US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3123

On March 03 2016 02:10 Liquid`Drone wrote:


While both cater to the anti-establishment voters, that's where the parallel ends. Bernie is unwilling to attack Hillary, he's unwilling to lie about what he wants or who he is, he refuses to have a dirty campaign.

Basically, Bernie is trying to be superior to the establishment (by playing a more fair political game than the norm), but not that many non-voters belong to the 'superior to the establishment' demographic. Trump caters to the lowest rungs of society - and there's a whole lot more anti-establishment sentiment to be found there.

What I'm trying to say is, Trump is WWE, Bernie Sanders is something out of NPR or PBS. Neither is 'establishment', but one is more energizing.

On March 03 2016 02:13 xDaunt wrote:
The difference between where the Republicans and Democrats are as parties isn't Trump. The difference is the level of disenfranchisement of their respective bases. The Republican party has failed its base since 2000, and has outright antagonized it since 2007. Trump wouldn't be where he is without this current level of dissatisfaction among Republican voters. There is no comparable history for the Democrats.

EDIT: While there is no comparable history for Democrats yet, there are some parallels between Obama and Bush. It will take some time to see how it develops.

On March 03 2016 02:01 Gorsameth wrote:
The difference is that while Bernie supporters are complaining about how unfair the system is Trump went and surged ahead despite facing imo stronger opposition from the establishment.

On March 03 2016 02:42 Toadesstern wrote:

Democrats have just always been way more willing to take the moderate, save bet because in the past the GOP usually faired better and they had to to stand a chance.
This thing with Bernie being actually somewhat close but ultimatively failing to be the non-moderate DEM nominee is fairly new. At least for me and iirc at least Reuters agrees with that with an article I read about how DEMs have basicly always picked the moderate instead of far-left candidates. And if someone picked the non-moderate it was the GOP that ended up with someone fairly far right on some occasions.

So I guess Democrats are more willing to take that slow approach people in here already mentioned about Clinton:
It's a really important election, especially with the supreme court situation at hand atm so just make sure you win that.
Clinton will absolutely trash Trump and Cruz in the general (I still think Rubio would win against her and ultimatively enough Republicans would vote for him just for the sake of "everything but Hillary" with all that pent up frustration after 8 years of Obama).
And yeah, Bernie is somewhat competetive against Cruz and Trump simply because all three are equally "unelectable" but that's up in the air. Rubio would easily be as good vs him as Clinton is vs Cruz&Trump imo.

So tl;dr: If the same happens to the DEM party eventually I think that's still a couple years down the road.

On March 03 2016 02:33 ticklishmusic wrote:
So can someone explain Bernie's path to the nomination? His campaign people are citing Florida, New York and California but I'm gonna say I'm skeptical to say the least. Source

Hillary is a very popular two-term senator from New York. Bernie could pick off the rural areas and the youth vote as usual, but that's definitely not going to be a win. California and Florida have large Hispanic populations and I'm guessing Hillary will take those 2:1 like in Texas. Her having a ST party in Florida wasn't just because of the weather either.

There are other states, but curious to hear thoughts.

The number of shootings by Los Angeles police officers spiked by more than 50% last year, according to the department’s 2015 use of force report.

Forty-eight people were shot by officers in 2015, up from 30 in 2014, according to the Los Angeles police department (LAPD) report, which was released on Tuesday. Twenty-one of those shot died from their injuries, up from 18 the year before.

By comparison, in New York – a city more than twice the size of Los Angeles, with four times the number of police officers – police shot 34 people, eight of whom died.

The LAPD report also showed that black people were five times more likely to be shot by police than white people and 2.6 times more likely than Latinos, once adjusted for relative populations.

Twenty-three of the 48 people shot in 2015 by Los Angeles officers were Latino, 12 were black, and seven were white, in a city where the population is almost 50% Hispanic, 30% non-Hispanic white, and less than 10% black.

The number of people shot who had indications of mental illness also rose sharply in real terms from the year before, almost tripling, from five to 14 – representing 37% of the total number shot, up from 19% in 2014.

Black people were also stopped by police 160,412 times, making them four times more likely to be stopped than white people. In a city where the black population is just under 400,000, according to the latest US census bureau data, that means that in 2015 there were a little fewer than one traffic stop for every two black people.

