Elections 2016 Iowa Caucus Thread

[Handsomebwonderfull]

Uhh, not even close. The GOP needs to pick VPs that appeal to evangelicals and old white people?! Karl Rove is on sherdog everyone.

But from an electoral map and demographic perspective, Huckabee is a horrible choice. If you are picking a white guy, you would be smart to pick someone the establishment could back while also playing a role in a key swing state. Someone like Kasich but that isn't likely for a lot of reasons. Trump would be smart to pick a woman or Hispanic since the GOP has plenty qualified politicians for that role. It's silly to be thinking VP spots for Trump at this point though.

Karl rove won 2 presidential elections with a man who could barely speak...

You are special aren't you?

 

[Lead]

Already explAined it in the post above but in summary

Trump needs to secure old white religious people.

Also Who cares about 2% gop primary polling for the presidency and coming from a red state when considering the Vice President? Lol. That's completely pointless.

You aren't making the leaps I assumed you would with that comment so I'll be more clear

Huckabee is polling at 2% in the GOP primary. The GOP Party consists of a larger portion of "secure old white religious people" than the Democratic.
So if in the party primary where old white people are disproportionate and there is a candidate receiving 2% in the polls, how can you argue he is even the best choice for the awful strategy you put forth?

Also, if Trump wins Iowa tomorrow, it would make a point that he's somewhat taken a good majority of the evangelic white vote.

 

[theBLADE1]

There's a lot of subjectivity in that assumption. Part of it likely is true but heres a good reason you can't just take little facts like this and come out with a definitive answer. Most of the campaigns sell tickets to their events and will let people know when they reached their full capacity for where the event is at. Trump doesn't do this at all. They will actually sell tickets (whether free or not) to events they know can't fill the build and then don't choose to let their supporters to know. Sure it looks great for TV with the large crowds but ultimately it can be somewhat misleading and also kinda slimy on their part.

Polling and predictions favor Trump. Silver, Wang, and Selzer all have Trump winning Iowa. That's something much more feasible to latch onto.

I don't know if Bernie sells tickets to his events or not. But if people are paying money to get into an event doesn't that mean there are likely to show up to vote which is something that is free? I know in Iowa there were lines of people waiting to get in to see him. He has also been forced to change venues to meet the demand of people trying to enter.

 

[Lead]

Karl rove won 2 presidential elections with a man who could barely speak...

You are special aren't you?

Yea and you know the difference between Bush and the past two candidates that won him those GE's? Hispanics. Bush got 35% and 40% in 2000 and 2004. McCain and Romney weren't even close to those numbers and the number of Hispanics voting has risen since 2004. Rove hasn't changed his mind on the appeal to the hidden majority white population idea and it's why he looked like a fool on election night in 2012.

 

[Lead]

I don't know if Bernie sells tickets to his events or not. But if people are paying money to get into an event doesn't that mean there are likely to show up to vote which is something that is free? I know in Iowa there were lines of people waiting to get in to see him. He has also been forced to change venues to meet the demand of people trying to enter.

Tickets are usually free. The point is for what I mentioned in being able to know the number coming and accommodate accordingly.

 

[theBLADE1]

Tickets are usually free. The point is for what I mentioned in being able to know the number coming and accommodate accordingly.

Yeah I'm willing to look really stupid on this one. I still have no idea what you're talking about. I'm not saying you're wrong I'm just saying I don't understand how that makes any sense lol

 

[Lead]

Handsomebwonderfull
23 posts
Joined: Today

Ohhhh

 

[Handsomebwonderfull]

You aren't making the leaps I assumed you would with that comment so I'll be more clear

Huckabee is polling at 2% in the GOP primary. The GOP Party consists of a larger portion of "secure old white religious people" than the Democratic.
So if in the party primary where old white people are disproportionate and there is a candidate receiving 2% in the polls, how can you argue he is even the best choice for the awful strategy you put forth?

