aren't nearly as liberal.  Otherwise, she's just going to be the Dem version of the tea party, vote no on everything (and fucking up left of center reforms in the process) while putting out uncompromised leftist bills that don't get much support and don't even see the floor.   We will see when she has to vote to save DACA while compromising on some of her immigration stances.

The modern conservative movement can't have someone like Ocasio-Cortez.  The modern movement is almost entirely about individuals getting rich in the private sector.  At 28, a modern conservative is working for dad's business, or just getting started in finance.  The closest thing you have to a conservative O-C is Stephen Miller who is mostly about xenophobia rather than conservative economics.

If we could replace all of Congress with young smart pragmatic idealists on both sides, we would be light years ahead of where we are now.

Time to throw out all the old corporatist bums and get shit done.

[BrickHorn 18,290]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

If we could replace all of Congress with young smart pragmatic idealists on both sides, we would be light years ahead of where we are now.

Time to throw out all the old corporatist bums and get shit done.

I’ll settle for a simple majority with integrity and a spine.

[Blotto 23,584]

3 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Her real problem is that she has little to no real world work experience.  I like her, but I would be surprised if she's effective in Congress. 

Wouldn't surprise me at all if your prediction turns out to be accurate. Her real value is in giving youth a sense that their may be hope and hopefully they will feel compelled to participate in the political process. 

Rolling out fucking fossils like Hillary, Bernie, Biden ain't gonna do shit to drive young voter participation. But the more the GOP attacks  Ocasio-Cortez for being everything the GOP is not, the more they will rile up the one voting demographic they do not want to wake up. If the under 30 crowd shows up in force, Trump, Mitch, and the rest of the GOP are proper fucked. The olds already showed up in 2016 and dotard still lost the popular vote by 3 mil.

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

4 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

If we could replace all of Congress with young smart pragmatic idealists on both sides, we would be light years ahead of where we are now.

Time to throw out all the old corporatist bums and get shit done.

If ifs were skiffs, we'd all be sailing.  Instead, young pragmatic idealists will need to deal with centrists, both young and old.

Also, after 2 terms and little effective legislation, does she step down for another 28 year old who still lives in her district?  Her GOTV team was also not from her district or even the state of NY.  Now I'm fine with both of those things, but she shouldn't be fine with them given her campaign rhetoric because both are hypocritical.  And I'm fine with talk shows, but her rhetoric also means that she shouldn't be out stumping for other pragmatic idealists in other districts either.  However, I expect to see her spending a lot of time on Bernie's (an old pragmatic idealist) campaign trail in 2020 instead of being in DC working for her district.  That's the same thing she blasted Crowley for. 

Ultimately, its also nearly impossible for her not to become the old Congresswoman who has been in office for 30 years. She has almost no other path in front of her.

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

6 minutes ago, Blotto said:

Wouldn't surprise me at all if your prediction turns out to be accurate. Her real value is in giving youth a sense that their may be hope and hopefully they will feel compelled to participate in the political process. 

Rolling out fucking fossils like Hillary, Bernie, Biden ain't gonna do shit to drive young voter participation. But the more the GOP attacks  Ocasio-Cortez for being everything the GOP is not, the more they will rile up the one voting demographic they do not want to wake up. If the under 30 crowd shows up in force, Trump, Mitch, and the rest of the GOP are proper fucked. The olds already showed up in 2016 and dotard still lost the popular vote by 3 mil.

Come on.  O-C loved Bernie.  You're falling into the same trap.  At the end of the day, all these Congressman have to govern a wide range of people.  There is simply no way for O-C to stay a purist.  Bernie didn't stay a purist.  Crowley didn't stay a purist.

Take the ACA.  Would she have voted against it because "single payer or bust?"  She acts like she would have, but single payer simply wasn't going to pass then so all she would have done is support the status quo.  Its going to take consensus building to even get it close to the table now.

[Parliament 14,336]

I think this is the best political ad I've ever seen.
 
