| Forum Index > Closed |
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. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On February 11 2016 03:11 oneofthem wrote: voter base will be different. not all americans do gop primary I think that it is a mistake to presume that the norms, standards, and expectations of previous elections are going to hold true in this one. The big tell here is how wrong the experts repeatedly have been this election cycle. The rules are being substantially bent and broken in both primaries. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On February 11 2016 04:50 oneofthem wrote: lol just lol at the idea that sanders would not be vulnerable to attacks. guy practically invites it The criminal vs the communist, as the internet puts it. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18876 Posts
 | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On February 11 2016 05:08 farvacola wrote: Good 'ole iCarly Fiorina is out of the race; let's hope that American corporations are safe from her leadership oh, i'm sure she'll find her way to the board of some small company that would be better off without her. based on her record i doubt she couldn't run a mcdonald's properly, let alone the country. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On February 11 2016 04:51 farvacola wrote: your reading comprehension is as facile as your sentence structure and grasp of US electoral politics  you honestly think either negative politics is not around or that it will not affect sanders simply because trump is immune to character attacks. this is just fantastic | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
Sanders... he's a good guy, I respect him and I like him. His heart is in the right place, but he's no saint. He's done things that are wrong, done things that look wrong. For better or for worse, he's in the spotlight now and as David Axelrod said, "the higher a monkey climbs the pole, the more you can see his ass'". | ||
|
farvacola
United States18876 Posts
On February 11 2016 05:17 oneofthem wrote: you honestly think either negative politics is not around or that it will not affect sanders simply because trump is immune to character attacks. this is just fantastic I'll resist my English major urge to diagram my previous posts; you've clearly already set up a "bernie bro" caricature with which to argue with but that's ok, it can be difficult to wrap ones' head around the fact that those who disagree with you do not fit into convenient boxes. Nowhere in my posts or statements supporting Sanders have I ever implied that negative politics are not around nor that Sanders is somehow immune to their effects. All I've been suggesting is that, when it comes to the field of likely candidates on both sides, Sanders' otherwise marked susceptibility to attacks using "socialist" language is greatly diminished by the extremely chaotic and unorthodox state of the Republican primary as it stands. No, this does not mean that Sanders supporters like myself think that Sanders will somehow waltz into the Oval Office; the general election is going to be a slugfest for pretty much any of the relevant candidates on either side of the aisle (yes, that includes Hillary, as xDaunt appropriately points out, time and time again). What it does mean is that a singular focus on Sanders, his brand of "socialism," and how that brand will impact his chances at a successful candidacy is an extremely narrow and utterly worthless take on the state of the election if it does not accompany a similar discussion of how the Republican field is also troubled by ideologically unpalatable labels and dynamics. Edit: and as ticklish mentions above, the notion that Trump is immune to negative attacks deserves a second look, particularly in regards to how said immunity will manifest itself come general election time. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
Sanders has been treated like a green party candidate until a couple months ago. Even still, attacks are against Clinton, not Sanders. His high ratings at the moment are a huge overestimation of how well he'd do after socialism and "yes we will increase taxes" ads. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On February 11 2016 05:27 ticklishmusic wrote: Trump looks immune to negatives, but that's largely a product of the estate of the nomination race rather than him being mudproof. The establishment vote is incredibly fragmented, and many other voters are disillusioned. The pundits and other "experts" got a lot wrong, but I think there is a hard limit on his support. The field is taking longer to winnow since Christie kamikaze'd Rubio, but when it finally gets down to Trump, Cruz and who I'm betting might actually be Jeb! it'll be over. Bit of a tangent, but I think Jeb! has grown the most as a candidate. Sanders... he's a good guy, I respect him and I like him. His heart is in the right place, but he's no saint. He's done things that are wrong, done things that look wrong. For better or for worse, he's in the spotlight now and as David Axelrod said, "the higher a monkey climbs the pole, the more you can see his ass'". Out of curiosity, what flaws in his political career will come back to haunt Sanders? He will certainly see more attacks against him in the future, but Republicans have brushed over him until Iowa and Hillary's attacks have been weak and petty. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On February 11 2016 04:52 xDaunt wrote: I think that it is a mistake to presume that the norms, standards, and expectations of previous elections are going to hold true in this one. The big tell here is how wrong the experts repeatedly have been this election cycle. The rules are being substantially bent and broken in both primaries. That is reflective of how shitty, click baity and meritless-pundit driven the main stream political news has become. They don’t want to be accurate. I listen to NPR and read Fivethirtyeight and they have been accurate and informative. Don’t just assume that people will be impressed by the walking Youtube comment section. To date, he has only been able impress 1/3 of Republican primary voters. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18876 Posts