Also, if Trump wins Iowa tomorrow, it would make a point that he's somewhat taken a good majority of the evangelic white vote.

My god dude. You don't need page long essays.

Old white people vote in droves. Julian Castro has already been all but announced as hillarys vp. They've been lining that up for 2 years. Trump has been railing against Hispanics. He won't win it or get a percentage of them. The republicans best bet is an old while people monopoly. Iowa doesn't represent the southern evangelicals. There's enough Hispanics in those areas that if trump doesn't nominate someone to appeal to the southern evangelicals he loses states like Florida easy

 

[Lead]

Yeah I'm willing to look really stupid on this one. I still have no idea what you're talking about. I'm not saying you're wrong I'm just saying I don't understand how that makes any sense lol

What are you confused on? I'm saying larger crowds could show at other events if they weren't turned away for capacity. Trump doesn't do that for publicity.

 

[Lead]

My god dude. You don't need page long essays.

Old white people vote in droves. Julian Castro has already been all but announced as hillarys vp. They've been lining that up for 2 years. Trump has been railing against Hispanics. He won't win it or get a percentage of them. The republicans best bet is an old while people monopoly. Iowa doesn't represent the southern evangelicals. There's enough Hispanics in those areas that if trump doesn't nominate someone to appeal to them he loses states like Florida easy

Well if we are talking Trump's chances at all, then I would say none of this matters at all. Your strategy itself shows how desperate a GE would look with that frame of thinking. I agree with you that Trump already sunk himself for a GE win.

But again, I get it now man.

 

[theBLADE1]

@Lead Salad I don't understand how large crowds at rallies which are free to get into don't correlate in to actual voting support for candidate. I could be wrong, Im just saying that when you have galvanized support bases like the ones Bernie and Donald have, it's reasonable to assume that a large majority of those crowds will show their support when it comes time to caucus.

 

[Handsomebwonderfull]

Well if we are talking Trump's chances at all, then I would say none of this matters at all. Your strategy itself shows how desperate a GE would look with that frame of thinking. I agree with you that Trump already sunk himself for a GE win.

But again, I get it now man.

Okay then. Semantic disagreement I guess no hard feelings.

But what's the gif about from fight club. I don't get that lol. I got bored with 4 Chan and came here today. They are a little to extreme there

 

[Lead]

I don't understand how large crowds at rallies which are free to get into don't correlate in to actual voting support for candidate. I could be wrong, I just saying that when you have galvanized support bases like the ones Bernie and Donald have, it's reasonable to assume that a large majority of those crowds will show their support when it comes time to caucus.

I'm not contesting large crowd size. I was trying to tell you a reason why this can't be trusted soley for what results we were going to see and explained an example for you. Like I said, top polls/predictions are turning to a Trump/Clinton win.

 

[Lead]

Okay then. Semantic disagreement I guess no hard feelings.

But what's the gif about from fight club. I don't get that lol. I got bored with 4 Chan and came here today. They are a little to extreme there

Usually low post count and the stuff you're saying would make me thing you're trolling me.

Yea, I went on 4chan once and couldn't handle the size and scope of content/vulgarity. I am content with this smaller pond even though I hardly post about MMA anymore.

 

[Handsomebwonderfull]

Usually low post count and the stuff you're saying would make me thing you're trolling me.

Yea, I went on 4chan once and couldn't handle the size and scope of content/vulgarity. I am content with this smaller pond even though I hardly post about MMA anymore.

Nah. I'm not trolling you. I've got my degree in polisci and Econ actually. I'm over 30. I've worked in elections, not anymore. So this isn't my first rodeo. I heard about this place on pol. They raid here all the time, usually go after some poster named "josh" who is kind of infamous for getting trolled and he gets really upset. I promise you I'm not trolling.

You know your stuff I should say, so I'm impressed.

 

[theBLADE1]

I'm not contesting large crowd size. I was trying to tell you a reason why this can't be trusted soley for what results we were going to see and explained an example for you. Like I said, top polls/predictions are turning to a Trump/Clinton win.

