|
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 May 23 2016 04:07 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 03:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 23 2016 03:02 On_Slaught wrote:
Why do people keep posting match up polls like they matter at this time? The general literally hasn't even begun. A significant portion of the Democratic base isn't exactly in the mood to vote for Hillary in such polls. Wait until Hillary has handled Sanders at least, if not until the first debate. The old throw away line about general election polls doesn't apply here. There is not another candidate in the last 30 years that could have said a fraction of what Trump said and still be competitive. If Trump can say Hillary is only where she is because she's a woman, otherwise she would have 5%, and still be statistically tied that means Hillary is a terrible candidate not that the left is just waiting to support her. This "oh just wait until the left coalesces" reminds me of the "But Trump isn't going to be the nominee" it's not true no matter how hard you wish it. And yes Moo Hillary isn't going to win WA in the general is what I'm saying. Trump, Gary Johnson, and Bernie as a write in all have a better chance. Every super delegate (supporting Hillary) was greeted at the caucuses by chants of Bernie and every caucus had a majority of Bernie or bust. The people being dismissed as immature, and other slights, aren't like they are described by Hillary supporters, They are veterans, immigrants from the middle east, Latinx's from places like Honduras, families destroyed by welfare reform and the crime bill, and on and on... Though with how easily vaporizing 100k civilians seems to go over in Hillary's camp I guess I can't really be surprised that her and Trump both planning on going to Kissinger for FP advice doesn't bother her supporters either. There is a certain irony in this coming from a Sanders supporter, since certainly they have a significant amount of blame in her polling where she is at this time. Considering the entire platform Sanders has shifted towards post-Trump victory is that he is better positioned to beat Trump in the general, is it unthinkable that Sanders voters would vote for Trump in these polls in order to fuel that narrative? Ultimately, these don't matter. Let's wait until Sanders endorses Hillary, Obama endorses Hillary and goes on the offensive against Trump, and the democratic party unites behind Hillary. If anything, it should be sad that the sole remaining Republican can't consistently out poll the Democrat in a still fractured party. If Trump can "unite" his party, then so can Hillary. The difference is she is still winning even without it.
lol like I said she was down to Bush in February when he was polling @ ~5%, it's not a Sanders supporters boosting Trump's numbers issue at all.
Trump shouldn't even be within 10 points of Hillary, you all can push it aside however you like, but look at what Trump's said and sincerely tell me that Hillary shouldn't be dominating him in the polls at least as much as Sanders is.
|
I think Cruz is much closer to Le Pen and the rest of European far right than Trump. Trump sounds like a centrist populist, if that makes sense.
|
On May 23 2016 03:38 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 03:02 On_Slaught wrote:
Why do people keep posting match up polls like they matter at this time? The general literally hasn't even begun. A significant portion of the Democratic base isn't exactly in the mood to vote for Hillary in such polls. Wait until Hillary has handled Sanders at least, if not until the first debate. The old throw away line about general election polls doesn't apply here. There is not another candidate in the last 30 years that could have said a fraction of what Trump said and still be competitive. If Trump can say Hillary is only where she is because she's a woman, otherwise she would have 5%, and still be statistically tied that means Hillary is a terrible candidate not that the left is just waiting to support her. This "oh just wait until the left coalesces" reminds me of the "But Trump isn't going to be the nominee" it's not true no matter how hard you wish it. And yes Moo Hillary isn't going to win WA in the general is what I'm saying. Trump, Gary Johnson, and Bernie as a write in all have a better chance. Every super delegate (supporting Hillary) was greeted at the caucuses by chants of Bernie and every caucus had a majority of Bernie or bust. The people being dismissed as immature, and other slights, aren't like they are described by Hillary supporters, They are veterans, immigrants from the middle east, Latinx's from places like Honduras, families destroyed by welfare reform and the crime bill, and on and on...
1. Washington went to Obama 56,16% to Romney's 41,29% in 2012. Hillary will win Washington in the general election.
2. Current polling is pretty much meaningless, considering Sanders is still running a negative campaign, and Obama/Biden/Warren and Sanders himself are not campaigning for her yet. Her favorable rating is going to go up, and she'll defeat Trump handily.
3. Sanders has been left untouched by negative ads at the national level. He would get shredded by GOP propaganda in the general, as I've already argued. His current polling numbers are therefore utterly irrelevant, since they do not reflect the impact that negative ads would have against him.
|
On May 23 2016 03:46 Velr wrote:
On pure assholeness Trump outshines them easily.
