|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On January 16 2016 01:42 kwizach wrote:
I think Rubio would likely beat Sanders. As others have said, current head-to-head polling is not very indicative of what the actual confrontation would be like. Republicans have been spending the vast majority of their time attacking Clinton, not Sanders.
From my outsiders perspective... This.
Rubio, while probably a tool, seems very electable (if he doesn't bomb himself any more), Cruz/Trump are just total red flags for everyone leaning liberal. Rubio also doesn't seem as bad as Romney, which really looked like a conservative robot and, while he was beat clearly, wasn't THAT far off.
To win the american presidency you have to win the undecided and seriously, the right wing undecided vote a "maverick/republican" anyway and allways did (see ron pauls moderate success in the prelims), the left wing socialists/communists/ultragreens most likely didn't chant for democrats as hard.
|
Rubio is probably the best shot the Republicans have. Very Paul Ryan-esque.
Trump is... Trump (I won't be surprised if that makes it into the Oxford Dictionary)
Cruz is a slimy sack of shit, and it's more than likely he'll collapse. I personally thought it was already beginning during the last debate. He simultaneously alienated the Northeast (and New Hampshire, I'll bet they'll be hearing a certain Cruz soundbite from the debate) and made Trump look good.
And we're left with Rubio as the only viable candidate, ironic that the establishment gets its way anyways.
|
On January 16 2016 01:48 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2016 01:42 kwizach wrote:
I think Rubio would likely beat Sanders. As others have said, current head-to-head polling is not very indicative of what the actual confrontation would be like. Republicans have been spending the vast majority of their time attacking Clinton, not Sanders. Well they've said everything they have to say about him, they've tried the socialism thing, the old rape piece from the 70's, and that he'll raise your taxes to 90%, etc. The only difference is in a general they will be saying them more frequently(not that "socialist" isn't said 100% of the time Bernie's name is mentioned already). No one who knows who Bernie Sanders is, is unaware of the standard republican attacks on him.
getting black people to vote for democrats is incredibly important to win. And I just don't see the turnout beeing what it was like for Obama for either Clinton or Sanders. Sanders looks even worse in that regard according to everything I've heard.
Asking people what they'd hypothetically vote a couple months before it happens is all fine and all but I'd assume the willingness to ACTUALLY put the X for someone that controversial is going to drop the weeks before electionday and the day itself.
Granted that's just my gutread out of the blue without anything behind it to back it up but I wouldn't feel good about it yet.
Then again, the whole fuck-up on how the GOP treats black people because they have to cater towards whites even harder and tell people that the cops are doing everything right could bring out the numbers even if there's no Obama.
|
The Republicans have a rough time with almost all minorities and women nationally. The GOP focuses on its base a lot, which hurts them when it comes to the general with independents, women and minorities. Groups that are required to win the general. The attacks on PP do not help with with independents in any way.
|
Sure, there's no way the GOP is going to get those votes. But if some of them stay home that might be enough to turn it around
Blacks are consistently Democrats’ best demographic group. Not only did they give Obama 93 percent of their vote in 2012, their turnout rate of 66 percent that year was 2 points higher than that of whites. If black turnout drops in 2016, Democrats will have much less room for error in key states such as Florida, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-swing-the-election/
I'm fairly sure it was mentioned in the article somewhere there that black turnout going back to pre-Obama levels could already be a problem (assuming GOP otherwise gains votes from whites folks)
And I could see them staying stable on votes with whites or even gaining if they're putting in Rubio. Sure trump and Cruz would still get dumpstered but meh
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
Bernie doesn't need Obama levels of black turnout. He'll generate more youth and white votes than Obama.
|
On January 16 2016 01:32 ragz_gt wrote:
It doesn't matter what they are polling, it doesn't mean anything unless it actually state what exactly they are polling and the sample size. For all I know they could polled 1000 cats and more than half of them put their paws on Bernie's picture because he looks more like a goldfish.
If only the source was posted directly on that image, so that one could look it up if one was so inclined...
Hmm.
Pretty sure they didn't poll cats, but you can also check to make sure of it.
|
As a very liberal dude with some pretty liberal circle and Facebook feed, the level of excitement and intensity for Sanders blows Obama out of the water. People were stoked for a black dude, but Sanders is like an entire shift that people legitimately believe in.
|
On January 16 2016 04:02 Souma wrote:
Bernie doesn't need Obama levels of black turnout. He'll generate more youth and white votes than Obama.