 

Was gonna suggest she insists too much on herself. But it IS a political ad. So, well done.

[Tuco 5,084]

37 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Her real problem is that she has little to no real world work experience.  I like her, but I would be surprised if she's effective in Congress.  Crowley, while sharing her political leanings, knew how to work with others, and more importantly, knew that he needed to work with others.   

She's an attractive, quick-witted, bartender working in an organization of 350 men.  She'll have a line of old stupid fucks looking to mentor her. (No, that's not a euphemism.) She'll be fine.  My bigger concern relates to vetting a staff, avoiding gaffes, keeping her shit together on accounting/legal stuff.  You know the Republicans are going to keep her under a microscope, looking for anything that resembles scandal.  

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

Not sure why anyone should care about her potential success or failure at this point.

What I care about is what she represents at this moment in time.

She represents hope that it can be done without running on an anti-Trump or anti-conservative campaign.  

She never talks about Trump in her interviews or campaign ads.  She is working FOR something and not AGAINST something.

 

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

7 minutes ago, Tuco said:

She's an attractive, quick-witted, bartender working in an organization of 350 men.  She'll have a line of old stupid fucks looking to mentor her. (No, that's not a euphemism.) She'll be fine.  My bigger concern relates to vetting a staff, avoiding gaffes, keeping her shit together on accounting/legal stuff.  You know the Republicans are going to keep her under a microscope, looking for anything that resembles scandal.  

Oh yeah, because the Republicans really keep their shit together on accounting/legal stuff. 

The first thing she will have to overcome will probably be a donor issue. Inevitably, she will take money from a donor affiliated with a corporation. In fact, she probably already has, but Crowley didn't dig, and the GOP hasn't dug yet. 

[Blotto 23,584]

23 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Come on.  O-C loved Bernie.  You're falling into the same trap.  At the end of the day, all these Congressman have to govern a wide range of people.  There is simply no way for O-C to stay a purist.  Bernie didn't stay a purist.  Crowley didn't stay a purist.

Take the ACA.  Would she have voted against it because "single payer or bust?"  She acts like she would have, but single payer simply wasn't going to pass then so all she would have done is support the status quo.  Its going to take consensus building to even get it close to the table now.

My point really had nothing to do with what O-C does in office, and my expectations are fairly low. She may have far more value in the runup to November. Especially if the GOP continually hammers on her with all of the subtlety and grace that a bunch of 60 year old white guys with Trumps cock in their mouth are capable of. If (and its a big if) the Dems can just get the 18-30 demographic to show in force, it's over for the GOP in November.

[Ghost of LL 15,544]

On 6/27/2018 at 8:19 PM, Message Board User said:

Arizona going blue?

The spread in 2016 was just 48.7 Dotard to 45.1 HRC.

The Republicans haven't had their primary yet, so I think those numbers are misleading.  A lot of Republican voters plan to vote for either Ward or Arpaio and are currently saying they're "undecided" in a match-up between Sinema and McSally.  But they'll come home and vote for McSally in the end.

Her polling lower than 50% is cause for some concern.  But she's really, really close to 50% in all the polls, and that is encouraging. 

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Not sure why anyone should care about her potential success or failure at this point.

What I care about is what she represents at this moment in time.

She represents hope that it can be done without running on an anti-Trump or anti-conservative campaign.  

She never talks about Trump in her interviews or campaign ads.  She is working FOR something and not AGAINST something.

 

Yes, but it's a +29 Dem district with one of the most liberal incumbents in Congress. She wasnt running against Trump. She would have lost had she done so. Even against a centrist Dem incumbent, it would have been a bad move. All dems have been anti Trump. Running an anti-Trump campaign is useful only in a split district, and even then, only in the general election. 

And look, her message didn't beat Crowley. Her GOTV team did. I can guarantee you that barely any of her voters saw her viral ad. They did see Crowley skip a debate. They also saw her canvassers at their door, at their subway station, and on their phones. They saw nobody doing the same for Crowley. He Hillaryd it more than she "won" it.