Now on politics, hard to tell, has Trump said anything clear yet?
-Wants to return education from the federal to state/local levels
-Wants to build a wall (fight the US illegal immigration and drug problems)
-Wants a moratorium on Muslim immigration
-Wants to preserve 2nd amendment freedoms
-Wants to reduce defense waste
-Would support ground troops in Syria, is "pro-Israel"
-Is open to increasing minimum wage
-Wants to reform the VA
-Wants more healthcare competition and more public coverage
-Wants better trade deals
-Wants a weaker EPA
|
On May 23 2016 03:58 Nebuchad wrote:
I don't know much about Hofer, but here's the thing, I can afford not to know much about him. He could be twice the asshole Trump is, his influence would still be limited, as Austria is Austria and the US is the US...
On May 23 2016 04:03 Nyxisto wrote:
The US has more power than Italy and foreign policy affects everybody so obviously more people look at the US than at Italy. Also what from my pov makes the US look scarier is that the party system in the US is so egalitarian that a random guy can take half of the established political system hostage over night. The Austrian president doesn't hold that much actual power so Hofer's win(if he wins) is more symbolic than political.
I still trust the French political system that it's going to keep Le Pen out which it probably is able to do, the US looks pretty shaky.
You two are setting the bar pretty damned high for cop out answers.
|
Crooked Hillary being elected would be insulting. She's playing the woman card because she is the worst candidate ever and has no other card to play.
|
On May 23 2016 04:18 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 03:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 23 2016 03:02 On_Slaught wrote:
Why do people keep posting match up polls like they matter at this time? The general literally hasn't even begun. A significant portion of the Democratic base isn't exactly in the mood to vote for Hillary in such polls. Wait until Hillary has handled Sanders at least, if not until the first debate. The old throw away line about general election polls doesn't apply here. There is not another candidate in the last 30 years that could have said a fraction of what Trump said and still be competitive. If Trump can say Hillary is only where she is because she's a woman, otherwise she would have 5%, and still be statistically tied that means Hillary is a terrible candidate not that the left is just waiting to support her. This "oh just wait until the left coalesces" reminds me of the "But Trump isn't going to be the nominee" it's not true no matter how hard you wish it. And yes Moo Hillary isn't going to win WA in the general is what I'm saying. Trump, Gary Johnson, and Bernie as a write in all have a better chance. Every super delegate (supporting Hillary) was greeted at the caucuses by chants of Bernie and every caucus had a majority of Bernie or bust. The people being dismissed as immature, and other slights, aren't like they are described by Hillary supporters, They are veterans, immigrants from the middle east, Latinx's from places like Honduras, families destroyed by welfare reform and the crime bill, and on and on... 1. Washington went to Obama 56,16% to Romney's 41,29% in 2012. Hillary will win Washington in the general election. 2. Current polling is pretty much meaningless, considering Sanders is still running a negative campaign, and Obama/Biden/Warren and Sanders himself are not campaigning for her yet. Her favorable rating is going to go up, and she'll defeat Trump handily. 3. Sanders has been left untouched by negative ads at the national level. He would get shredded by GOP propaganda in the general, as I've already argued. His current polling numbers are therefore utterly irrelevant, since they do not reflect the impact that negative ads would have against him.
Would you have scolded 2008 Hillary and her asshole shady campaign tactics like you do with Bernie Sanders in 2016? She was decidedly worse in 2008, yet I haven't seen you comment on this. Maybe I missed it.
Also, you really think Bernie Sanders would lose a 14 point lead over a couple "he said this in 1977 during the cold war!!!" Most people under 40 don't give a shit about "socialism" being the big bad wolf it used to be. Remember how much traction that "OMG BERNIE RAPE FANTASY" story got? You probably don't, because it fell out of the news in about 2 seconds because it was stupid.
Yes, i'm sure he would lose some support. But I sincerely doubt he would lose a whopping +14 aggregate against the least liked candidate of all time... especially if the Democratic party united behind him!!!!!!
|
On May 23 2016 04:36 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 03:58 Nebuchad wrote:
I don't know much about Hofer, but here's the thing, I can afford not to know much about him. He could be twice the asshole Trump is, his influence would still be limited, as Austria is Austria and the US is the US... Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 04:03 Nyxisto wrote:
The US has more power than Italy and foreign policy affects everybody so obviously more people look at the US than at Italy. Also what from my pov makes the US look scarier is that the party system in the US is so egalitarian that a random guy can take half of the established political system hostage over night. The Austrian president doesn't hold that much actual power so Hofer's win(if he wins) is more symbolic than political.