If younger voters actually get out there and vote, then it's an easy win imo.
|
As a non-American, I must say the notion of not voting for Sanders while being a democrat just escapes me.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On January 16 2016 04:07 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2016 04:02 Souma wrote:
Bernie doesn't need Obama levels of black turnout. He'll generate more youth and white votes than Obama. If younger voters actually get out there and vote, then it's an easy win imo.
Young voters are definitely feeling the Bern. I really expect record levels of youth turnout this election cycle.
|
On January 16 2016 04:07 Nebuchad wrote:
As a non-American, I must say the notion of not voting for Sanders while being a democrat just escapes me.
"If you don't go out to vote, this Republican could win, go vote ffs" is actually a viable message ^^
|
For me to consider voting for Bernie Sanders he'd have to reach out to Republicans, to repeal Obamacare and defund PP. I've been a registered Republican since 2004(the first year I was able to vote) so a Democrat would have to really impress me to get my vote. Neither John Kerry nor Barack Obama managed to do that.
|
On January 16 2016 04:22 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2016 04:07 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On January 16 2016 04:02 Souma wrote:
Bernie doesn't need Obama levels of black turnout. He'll generate more youth and white votes than Obama. If younger voters actually get out there and vote, then it's an easy win imo. Young voters are definitely feeling the Bern. I really expect record levels of youth turnout this election cycle.
Not just traditionally "younger voters" (18-25) Bernie is crushing Clinton with under 45's (almost 2-1). The main reason the polls don't reflect a larger lead for Sanders is because they are expected to not turn out and vote so are almost always underrepresented even for a moderate turnout.
That 2-1 lead in under 45's includes a significant lead for Sanders among women in that group. Hillary losing women in any category other than "Republican" is one of the worst possible signs for her campaign.
|
On January 16 2016 06:08 Ravianna26 wrote:
For me to consider voting for Bernie Sanders he'd have to reach out to Republicans, to repeal Obamacare and defund PP. I've been a registered Republican since 2004(the first year I was able to vote) so a Democrat would have to really impress me to get my vote. Neither John Kerry nor Barack Obama managed to do that.
Thank God you won't be voting for Sanders then 
|
On January 16 2016 01:24 DickMcFanny wrote:
What kind of person would vote for Ted Cruz?
He's such a vile creature and so transparently evil...
so evil people vote for him then. Evil people may as well vote for people like them.
|
On January 16 2016 06:08 Ravianna26 wrote:
For me to consider voting for Bernie Sanders he'd have to reach out to Republicans, to repeal Obamacare and defund PP. I've been a registered Republican since 2004(the first year I was able to vote) so a Democrat would have to really impress me to get my vote. Neither John Kerry nor Barack Obama managed to do that.
i'm sure he's reached out some to republicans in the past, what with how long he's been in congress. Not sure how well it's gone though.
Why defund PP?
repeal obamacare, that's something he can't really do politically. You can't expect any politician to go so far against how things have to be, Canute didn't stop the tides.
I hope the republicans at some point present an actual viable thought out alternative to Obamacare, instead of just hating.
|
I don't get the repeal Obamacare thing. Just submit fixes to it ffs instead of going through another painful transition period (to as of yet unannounced system by the GOPers). Changing Obamacare to be better is the way to go but noooo the GOP and their ilk have such a silly grudge.
|
It's okay, in Republican controlled states they'll shut down Obamacare by naming it something else. Look at Kentucky, Bevin is taking down Kynect, but people are just going to sign up on healthcare.gov instead (and the website works just fine now). They'll rail against in public, but it won't stop them from taking Federal dollars.
#icantbelieveitsnotobamacare
|
On January 16 2016 06:25 Slaughter wrote:
I don't get the repeal Obamacare thing. Just submit fixes to it ffs instead of going through another painful transition period (to as of yet unannounced system by the GOPers). Changing Obamacare to be better is the way to go but noooo the GOP and their ilk have such a silly grudge.
Practically every new member in the house and Senate on the Republican side since 08 was voted in to fight/repeal Obamacare. They convinced their constituents they had a shot at actually getting it done (but they had no intention of repealing anything).
Their pot committed, they can't do anything other than scream from the rafters they are repealing Obamacare or they won't get reelected (that's what Obama was talking about at the SOTU).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