On February 11 2016 05:35 Mohdoo wrote: I think pounding the idea that Sanders endorses socialism into attack ads over and over will be enough for someone to inch out an election over Sanders. I think the only person who would lose to Sanders is Trump. The many, many quotes where Sanders throws his full support behind socialism is just too huge. Getting 80% of the young vote doesn't matter if you only end up with 20% of the old vote. Sanders has been treated like a green party candidate until a couple months ago. Even still, attacks are against Clinton, not Sanders. His high ratings at the moment are a huge overestimation of how well he'd do after socialism and "yes we will increase taxes" ads. That's a valid concern, but I very much think that voters torn between Sanders and a candidate like Cruz will be more afraid of the platform/rhetoric of the latter than the negative connotations associated with the ideology of the former. We'll have to see | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On February 11 2016 05:40 Plansix wrote: That is reflective of how shitty, click baity and meritless-pundit driven the main stream political news has become. They don’t want to be accurate. I listen to NPR and read Fivethirtyeight and they have been accurate and informative. Don’t just assume that people will be impressed by the walking Youtube comment section. To date, he has only been able impress 1/3 of Republican primary voters. 538 hasn't been any better than other mainstream experts. Go look at what 538 said last summer and last fall about the viability of the Trump and Sanders campaigns and have a good laugh. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On February 11 2016 05:31 farvacola wrote: I'll resist my English major urge to diagram my previous posts; you've clearly already set up a "bernie bro" caricature with which to argue with but that's ok, it can be difficult to wrap ones' head around the fact that those who disagree with you do not fit into convenient boxes. Nowhere in my posts or statements supporting Sanders have I ever implied that negative politics are not around nor that Sanders is somehow immune to their effects. All I've been suggesting is that, when it comes to the field of likely candidates on both sides, Sanders' otherwise marked susceptibility to attacks using "socialist" language is greatly diminished by the extremely chaotic and unorthodox state of the Republican primary as it stands. No, this does not mean that Sanders supporters like myself think that Sanders will somehow waltz into the Oval Office; the general election is going to be a slugfest for pretty much any of the relevant candidates on either side of the aisle (yes, that includes Hillary, as xDaunt appropriately points out, time and time again). What it does mean is that a singular focus on Sanders, his brand of "socialism," and how that brand will impact his chances at a successful candidacy is an extremely narrow and utterly worthless take on the state of the election if it does not accompany a similar discussion of how the Republican field is also troubled by ideologically unpalatable labels and dynamics. Edit: and as ticklish mentions above, the notion that Trump is immune to negative attacks deserves a second look, particularly in regards to how said immunity will manifest itself come general election time. so this is basically 'they are even weaker'. but are you suggesting the republican primary is how the gop general candidate will present himself in the actual election? bernie and his supporters are true believers. there will not be a toning down of rhetoric even to avoid clearly catastropic statements. this will be a severe liability come general election time. even trump would be able to change his coats deftly and move to the center. i don't see sanders capable of doing that. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On February 11 2016 05:46 xDaunt wrote: 538 hasn't been any better than other mainstream experts. Go look at what 538 said last summer and last fall about the viability of the Trump and Sanders campaigns and have a good laugh. I don’t really consider that a fault considering most of the world thought that Trump was going to burn out. They can be wrong, that isn’t a big problem. Being wrong is a product of making a prediction. The difference is they care about being right. MSNBC, Fox News and CNN don’t care about providing an accurate picture. They just want to provide the picture gets the most people to watch, merit be damned. And once again, the rest of America doesn’t really like Trump. His national polls for likability are garbage. People just don’t know who Sanders is. | ||
|