I still trust the French political system that it's going to keep Le Pen out which it probably is able to do, the US looks pretty shaky. You two are setting the bar pretty damned high for cop out answers.
I don't understand the accusation, what are we supposed to be coping out about?
|
On May 23 2016 04:37 Ravianna26 wrote:
Crooked Hillary being elected would be insulting. She's playing the woman card because she is the worst candidate ever and has no other card to play.
So we're posting Trump tweets now?
|
On May 23 2016 04:40 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 04:36 xDaunt wrote:On May 23 2016 03:58 Nebuchad wrote:
I don't know much about Hofer, but here's the thing, I can afford not to know much about him. He could be twice the asshole Trump is, his influence would still be limited, as Austria is Austria and the US is the US... On May 23 2016 04:03 Nyxisto wrote:
The US has more power than Italy and foreign policy affects everybody so obviously more people look at the US than at Italy. Also what from my pov makes the US look scarier is that the party system in the US is so egalitarian that a random guy can take half of the established political system hostage over night. The Austrian president doesn't hold that much actual power so Hofer's win(if he wins) is more symbolic than political.
I still trust the French political system that it's going to keep Le Pen out which it probably is able to do, the US looks pretty shaky. You two are setting the bar pretty damned high for cop out answers. I don't understand the accusation, what are we supposed to be coping out about?
Giving the bullshit answer of "comparing Trump to Hofer/Le Pen doesn't matter because Austria and France are relatively irrelevant compared to the US."
|
On May 23 2016 04:42 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 04:37 Ravianna26 wrote:
Crooked Hillary being elected would be insulting. She's playing the woman card because she is the worst candidate ever and has no other card to play. So we're posting Trump tweets now?
Apparently the woman card is a thing now. The way to avoid playing the woman card: be a man.
|
On May 23 2016 04:43 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 04:40 Nebuchad wrote:On May 23 2016 04:36 xDaunt wrote:On May 23 2016 03:58 Nebuchad wrote:
I don't know much about Hofer, but here's the thing, I can afford not to know much about him. He could be twice the asshole Trump is, his influence would still be limited, as Austria is Austria and the US is the US... On May 23 2016 04:03 Nyxisto wrote:
The US has more power than Italy and foreign policy affects everybody so obviously more people look at the US than at Italy. Also what from my pov makes the US look scarier is that the party system in the US is so egalitarian that a random guy can take half of the established political system hostage over night. The Austrian president doesn't hold that much actual power so Hofer's win(if he wins) is more symbolic than political.
I still trust the French political system that it's going to keep Le Pen out which it probably is able to do, the US looks pretty shaky. You two are setting the bar pretty damned high for cop out answers. I don't understand the accusation, what are we supposed to be coping out about? Giving the bullshit answer of "comparing Trump to Hofer/Le Pen doesn't matter because Austria and France are relatively irrelevant compared to the US."
The second part of my post addressed a completely other issue. The US basically has no party system anymore that provides a filter. The President of Austria doesn't occupy the same role the US president does. Fringe candidates won't make it through the process here. This is the more important difference.
|
On May 23 2016 04:43 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 04:40 Nebuchad wrote:On May 23 2016 04:36 xDaunt wrote:On May 23 2016 03:58 Nebuchad wrote:
I don't know much about Hofer, but here's the thing, I can afford not to know much about him. He could be twice the asshole Trump is, his influence would still be limited, as Austria is Austria and the US is the US... On May 23 2016 04:03 Nyxisto wrote:
The US has more power than Italy and foreign policy affects everybody so obviously more people look at the US than at Italy. Also what from my pov makes the US look scarier is that the party system in the US is so egalitarian that a random guy can take half of the established political system hostage over night. The Austrian president doesn't hold that much actual power so Hofer's win(if he wins) is more symbolic than political.
I still trust the French political system that it's going to keep Le Pen out which it probably is able to do, the US looks pretty shaky. You two are setting the bar pretty damned high for cop out answers. I don't understand the accusation, what are we supposed to be coping out about? Giving the bullshit answer of "comparing Trump to Hofer/Le Pen doesn't matter because Austria and France are relatively irrelevant compared to the US."