[Js1 85,602]

3 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

The Republicans haven't had their primary yet, so I think those numbers are misleading.  A lot of Republican voters plan to vote for either Ward or Arpaio and are currently saying they're "undecided" in a match-up between Sinema and McSally.  But they'll come home and vote for McSally in the end.

Her polling lower than 50% is cause for some concern.  But she's really, really close to 50% in all the polls, and that is encouraging. 

Interestingly,  America may "look West" and suddenly see that Washington, California, Nevada and Arizona may end up having 7 female Democratic Senators between them after November 2018.  Plus 1 in Hawaii.

Potentially 8 Senators west of the Rockies would be women and all Democrats.

Also, Nevada would join California, Washington, MN and New Hampshire as all-female Senate delegates.

[simplicity 9]

6 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Yes, but it's a +29 Dem district with one of the most liberal incumbents in Congress. She wasnt running against Trump. She would have lost had she done so. Even against a centrist Dem incumbent, it would have been a bad move. All dems have been anti Trump. Running an anti-Trump campaign is useful only in a split district, and even then, only in the general election. 

And look, her message didn't beat Crowley. Her GOTV team did. I can guarantee you that barely any of her voters saw her viral ad. They did see Crowley skip a debate. They also saw her canvassers at their door, at their subway station, and on their phones. They saw nobody doing the same for Crowley. He Hillaryd it more than she "won" it.

Shut the fuck up already

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

One other thing to add is that the NY Dem primary is an anti-incumbent dream. State and federal elections are separate. Her race was the only one on the ballot. GOTV is perfect for this.  With state elections on the same ballot, the incumbent gets more support from the Governor or Mayor race which gets widespread TV coverage. 

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

3 minutes ago, simplicity said:

Shut the fuck up already

Fuck you. This thread is about 2018 elections. That is one of them. 

Edited July 2, 2018 by FondrenRoad

[Tuco 5,084]

On ‎6‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 7:22 AM, Washpark said:

Damn good political ad. Blue wave in Texas, doubtful but hope she makes a strong run.
 

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Zi6v4CYNSIQ

 

Story behind the ad, including whether to go with "UT" or "University of Texas."

  https://www.washingtonian.com/2018/07/03/inside-the-most-viral-political-ad-of-2018/

[Brisketexan 105,445]

1 hour ago, Tuco said:

Story behind the ad, including whether to go with "UT" or "University of Texas."

  https://www.washingtonian.com/2018/07/03/inside-the-most-viral-political-ad-of-2018/

It's a great ad, and she's EXACTLY the kind of candidate we should want running for public office - regardless of party.  "We the people."  First damned words of the Constitution.

[Aqua Buddha 14,624]

Regardless of your leaning, you have to admit that's a damn good ad.  One of the best I've ever seen.

[Huckleberry 33,115]

Love the subtle dig at A&M in that Washingtonian story.

"Everyone in Texas says UT."

[EMAWesome 101]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-millennials/exclusive-democrats-lose-ground-with-millennials-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN1I10YH

 

MANCHESTER, N.H. (Reuters) - Enthusiasm for the Democratic Party is waning among millennials as its candidates head into the crucial midterm congressional elections, according to the Reuters/Ipsos national opinion poll.

The online survey of more than 16,000 registered voters ages 18 to 34 shows their support for Democrats over Republicans for Congress slipped by about 9 percentage points over the past two years, to 46 percent overall. And they increasingly say the Republican Party is a better steward of the economy.

Although nearly two of three young voters polled said they do not like Republican President Donald Trump, their distaste for him does not necessarily extend to all Republicans or translate directly into votes for Democratic congressional candidates.

That presents a potential problem for Democrats who have come to count on millennials as a core constituency - and will need all the loyalty they can get to achieve a net gain of 23 seats to capture control of the U.S. House of Representatives in November.

Young voters represent an opportunity and a risk for both parties, said Donald Green, a political science professor at Columbia University in New York City.