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On February 11 2016 05:35 Mohdoo wrote: I think pounding the idea that Sanders endorses socialism into attack ads over and over will be enough for someone to inch out an election over Sanders. I think the only person who would lose to Sanders is Trump. The many, many quotes where Sanders throws his full support behind socialism is just too huge. Getting 80% of the young vote doesn't matter if you only end up with 20% of the old vote. Sanders has been treated like a green party candidate until a couple months ago. Even still, attacks are against Clinton, not Sanders. His high ratings at the moment are a huge overestimation of how well he'd do after socialism and "yes we will increase taxes" ads. I doubt it. Obama got attacked for being a secret muslim, a terrorist, and a socialist. That was less than a decade after 9/11, and only a decade and a half after the end of the cold war. It didn't work then, and despite Sanders being a self-proclaimed socialist I doubt those kinds of attacks will work now. Some parts of the Republican base will eat it up but most people won't be bothered. Out of context soundbites about taxes isn't bad, but the more realistic strategy for defeating Sanders is attacking him on national security. Sanders is at his least comfortable and reasonable when it comes to the Middle East. Pulling out the troops isn't a line that's going to work 8 years after Obama used it as the center of his election campaign, especially with Syria now on the table and work still to be done with Iran. Security, not socialism, is Sanders' weak point. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18876 Posts
On February 11 2016 05:51 oneofthem wrote: so this is basically 'they are even weaker'. but are you suggesting the republican primary is how the gop general candidate will present himself in the actual election? bernie and his supporters are true believers. there will not be a toning down of rhetoric even to avoid clearly catastropic statements. this will be a severe liability come general election time. even trump would be able to change his coats deftly and move to the center. i don't see sanders capable of doing that. Your disapproval of Sanders' rhetoric/platform has clearly bled into your belief as to the political acumen (or lack thereof) of his campaign; this is likely where we disagree the greatest. Should Sanders win the democratic nomination, I have very little doubt that he will willingly and readily incorporate the strengths of the Democratic party infrastructure in an effort to give his general election bid the best chance it has. Sanders' "true believers" have already acquiesced to running under the D of the Democratic Party, after all. Your belief to the contrary is just that, a belief, and time will tell whose is more accurate | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On February 11 2016 05:55 oneofthem wrote: you can't equate gop conspiracy attacks on obama with sanders' repeated proclamations of his own position as well as the big numbers from his platform. he is as big government as they come and that is not really a winning position since the 70's. This is exactly correct. There is absolutely no mistaking who Bernie is and what he believes. I don't think that the American people, as a whole, are ready to buy what he's selling. More likely than not, Bernie would go down in flames like Mondale and McGovern if he becomes the democrat nominee. Still, that's putting the cart way before the horse. He has a long way to go to beat Hillary. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22705 Posts
On February 11 2016 05:46 xDaunt wrote: 538 hasn't been any better than other mainstream experts. Go look at what 538 said last summer and last fall about the viability of the Trump and Sanders campaigns and have a good laugh. Statements that early have never been accurate. Its like trying to project next years weather... | ||
|
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On February 11 2016 05:55 oneofthem wrote: you can't equate gop conspiracy attacks on obama with sanders' repeated proclamations of his own position as well as the big numbers from his platform. he is as big government as they come and that is not really a winning position since the 70's. I'm not, I'm equating the GOP conspiracy attacks on Obama with the notion that simply calling Sanders a socialist and a communist is enough to defeat him. It isn't. Sanders needs to be attacked on substance to be defeated. Obama lost his footing to Romney after the first debate not because of labels or character attacks, but because he underprepared for the debate and lost to Romney when it came to discussing substance. If you can't defend your policies it's your opponent who appears to have substance, not you. So if Republicans successfully bang the "big government" drum and Sanders can't turn it around on them then he'll probably lose, but that's an entirely different proposition to simply calling him a socialist and a communist and expecting the specter of the Cold War to bury him. | ||
| ||
|
|
The PondCast
KCM Race Survival
WardiTV Invitational
OSC
ArT vs MindelVK
MiniZergUA vs TBD
Shameless vs TBD
Ultimate Battle
OSC
ByuN vs MaxPax
herO vs Krystianer
Percival vs Shameless
LetaleX vs YoungYakov
Nicoract vs Gerald
GgMaChine vs ArT
CranKy Ducklings
IPSL
TerrOr vs IJ_Terran
rasowy vs Hazorath
BSL
TerrOr vs OyAji
UltrA vs Gosudark
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