Given your self-professed appreciation for realpolitik in the context of international affairs, it's odd to see you take issue with the fairly straightforward argument that populist political figures deserve different consideration relative to the power and influence of the country in which they operate.
|
On May 23 2016 04:42 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 04:37 Ravianna26 wrote:
Crooked Hillary being elected would be insulting. She's playing the woman card because she is the worst candidate ever and has no other card to play. So we're posting Trump tweets now?
That post is missing something with an exclamation mark in the end. Add "She is a very dishonest person!" and you have a perfect Trump tweet
+ Show Spoiler +https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/733838909805887488
|
On May 23 2016 04:12 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 04:07 On_Slaught wrote:On May 23 2016 03:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 23 2016 03:02 On_Slaught wrote:
Why do people keep posting match up polls like they matter at this time? The general literally hasn't even begun. A significant portion of the Democratic base isn't exactly in the mood to vote for Hillary in such polls. Wait until Hillary has handled Sanders at least, if not until the first debate. The old throw away line about general election polls doesn't apply here. There is not another candidate in the last 30 years that could have said a fraction of what Trump said and still be competitive. If Trump can say Hillary is only where she is because she's a woman, otherwise she would have 5%, and still be statistically tied that means Hillary is a terrible candidate not that the left is just waiting to support her. This "oh just wait until the left coalesces" reminds me of the "But Trump isn't going to be the nominee" it's not true no matter how hard you wish it. And yes Moo Hillary isn't going to win WA in the general is what I'm saying. Trump, Gary Johnson, and Bernie as a write in all have a better chance. Every super delegate (supporting Hillary) was greeted at the caucuses by chants of Bernie and every caucus had a majority of Bernie or bust. The people being dismissed as immature, and other slights, aren't like they are described by Hillary supporters, They are veterans, immigrants from the middle east, Latinx's from places like Honduras, families destroyed by welfare reform and the crime bill, and on and on... Though with how easily vaporizing 100k civilians seems to go over in Hillary's camp I guess I can't really be surprised that her and Trump both planning on going to Kissinger for FP advice doesn't bother her supporters either. There is a certain irony in this coming from a Sanders supporter, since certainly they have a significant amount of blame in her polling where she is at this time. Considering the entire platform Sanders has shifted towards post-Trump victory is that he is better positioned to beat Trump in the general, is it unthinkable that Sanders voters would vote for Trump in these polls in order to fuel that narrative? Ultimately, these don't matter. Let's wait until Sanders endorses Hillary, Obama endorses Hillary and goes on the offensive against Trump, and the democratic party unites behind Hillary. If anything, it should be sad that the sole remaining Republican can't consistently out poll the Democrat in a still fractured party. If Trump can "unite" his party, then so can Hillary. The difference is she is still winning even without it. lol like I said she was down to Bush in February when he was polling @ ~5%, it's not a Sanders supporters boosting Trump's numbers issue at all. Trump shouldn't even be within 10 points of Hillary, you all can push it aside however you like, but look at what Trump's said and sincerely tell me that Hillary shouldn't be dominating him in the polls at least as much as Sanders is.
I agree she should be beating him by more. You can thank decades of conservative smear for that, combined with slip ups from her.
My point still stands; not only are polls at this point not indicative of the final result, since so much time is left, it is compounded by the fact you are polling at a time when Trump is at his absolute strongest, being the Victor of his party, while Clinton is in a unique position of weakness as she is being hit on both sides at once.
Nobody should look at these polls in a vacuum.
|
On May 23 2016 04:48 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 04:43 xDaunt wrote:On May 23 2016 04:40 Nebuchad wrote:On May 23 2016 04:36 xDaunt wrote:On May 23 2016 03:58 Nebuchad wrote:
I don't know much about Hofer, but here's the thing, I can afford not to know much about him. He could be twice the asshole Trump is, his influence would still be limited, as Austria is Austria and the US is the US... On May 23 2016 04:03 Nyxisto wrote:
The US has more power than Italy and foreign policy affects everybody so obviously more people look at the US than at Italy. Also what from my pov makes the US look scarier is that the party system in the US is so egalitarian that a random guy can take half of the established political system hostage over night. The Austrian president doesn't hold that much actual power so Hofer's win(if he wins) is more symbolic than political.