“They’re not as wedded to one party,” Green said. “They’re easier to convince than, say, your 50- or 60-year-olds who don’t really change their minds very often.”

Terry Hood, 34, an African-American who works at a Dollar General store in Baton Rouge, Louisiana and took this year’s poll, said he voted for Democrat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election.

But he will consider a Republican for Congress because he believes the party is making it easier to find jobs and he applauds the recent Republican-led tax cut.

“It sounds strange to me to say this about the Republicans, but they’re helping with even the small things,” Hood said in a phone interview. “They’re taking less taxes out of my paycheck. I notice that.”

The Reuters/Ipsos poll surveyed young voters during the first three months of this year and the same period in 2016.

Only 28 percent of those polled expressed overt support for Republicans in the 2018 poll - about the same percentage as two years earlier.

But that does not mean the rest will turn out to back Democrats, the survey showed. A growing share of voters between ages 18 and 34 years old said they were undecided, would support a third-party candidate or not vote at all.

The shift away from Democrats was more pronounced among white millennials - who accounted for two-thirds of all votes cast in that age group in 2016.

Two years ago, young white people favored Democrats over Republicans for Congress by a margin of 47 to 33 percent; that gap vanished by this year, with 39 percent supporting each party.

The shift was especially dramatic among young white men, who two years ago favored Democrats but now say they favor Republicans over Democrats by a margin of 46 to 37 percent, the Reuters/Ipsos poll showed.

Ashley Reed, a white single mother of three in New Hampshire, said a teenage fascination with Democrat Barack Obama led her to support his presidency in 2008. But her politics evolved with her personal life.

Reed, now 28, grew more supportive of gun rights, for instance, while married to her now ex-husband, a U.S. Navy technician. She lost faith in social welfare programs she came to believe were misused. She opposed abortion after having children.

Reed plans to vote for a Republican for Congress this year.

“As I got older, I felt that I could be my own voice,” she said last month in Concord, New Hampshire.

Down the road from where Reed lives lies New Hampshire’s 1st Congressional District, a hiker’s paradise of evergreen thickets and snow-capped lakes where young white voters make up about a quarter of the electorate, compared to 21 percent nationally.

The district’s House seat has changed parties five times in seven election cycles and is up for grabs this year after the Democratic incumbent declined to seek re-election.

New Hampshire’s Democrats have an early edge in voter enthusiasm after a string of victories in races for state legislative seats, said Christopher Galdieri, a politics professor at Saint Anselm College in Manchester.

At a campaign event at the University of New Hampshire in Durham, Mindi Messmer, one of eight Democrats running in the primary election, touted her work as an environmental crusader. But students in the crowd also raised many other issues, notably the local economy.

“People come to school here, and then they move away because they can’t get jobs,” said Acadia Spear, 18, of Portsmouth.

Spear said she would likely vote for a Democrat, but her peers nationally are increasingly looking to Republicans for economic leadership, according to the Reuters/Ipsos poll.

Millennials are almost evenly split this year over the question of which party has a better plan for the economy, with 34 percent picking the Democrats and 32 percent choosing Republicans. That’s a shift from two years ago, when they said Democrats had the better plan by a 12-point margin.

In Manchester, the biggest city in New Hampshire’s 1st District, tattoo artist Ashley Matthias, 31, said she has not decided how she will vote but will support anyone who will make her health insurance more affordable.

As she drilled an eagle in black ink across a client’s shoulder blades, Matthias explained that it is cheaper to pay for her doctor’s visits out-of-pocket than to buy insurance through the government-run Obamacare exchange. 

“You just hope nothing happens to you,” she said.

After the bruising loss in the presidential election of 2016, the Democratic Party learned it needed to reach young voters on their turf, including on social media and at college campuses, said Elizabeth Renda, who specializes in reaching young voters for the Democratic National Committee.

“Instead of having real conversations with them, we settled for TV ads,” Renda said of the 2016 failure.