On March 03 2016 02:50 Liquid`Drone wrote:


Since Goldwater in 64 I don't think GOP has picked anyone extreme (by republican standards)? Democrats don't really have a history for it either, I guess McGovern (what a fabulous name for a politician) in 72 is the last time they really elected someone who was kinda far left compared to the rest of the party? Basically both parties have a history of choosing candidates they think have a chance in the general election rather than candidates appealing strictly to the GOP or Democrat voting base.

The Republican Party’s battered anti-Trump forces licked their wounds on Wednesday as they set about an increasingly improbable task: Stopping Donald Trump from wrapping up the GOP nomination.

Trump, whose haul so far of 316 delegates gives him nearly as many as the rest of the Republican field combined, planned an uncharacteristically low-key day on Wednesday after scorching through Super Tuesday with seven wins. He didn’t call into a single morning show, nor did he have any public events on the calendar.

But his rivals and the growing legion of Trump spoilers loudly warned on Wednesday about the need to stop the man they contend will not only hand the White House to Hillary Clinton but also destroy the Republican Party.

Marco Rubio, who on Tuesday won his first and so far only state, appeared to take solace in the fact that Trump has not yet sewn up the nomination and did not receive a majority of the vote in any of the dozen states on Super Tuesday.

“Donald Trump — 65 percent of the people who voted, voted against him, and that’s the problem he has,” said Rubio, who finished third in many of the contests despite going nuclear in his attacks on Trump. “He can never bring this party together. There will never be a time when our supporters are asking us to make a way for Donald Trump.”

The Florida senator has vowed to win his home state in two weeks and stay in the race as long as it takes to stop Trump, who he’s aggressively branded as a con artist. “If this was anybody else as the front-runner, there’d be people right now saying let’s all rally around the front-runner,” Rubio said. “That will never happen with Donald Trump. On the contrary, what you’re hearing now is how do we prevent the party of Reagan and Lincoln from being taken over by someone who for days refused to condemn the Ku Klux Klan and someone who quite frankly is carrying out the most elaborate con job we’ve ever seen in politics.”

Rubio’s efforts are getting plenty of support from Republican allies both on the trail and in Congress. Outside groups have also taken on the cause and are ramping up their efforts.

On March 02 2016 16:43 GreenHorizons wrote:


I guess the Secretary of State is wrong then? That would seem like something he would know better than a local news station?



Source

Edit: To your second point, probably, if it wasn't part of a larger pattern.

On March 03 2016 02:43 Djabanete wrote:
PS. I do not think it's a given that Clinton would beat Trump in the general. Although I think most comparisons between Sanders and Trump, as candidates, are disingenuous and meant to hurt Sanders, there are still a lot of poorly informed but rightly dissatisfied people who would vote Sanders > Trump but Trump > Clinton. That said, I fervently hope that Clinton would beat Trump.

On March 03 2016 03:55 Plansix wrote:
It should also be pointed out that Clinton has managed to pull in 60% of the Democrats, while Trump around 35% of Republicans. And a lot of those voters that didn’t vote for him said he was not their second choice. Many said they did not know. Trump has a lot of ground to cover to become marketable for the rest of Republicans, let alone independents.

On March 03 2016 03:59 oBlade wrote:

That's because there's 2 blue candidates and 5 red.

On March 03 2016 03:59 oBlade wrote:

That's because there's 2 blue candidates and 5 red.

On March 03 2016 04:01 Plansix wrote:

Yes, I am aware. Now, for the second part where the majority of voters not voting for Trump said he was not their second choice. The stats were linked in this thread.

Emad El-Din Ali Mohamed Nasr El Sayed, a 23-year-old student, reportedly had his U.S. visa revoked as a result of the threats.

“I am willing to kill Donald Trump and serve a life sentence,” El Sayed wrote on Facebook, according to interviews with his lawyer conducted by Egyptian Streets. “[T]he whole world would thank me for doing that.”

El Sayed was arrested in mid-February but authorities dropped the charges after a decision was made to revoke his visa. A California immigration court determined on Tuesday that he is now in the United States illegally and must be deported back to Egypt.

On March 03 2016 04:02 KwarK wrote:

You forgot Martin. Sure, he has no chance at becoming president but if that means you can ignore him then Hillary might as well be running unopposed.

On March 03 2016 04:04 wei2coolman wrote:

2nd choice doesn't matter post primary, unless the other GOP candidates run as independent afterwords. It's a matter of "how jaded are you about Trump that you're willing to vote Hillary?"