I still trust the French political system that it's going to keep Le Pen out which it probably is able to do, the US looks pretty shaky. You two are setting the bar pretty damned high for cop out answers. I don't understand the accusation, what are we supposed to be coping out about? Giving the bullshit answer of "comparing Trump to Hofer/Le Pen doesn't matter because Austria and France are relatively irrelevant compared to the US." Given your self-professed appreciation for realpolitik in the context of international affairs, it's odd to see you take issue with the fairly straightforward argument that populist political figures deserve different consideration relative to the power and influence of the country in which they operate.
Of course France and Austria are largely irrelevant countries. That's not the point. We're comparing the quality of the politicians among countries. All these Europeans love coming into this thread and shitting all over our various candidates -- often times unfairly. I'm merely pointing out these good folks have more serious political problems in their own backyards.
|
On May 23 2016 04:40 darthfoley wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 04:18 kwizach wrote:On May 23 2016 03:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 23 2016 03:02 On_Slaught wrote:
Why do people keep posting match up polls like they matter at this time? The general literally hasn't even begun. A significant portion of the Democratic base isn't exactly in the mood to vote for Hillary in such polls. Wait until Hillary has handled Sanders at least, if not until the first debate. The old throw away line about general election polls doesn't apply here. There is not another candidate in the last 30 years that could have said a fraction of what Trump said and still be competitive. If Trump can say Hillary is only where she is because she's a woman, otherwise she would have 5%, and still be statistically tied that means Hillary is a terrible candidate not that the left is just waiting to support her. This "oh just wait until the left coalesces" reminds me of the "But Trump isn't going to be the nominee" it's not true no matter how hard you wish it. And yes Moo Hillary isn't going to win WA in the general is what I'm saying. Trump, Gary Johnson, and Bernie as a write in all have a better chance. Every super delegate (supporting Hillary) was greeted at the caucuses by chants of Bernie and every caucus had a majority of Bernie or bust. The people being dismissed as immature, and other slights, aren't like they are described by Hillary supporters, They are veterans, immigrants from the middle east, Latinx's from places like Honduras, families destroyed by welfare reform and the crime bill, and on and on... 1. Washington went to Obama 56,16% to Romney's 41,29% in 2012. Hillary will win Washington in the general election. 2. Current polling is pretty much meaningless, considering Sanders is still running a negative campaign, and Obama/Biden/Warren and Sanders himself are not campaigning for her yet. Her favorable rating is going to go up, and she'll defeat Trump handily. 3. Sanders has been left untouched by negative ads at the national level. He would get shredded by GOP propaganda in the general, as I've already argued. His current polling numbers are therefore utterly irrelevant, since they do not reflect the impact that negative ads would have against him. Would you have scolded 2008 Hillary and her asshole shady campaign tactics like you do with Bernie Sanders in 2016? She was decidedly worse in 2008, yet I haven't seen you comment on this. Maybe I missed it.
I was just as critical of the negative attacks in 2008. After eight years of GWB, the Democrats could not afford to substantially damage each other for the general election. At this point in 2008, however, Hillary was much closer to Obama in pledged delegates, superdelegates, and in the popular vote, than Sanders is to her now. She also considerably toned down the rhetoric against Obama, instructed her campaign to tone it down as well, and loudly said she would work as hard as she could for the eventual nominee and the party. She did not use the kind of holier-than-thou, populist rhetoric Sanders is using, and she was certainly not seeding distrust towards the Democratic party.
On May 23 2016 04:40 darthfoley wrote:
Also, you really think Bernie Sanders would lose a 14 point lead over a couple "he said this in 1977 during the cold war!!!" Most people under 40 don't give a shit about "socialism" being the big bad wolf it used to be. Remember how much traction that "OMG BERNIE RAPE FANTASY" story got? You probably don't, because it fell out of the news in about 2 seconds because it was stupid.
Yes, i'm sure he would lose some support. But I sincerely doubt he would lose a whopping +14 aggregate against the least liked candidate of all time... especially if the Democratic party united behind him!!!!!!
"Most people under 40" are not the only ones voting in the general election, and most polls show being a socialist is still one of the most disliked traits a presidential candidate can have. The lines of attack I listed in the post I linked to would hurt it substantially, and so would his inability to articulate how he would implement his plans as well as his ignorance on many issues, including with regards to international politics. I'm not saying he would lose against Trump, but current polls are certainly not reflective of the relative strengths and weaknesses of Sanders and Hillary.