Earlier this year, the DNC launched its “IWillVote” initiative, aimed in part at registering millennials to vote. The party also will run ads via social media and text, and it plans to send buses to college campuses on election day to bring students to the polls.

The Democratic National Committee declined to comment on the Reuters poll. Republican National Committee spokeswoman Cassie Smedile said the poll indicates that young voters “like what they’ve seen” from the party in power.

The Republican committee plans to target young voters in part through a pilot program to get out the vote at six college campuses, Smedile said.

In New Hampshire, Eddie Edwards, one of two Republicans running for Congress in the 1st District, said he pitches millennials on ways the government should help college graduates pay off their student loans. He also argues that public secondary schools must better prepare students to find jobs without attending college.

“This is a generation that has much more access to information than others,” he said. “Unless you’re addressing those issues that are important to them, it’s hard to get them involved.”

The Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted online in English throughout the United States. It gathered about 65,000 responses in all during the first three months of 2018 and 2016, including 16,000 registered voters between the ages of 18 and 34 and nearly 11,000 registered white millennial voters.

The poll has a credibility interval of 1 percentage point, meaning that results may vary by about 1 percentage point in either direction.

For graphic on Democrats losing millenial voters, click: tmsnrt.rs/2I1YafW

 

[Larry T. Spider 1,747]

49 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-millennials/exclusive-democrats-lose-ground-with-millennials-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKBN1I10YH

 

 

 

Obama connected with younger voters but there has been a void of leadership since he left office. A bunch of rich, old, white, dinosaurs run the left as much as the right. It’s no surprise that they are clueless about the issues facing people under 35. In the last election they tried things like tv ads to reach these people and to nobody’s surprise it didn’t really work. New leadership that actually has some creativity and a message beyond “trump sucks” better be figured out by the time the next presidential cycle kicks in or we are at real risk of another four years of dotard.

[Goredho 17,423]

On 7/2/2018 at 2:47 PM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

If we could replace all of Congress with young smart pragmatic idealists on both sides, we would be light years ahead of where we are now.

Time to throw out all the old corporatist bums and get shit done.

That is to say you want to drain the swamp?

At some point, there has to be a return to pragmatic centricism.  If we cycle through ever-wilder swings right and left, I don’t see how that ends without a violent correction.  Maybe it’s a foregone conclusion and a pre-requisite for a step away from the ledge, but I hope not.

[Loch Ness Monster 3,533]

Def hope its not another old fart. 

Bernie 76 years old

Biden 75 years old

Hillary 70 years old

 

[David Dennison 18,951]

On 7/2/2018 at 1:11 PM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

November is going to be very bad for the red party.

[Brisketexan 105,445]

That is to say you want to drain the swamp?
At some point, there has to be a return to pragmatic centricism.  If we cycle through ever-wilder swings right and left, I don’t see how that ends without a violent correction.  Maybe it’s a foregone conclusion and a pre-requisite for a step away from the ledge, but I hope not.

Preach.

Except, of course, I think that die is cast. No stepping back - rather, full-on Thelma and Louise.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

43 minutes ago, Goredho said:

That is to say you want to drain the swamp?

At some point, there has to be a return to pragmatic centricism.  If we cycle through ever-wilder swings right and left, I don’t see how that ends without a violent correction.  Maybe it’s a foregone conclusion and a pre-requisite for a step away from the ledge, but I hope not.

 

20 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Preach.

Except, of course, I think that die is cast. No stepping back - rather, full-on Thelma and Louise.

This is going to sound crazy but I think we need a violent swing to the left first before we work our way to the pragmatic middle.  

Trumpism and the fence sitting corporate democrats need to be flushed out with new blood.  A strong backlash from the youthful idealistic left should inspire the right to alter their approach, away from Trumpism and more towards traditional conservatism.  

This is why I’ve said it’s going to take 20 years recover from the shit we’re in now.  The more significant the gains in the short term from the left, the closer we become to a long term pragmatic center without Trumpism.

Edited July 4, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Enchubben 5,512]

36 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

November is going to be very bad for the red party.