I didn't say you were contesting crowd size I was saying I didn't understand your reasoning for why they couldn't be trusted. Nobody is bringing in larger crowds then Sanders and Trump. So for that reason to me it seems somewhat reasonable to assume that those supporters are going to represent themselves enough to get them a victory in Iowa Since there into politics enough for them to even show up at a rally to begin with.

Also I noticed in the poll you indicated you felt that Ted Cruz would win Even in spite of him being in second place. Why do you think that's true for Cruz and not for Sanders who is much closer to Hillary then Cruz is to Trump?

 

[Lead]

Nah. I'm not trolling you. I've got my degree in polisci and Econ actually. I'm over 30. I've worked in elections, not anymore. So this isn't my first rodeo. I heard about this place on pol. They raid here all the time, usually go after some poster named "josh" who is kind of infamous for getting trolled and he gets really upset. I promise you I'm not trolling.

You know your stuff I should say, so I'm impressed.

Is Josh his real name or screenname? Is this in the WR or Heavies?

 

[Lead]

I didn't say you were contesting crowd size I was saying I didn't understand your reasoning for why they couldn't be trusted. Nobody is bringing in larger crowds then Sanders and Trump. So for that reason to me it seems somewhat reasonable to assume that those supporters are going to represent themselves enough to get them a victory and Iowa Since there into politics enough for them to even show up at a rally to begin with.

Also I noticed in the poll you indicated you felt that Ted Cruz would win Even in spite of him being in second place. Why do you think that's true for Cruz and not for Sanders who is much closer to Hillary then Cruz is to Trump?

I'm just making the point crowd size is not a direct correlation to votes/support size. If it were, it would be followed much closer than polling data.

Trump probably is going to win Iowa but I just don't want to believe it, ha. I don't want to believe he's winning a single state. I've been sick of this guy since he was teasing his announcement and I just want to have faith in the voters that they will see past this guy and somehow he loses. It's not the smartest pick in the poll but I didn't want to predict Trump. It is a close race too so it isn't complete stubbornness but somewhat. Also, it still will surprise me to see an Evangelical primary state like Iowa go for a secular liberal in the GOP.

 

[Handsomebwonderfull]

Is Josh his real name or screenname? Is this in the WR or Heavies?

I'm not sure. His name was in green like yours and it just was "Josh". They've been trolling that guy for years now. There's a whole collection of screen caps on him. He usually talks about the down fall of the United States stuff like that. This is my first time on here so I can't really tell you. Like I don't even know what heavies are. I know the ones I've seen have been in the war room a couple of times. They go on for days with the guy. I've seen one that went on for weeks with a bunch of Australians just messing with him. I don't to get a Ban or warning I'm just giving you An answer.

 

[theBLADE1]

I'm just making the point crowd size is not a direct correlation to votes/support size. If it were, it would be followed much closer than polling data.

Trump probably is going to win Iowa but I just don't want to believe it, ha. I don't want to believe he's winning a single state. I've been sick of this guy since he was teasing his announcement and I just want to have faith in the voters that they will see past this guy and somehow he loses. It's not the smartest pick in the poll but I didn't want to predict Trump. It is a close race too so it isn't complete stubbornness but somewhat. Also, it still will surprise me to see an Evangelical primary state like Iowa go for a secular liberal in the GOP.

I see LOL! All I'm saying is you can't ever underestimate galvanized young voters who support their candidate. That's why Barack Won it big in 2008, Because he ran on a message of hope and change against Hillary Clinton, and now Bernie Sanders is running on a platform of hope and change against Hillary Clinton. He talks about his support at rallies in this video and is asking his supporters to prove the pundits wrong.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/bern...n-slapped-email-controversy/story?id=36617226

And I hate Donald Trump with the same passion but I've accepted that he is going to win on the Republican side.