On May 23 2016 04:54 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 04:12 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 23 2016 04:07 On_Slaught wrote:On May 23 2016 03:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 23 2016 03:02 On_Slaught wrote:
Why do people keep posting match up polls like they matter at this time? The general literally hasn't even begun. A significant portion of the Democratic base isn't exactly in the mood to vote for Hillary in such polls. Wait until Hillary has handled Sanders at least, if not until the first debate. The old throw away line about general election polls doesn't apply here. There is not another candidate in the last 30 years that could have said a fraction of what Trump said and still be competitive. If Trump can say Hillary is only where she is because she's a woman, otherwise she would have 5%, and still be statistically tied that means Hillary is a terrible candidate not that the left is just waiting to support her. This "oh just wait until the left coalesces" reminds me of the "But Trump isn't going to be the nominee" it's not true no matter how hard you wish it. And yes Moo Hillary isn't going to win WA in the general is what I'm saying. Trump, Gary Johnson, and Bernie as a write in all have a better chance. Every super delegate (supporting Hillary) was greeted at the caucuses by chants of Bernie and every caucus had a majority of Bernie or bust. The people being dismissed as immature, and other slights, aren't like they are described by Hillary supporters, They are veterans, immigrants from the middle east, Latinx's from places like Honduras, families destroyed by welfare reform and the crime bill, and on and on... Though with how easily vaporizing 100k civilians seems to go over in Hillary's camp I guess I can't really be surprised that her and Trump both planning on going to Kissinger for FP advice doesn't bother her supporters either. There is a certain irony in this coming from a Sanders supporter, since certainly they have a significant amount of blame in her polling where she is at this time. Considering the entire platform Sanders has shifted towards post-Trump victory is that he is better positioned to beat Trump in the general, is it unthinkable that Sanders voters would vote for Trump in these polls in order to fuel that narrative? Ultimately, these don't matter. Let's wait until Sanders endorses Hillary, Obama endorses Hillary and goes on the offensive against Trump, and the democratic party unites behind Hillary. If anything, it should be sad that the sole remaining Republican can't consistently out poll the Democrat in a still fractured party. If Trump can "unite" his party, then so can Hillary. The difference is she is still winning even without it. lol like I said she was down to Bush in February when he was polling @ ~5%, it's not a Sanders supporters boosting Trump's numbers issue at all. Trump shouldn't even be within 10 points of Hillary, you all can push it aside however you like, but look at what Trump's said and sincerely tell me that Hillary shouldn't be dominating him in the polls at least as much as Sanders is. I agree she should be beating him by more. You can thank decades of conservative smear for that, combined with slip ups from her. My point still stands; not only are polls at this point not indicative of the final result, since so much time is left, it is compounded by the fact you are polling at a time when Trump is at his absolute strongest, being the Victor of his party, while Clinton is in a unique position of weakness as she is being hit on both sides at once. Nobody should look at these polls in a vacuum.
Yep, exactly. Attacks from Sanders' camp in the current campaign have also taken their toll, and once he starts campaigning for her, alongside Obama and the other top Democrats, her numbers will go up.
|
On May 23 2016 04:57 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 04:48 farvacola wrote:On May 23 2016 04:43 xDaunt wrote:On May 23 2016 04:40 Nebuchad wrote:On May 23 2016 04:36 xDaunt wrote:On May 23 2016 03:58 Nebuchad wrote:
I don't know much about Hofer, but here's the thing, I can afford not to know much about him. He could be twice the asshole Trump is, his influence would still be limited, as Austria is Austria and the US is the US... On May 23 2016 04:03 Nyxisto wrote:
The US has more power than Italy and foreign policy affects everybody so obviously more people look at the US than at Italy. Also what from my pov makes the US look scarier is that the party system in the US is so egalitarian that a random guy can take half of the established political system hostage over night. The Austrian president doesn't hold that much actual power so Hofer's win(if he wins) is more symbolic than political.
I still trust the French political system that it's going to keep Le Pen out which it probably is able to do, the US looks pretty shaky. You two are setting the bar pretty damned high for cop out answers. I don't understand the accusation, what are we supposed to be coping out about? Giving the bullshit answer of "comparing Trump to Hofer/Le Pen doesn't matter because Austria and France are relatively irrelevant compared to the US." Given your self-professed appreciation for realpolitik in the context of international affairs, it's odd to see you take issue with the fairly straightforward argument that populist political figures deserve different consideration relative to the power and influence of the country in which they operate. Of course France and Austria are largely irrelevant countries. That's not the point. We're comparing the quality of the politicians among countries. All these Europeans love coming into this thread and shitting all over our various candidates -- often times unfairly. I'm merely pointing out these good folks have more serious political problems in their own backyards.