Because relying on polls for elections has proved foolproof. I seem to remember poll after poll after poll predicting a landslide victory for Hillary.

[Brisketexan 105,445]

This is going to sound crazy but I think we need a violent swing to the left first before we work our way to the pragmatic middle.  
Trumpism and the fence sitting corporate democrats need to be flushed out with new blood.  A strong backlash from the youthful idealistic left should inspire the right to alter their approach, away from Trumpism and more towards traditional conservatism.  
This is why I’ve said it’s going to take 20 years recover from the shit we’re in now.  The more significant the gains in the short term from the left, the closer we become to a long term pragmatic center without Trumpism.

What a lovely prospect. From the oven to the freezer. When all common sense says “set the thermostat at 72-74 and leave it the fuck alone.”

[Brisketexan 105,445]

Because relying on polls for elections has proved foolproof. I seem to remember poll after poll after poll predicting a landslide victory for Hillary.

Do you? Interesting. I recall polls that gave her a high chance of securing sufficient electoral votes to win (that is, her LIKELIHOOD of winning was high), but I don’t recall a single one that indicated that the vote margin would be a “landslide.” If love a citation to such polls, for verification.

[Larry T. Spider 1,747]

3 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

Because relying on polls for elections has proved foolproof. I seem to remember poll after poll after poll predicting a landslide victory for Hillary.

Polls were “wrong” once and now they are worthless. Probably shouldn’t even do them anymore.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

Keep in mind that there's a good chance Enchubben is a sheeeit sock. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

What a lovely prospect. From the oven to the freezer. When all common sense says “set the thermostat at 72-74 and leave it the fuck alone.”

In my analogy, the republic is currently on fire.  It needs to be overwhelmed with fresh water first before it can be rebuilt.  

If it isn’t, the flames will fester with periodic unpleasant flare ups.

[Enchubben 5,512]

16 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Do you? Interesting. I recall polls that gave her a high chance of securing sufficient electoral votes to win (that is, her LIKELIHOOD of winning was high), but I don’t recall a single one that indicated that the vote margin would be a “landslide.” If love a citation to such polls, for verification.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-track-electoral-college-landslide-510362%3famp=1

im not gonna go do a bunch of research but this is the first link after searching Hilary prediction landslide election in google. There were others like the following indicating close to 90% chance of victory with a margin of something like 100 electoral votes because she was going to win all the swing states, that she supposedly didn’t even need.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/2016/10/18/13311128/polls-trump-clinton-2016-winning

 

Edited July 4, 2018 by Enchubben
Spelling etc

[Brisketexan 105,445]

https://www.google.com/amp/www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-track-electoral-college-landslide-510362%3famp=1
im not gonna go do a bunch of research but this is the first link after searching Hilary presiction landslide election in google. There were others like the following as well indicating close to 90% chance of victory 
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/2016/10/18/13311128/polls-trump-clinton-2016-winning
 

Excellent. Citing polls from weeks before the election (because voters change their minds, and intervening events happen), and even then, you don’t account for the fact that the delta still ended up being only a few points. She won the popular vote by 3 points on Election Day. Find a poll from close to Election Day that significantly differed from that. Go ahead.

[Enchubben 5,512]

9 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Keep in mind that there's a good chance Enchubben is a sheeeit sock. 

Nah, thanks though. Just pointing out that polls at this point in time aren’t all that reliable. 

[ChiTownDoc 21,175]

Lol at that guy Sheeeeit.  Seriously, laugh at him.  It’s healthy.  

[Larry T. Spider 1,747]

9 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

Nah, thanks though. Just pointing out that polls at this point in time aren’t all that reliable. 

The polls weren’t that far off in the last election but I’ll give it to you. Tell me about all the other major elections where the polls were way off. Should be pretty easy if they aren’t reliable.

[Enchubben 5,512]

Triggered much? Just pointing out that making a definitive statement about future election results based off polls 4 months before an election is a bit aggressive. Especially given the current political environment that seems to be getting increasingly more volatile.