Elections 2016 Democratic/GOP Super Tuesday Primary Thread

[RockstarChris]

Someone should make a UFC poster with the candidates on it. Lots of birds.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Don't tell me what to do.

Don't tell me what to do.

 

[M3t4tr0n]

Hardly; Hillary (Shillary?) can't even give a full speech.

No passion, no beliefs, a justice-for-hire dope.

Was talking about the compulsive liar angle.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

So, it seems that Trump is the 100% chance of being the nomination, IF two things happen.

One. There's not a giant bombshell that somehow nukes his appeal - like the supposed audio of Trump saying he's not going to enforce the border.

If it exists, expect it to be released just days before the general election.

Two. If all the other candidates stay in, which is highly probable at this point, splitting the opposing vote. Cruz has won Iowa, Texas, and Oklahoma. Rubio won Minnesota, and will probably stay in after losing Florida. Kasich may stay in until Ohio, then who knows. Carson will stay in until he's run out of money, and he claims he recently recieved the best day of donations in his entire campaign.

I'm curious as to the source of those donations, because he's had absolutley no shinning moments that have indicated he has a chance of winning the nomination. The only new donors to his campaign are either fools, or want him to stay in to help Trump win.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I think saying uneducated blacks are voting against their interests is really just taking a critique of fx news fans and now trumpsters re poor white males and flipping it on its head. It's the logic that the poor should support the more liberal.

Of course it's crass and I can think of many reasons why it's bullshit, but I don't think it's outright racist.

It's wrong because

- Hilary is liberal

- Hilary is not a dog whistle racist using the southern strategy

- Hilary has a strong record on civil rights and race, arguably as strong or stronger than the burn

- The lack of brand recognition among blacks is Bernie's fault

- Cutting taxes for the rich while globalization enriches them are policies that are easy to categorize as against the working class

- Saying that voting for someone who has less radical but similar policies is against black interests is a much tougher sell. As if all blacks should be commies by that logic.

This is right all around, but let's also note that the tone of the post was very contemptuous. It could be that someone advances the (flawed) critique that he was without the racism, but that wasn't what happened.

 

[COTUR1@43]

Are you aware you just pulled two more examples that reinforced the point I (apparently failed) to convey to you?

Perot hurt Bush & Dole, not Clinton. He campaigned for the "Reform" party which was a loosely collected set of political sympathies that had a particular appeal to the wealthy, and drew mostly from breaking right-wing voters.

Lets say there are a ton of voters who are not fond of Hillary or Trump, but would vote for one or the other UNLESS there is a 3rd "independent" choice. I can see this allowing Trump to beat Hillary when a lot of her would be voters go 3rd party in a protest move.

 

[Madmick]

So, it seems that Trump is the 100% chance of being the nomination, IF two things happen.

One. There's not a giant bombshell that somehow nukes his appeal - like the supposed audio of Trump saying he's not going to enforce the border.

If it exists, expect it to be released just days before the general election.

Two. If all the other candidates stay in, which is highly probable at this point, splitting the opposing vote. Cruz has won Iowa, Texas, and Oklahoma. Rubio won Minnesota, and will probably stay in after losing Florida. Kasich may stay in until Ohio, then who knows. Carson will stay in until he's run out of money, and he claims he recently recieved the best day of donations in his entire campaign.

I'm curious as to the source of those donations, because he's had absolutley no shinning moments that have indicated he has a chance of winning the nomination. The only new donors to his campaign are either fools, or want him to stay in to help Trump win.

I want to believe the NYT is withholding this out of a sense of journalistic integrity, but I must admit that I share your cynicism. It's an ace in the sleeve for liberals, and it definitely has Trump's name on it.

 

[Senkoy]

Why are you quoting me? We're the only ones in this thread.

 

[Handsomebwonderfull]

Don't tell me what to do.

I'm not your buddy, pal

 

[Madmick]

Lets say there are a ton of voters who are not fond of Hillary or Trump, but would vote for one or the other UNLESS there is a 3rd "independent" choice. I can see this allowing Trump to beat Hillary when a lot of her would be voters go 3rd party in a protest move.

I just explained to you concretely why this is a fantasy, and precisely the opposite of the effect a third party run with a split GOP would have on the GE vote. The only voter base at risk of being split here is the GOP base. The Democrats are consolidated, and have been for well over a decade.

 

[RockstarChris]

So, it seems that Trump is the 100% chance of being the nomination, IF two things happen.

One. There's not a giant bombshell that somehow nukes his appeal - like the supposed audio of Trump saying he's not going to enforce the border.

If it exists, expect it to be released just days before the general election.

Two. If all the other candidates stay in, which is highly probable at this point, splitting the opposing vote. Cruz has won Iowa, Texas, and Oklahoma. Rubio won Minnesota, and will probably stay in after losing Florida. Kasich may stay in until Ohio, then who knows. Carson will stay in until he's run out of money, and he claims he recently recieved the best day of donations in his entire campaign.