But the first thing I've said is that I wasn't proud of my country in that regard, as it does no better than America (the "Trump party" is Switzerland's first party in terms of number of voters, even though it's not really fair to compare them to Trump, as much as I dislike both of them). So where is the cop out? It's not a competition.
|
On May 23 2016 04:57 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 04:48 farvacola wrote:On May 23 2016 04:43 xDaunt wrote:On May 23 2016 04:40 Nebuchad wrote:On May 23 2016 04:36 xDaunt wrote:On May 23 2016 03:58 Nebuchad wrote:
I don't know much about Hofer, but here's the thing, I can afford not to know much about him. He could be twice the asshole Trump is, his influence would still be limited, as Austria is Austria and the US is the US... On May 23 2016 04:03 Nyxisto wrote:
The US has more power than Italy and foreign policy affects everybody so obviously more people look at the US than at Italy. Also what from my pov makes the US look scarier is that the party system in the US is so egalitarian that a random guy can take half of the established political system hostage over night. The Austrian president doesn't hold that much actual power so Hofer's win(if he wins) is more symbolic than political.
I still trust the French political system that it's going to keep Le Pen out which it probably is able to do, the US looks pretty shaky. You two are setting the bar pretty damned high for cop out answers. I don't understand the accusation, what are we supposed to be coping out about? Giving the bullshit answer of "comparing Trump to Hofer/Le Pen doesn't matter because Austria and France are relatively irrelevant compared to the US." Given your self-professed appreciation for realpolitik in the context of international affairs, it's odd to see you take issue with the fairly straightforward argument that populist political figures deserve different consideration relative to the power and influence of the country in which they operate. Of course France and Austria are largely irrelevant countries. That's not the point. We're comparing the quality of the politicians among countries. All these Europeans love coming into this thread and shitting all over our various candidates -- often times unfairly. I'm merely pointing out these good folks have more serious political problems in their own backyards.
I can't speak for the other people from Europe and even for germans I'm massively generalizing just now but imo a lot of german people, myself included like to criticize things and talk about aspects of something we consider to be bad for various reasons.
Now, from your point of view that might sound like we're only doing it about you/the US but trust me, we do the same with everybody else including ourselves.
|
On May 23 2016 04:57 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 23 2016 04:48 farvacola wrote:On May 23 2016 04:43 xDaunt wrote:On May 23 2016 04:40 Nebuchad wrote:On May 23 2016 04:36 xDaunt wrote:On May 23 2016 03:58 Nebuchad wrote:
I don't know much about Hofer, but here's the thing, I can afford not to know much about him. He could be twice the asshole Trump is, his influence would still be limited, as Austria is Austria and the US is the US... On May 23 2016 04:03 Nyxisto wrote:
The US has more power than Italy and foreign policy affects everybody so obviously more people look at the US than at Italy. Also what from my pov makes the US look scarier is that the party system in the US is so egalitarian that a random guy can take half of the established political system hostage over night. The Austrian president doesn't hold that much actual power so Hofer's win(if he wins) is more symbolic than political.
I still trust the French political system that it's going to keep Le Pen out which it probably is able to do, the US looks pretty shaky. You two are setting the bar pretty damned high for cop out answers. I don't understand the accusation, what are we supposed to be coping out about? Giving the bullshit answer of "comparing Trump to Hofer/Le Pen doesn't matter because Austria and France are relatively irrelevant compared to the US." Given your self-professed appreciation for realpolitik in the context of international affairs, it's odd to see you take issue with the fairly straightforward argument that populist political figures deserve different consideration relative to the power and influence of the country in which they operate. Of course France and Austria are largely irrelevant countries. That's not the point. We're comparing the quality of the politicians among countries. All these Europeans love coming into this thread and shitting all over our various candidates -- often times unfairly. I'm merely pointing out these good folks have more serious political problems in their own backyards. You are more than welcome to come to the European thread and shit on whoever political candidate you want to, it is very likely that we will shit on them too, but we are on the US thread.
Edit - Also the analogy was quite bad. Berlusconi would fit much better as an analogy for Trump. But yeah, radicalization of the electorate is happening on Europe aswell, after an economical crisis, who would had thought 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