I'm curious as to the source of those donations, because he's had absolutley no shinning moments that have indicated he has a chance of winning the nomination. The only new donors to his campaign are either fools, or want him to stay in to help Trump win.

i want Trump to get 49% of the vote then Republicans put Jeb Bush in.

Some people just want to watch the world Bush.

 

[Gandhi]

you just insulted him and didnt even respond to his post that you quoted lol

Well SoA has decent posts - but when they are just lunatic rants I tell him without a play by play. Now that I have clarified myself you can go back to your vacuous posts about the Donald and I can go back to ignoring you.

 

[SouthoftheAndes]

Oh go back on your meds

Vyvanse son.

It was an accurate post I feel. I just skipped the formal reply and said what I felt that poster truly was trying to say.

you just insulted him and didnt even respond to his post that you quoted lol

What I said is accurate. Anung was trying to deflect a truthful statement about how some people claim that black voters are too uneducated to know what is in their own best interests.

Anung replied by posting an article which just elaborated on the lie that the poor, minorities can't think for themselves. I then followed up mentioning the fact that he (Anung) a self proclaimed Bernie fan has admitted he would vote against Liberal interests of it meant not voting for Clinton.

Can I have some?

What you need homie?

 

[Anung Un Rama]

@Gandhi - but Hillary's civil rights record is not as strong as Sanders'. And when you blame Sanders for people not knowing who he is, isn't that just another way of saying "uninformed voter"? Even if you're aware of him but just listen to what gets dished out, you're still just an uninformed voter.

As for the poor supporting the more liberal, I don't feel it's that simple. For one thing, Sanders' taxes are not going to be in my personal best interest, but in the best interest of the country, so I support them. But also because some candidates actively work against their constituencies best interests, or pander to them with zero intent of following thru.

So much emphasis is put on rhetoric, style, and name recognition and so little is put on the record. People talk about Clinton's voting record as a %-Liberal when compared to Sanders, but when you evaluate the important decisions that differentiate them and compare them to their overall record the difference is clear. You have to examine the record or you're just being played.

I fully agree with your point about assuming what a person should desire in a candidate. Nobody can know for sure. It's possible that Hillary supporters believe in the New Democrat platform that is a little more corporate friendly and militant (GOP Light). But it's just as likely that a huge % of voters think Democrats = Good, Republicans = Bad (and vice versa)

 

[RockstarChris]

all the hate and anger i love it

love all you guys.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

BTW, for all the neophyte Trump supporters I'm seeing in here that are never in the WR and don't know anything about politics, the above blog will exhibit why Trump's general "win" tonight is a flimsy one. He was beaten much, much more soundly than projected in the biggest state on the menu, Texas, and he didn't win 50% of the vote in a single state meaning that he is nibbling delegate votes instead of taking the lion's share in the "winner take most" states. Rubio, Cruz, or Kasich either beat him or managed better than 20% in virtually every state which means they'll also gobble up those votes in addition to those Trump failed to secure with majority wins.

There's a good chance he won't be able to get to 1,237 delegates if this continues and the other candidates remain in the race (perhaps accruing momentum from his inability to demonstrate an ability to consolidate the GOP vote; ergo continuing to prove that his "natural ceiling" isn't a figment of pollster imaginations, but is very much a real thing).

That's what Rubio is counting on.

And that's why he's staying in after losing Florida, and taking it all the way to the RNC.

 

[Gandhi]

This is right all around, but let's also note that the tone of the post was very contemptuous. It could be that someone advances the (flawed) critique that he was without the racism, but that wasn't what happened.

It's hard to make that argument without a contemptuous ring to it. It is certainly sounds like contempt when we talk of angry white males being tricked by Fox News into voting for tax cuts by not so subtle appeals to identity politics. Of course there is sympathy as well but also pity which borders on contempt for some.

Anyway I think the issue is easily dismissed without resorting to calling someone a racist or having to be worried about a double standard in how we talk about poor whites vs poor blacks. There is little meat on the bone here wrg to the theory.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

I want to believe the NYT is withholding this out of a sense of journalistic integrity, but I must admit that I share your cynicism. It's an ace in the sleeve for liberals, and it definitely has Trump's name on it.

Lol @ 'Journalistic Integrity' at the NYT.

Remember when they made a front page story of an anonymous source saying McCain cheated on his wife?

And that's just the #1 example off the top of my head.

 

[GearSolidMetal]

i want Trump to get 49% of the vote then Republicans put Jeb Bush in.

Some people just want to watch the world Bush.

Zero chance of that happening. If it goes to the convention, where the Republican establishment have complete control, it's guaranteed that Rubio will be the nominee.

 

[ncordless]

You mean Bill right? Settling for Bill?

Becausd who settled for Hillary before? She won popular vote and still lost to Obama in 08.



It's called democracy

Yeah. Bill Clinton. Considering they are husband and wife, it's fairly safe to assume they share policy preferences, no? Especially when we have well-known records to compare and see it is so. Hillary is her own person, but she is a Clinton with Clintonian policy references. Many would like to see someone a further to the left, especially when the GOP looks so vulnerable. But times were generally good with a Clinton in office, and it's better than a fascist cult figure.