Author Topic: 2016 Election  (Read 218736 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dndfreak

  • 1942 Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 3766
  • The GM
    • View Profile
    • PathLosers
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #255 on: October 22, 2015, 11:15:26 am »
You really think Jeb is going to trash talk his own brother?

No, of course not. Which is why he's forced in that position to defend his family, and in doing so forcing himself to ally with a largely unpopular administration. I would be better for Jeb to simply not mention George W. at all.

Offline Brandonazz

  • All Your Base Zero Wing
  • *****
  • Posts: 8912
  • Everything ends.
    • View Profile
    • My Internet Treasure Trove
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #256 on: October 22, 2015, 11:37:03 am »
It's kinda hard not to bring him up after his, uh... let's call them minor blunders.

We're still trying to fix them.

Offline PatMan33

  • Fable Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 28834
  • GREAT SCOTT!!
    • View Profile
    • DuckDuckGo
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #257 on: October 22, 2015, 10:24:25 pm »
BEN.
GAZZY.

Offline eropS

  • Out Run Speedster
  • *****
  • Posts: 5117
  • That's right, I went there
    • View Profile
No, no, he did. In the everything else section, at least. Officially, this makes him king.

Offline Inkling

  • S.T.U.N. Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 8054
  • Not a Squid.
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #259 on: October 23, 2015, 04:52:25 pm »
Lincoln Chafee drops out.  His margin of error support base is probably crushed.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/lincoln-chafee-2016-election/
Probably not a Goat, either.


Offline Inkling

  • S.T.U.N. Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 8054
  • Not a Squid.
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #260 on: October 23, 2015, 06:34:21 pm »
No.  Stop this.  For every thing you've heard from Trump that seemed sensible, he's said 20 other completely stupid things that would sink any actual politician.  He won't get the nomination, the GOP establishment would do everything in their power to prevent that.  More 538 because I like them.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/donald-trump-is-doomed-andor-invincible/
Probably not a Goat, either.


Offline eropS

  • Out Run Speedster
  • *****
  • Posts: 5117
  • That's right, I went there
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #261 on: October 23, 2015, 07:28:08 pm »
Well, it sure as **** won't be Ben "Yes, I Performed Brain Surgery and Say These Things" Carson.

Furthermore, wtf are people like Chris Christie and Mike ****ing Hukabee still doing in the ****ing race? Get. Out.

For god sakes, even Webb and Chaffe knew when to throw in the towel.
« Last Edit: October 23, 2015, 07:32:02 pm by eropS »
No, no, he did. In the everything else section, at least. Officially, this makes him king.

Offline PatMan33

  • Fable Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 28834
  • GREAT SCOTT!!
    • View Profile
    • DuckDuckGo
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #262 on: October 23, 2015, 07:33:15 pm »
SAND SAND SAND

Offline Inkling

  • S.T.U.N. Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 8054
  • Not a Squid.
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #263 on: October 23, 2015, 07:48:31 pm »
If I had to bet on someone for the Republican primary it would be Rubio.

The dynamics in the primaries are different.  For the Democrats Clinton is the very clear frontrunner and Sanders is the only challenger with any kind of traction.  For the Republicans it's a much larger field so you can stay afloat with a smaller polling percentage.  The two frontrunners, especially Carson, are more in the mold of Bachmann and Herman Cain in 2012: Crazy people who throw red meat to the base and have their moment in the sun, but implode once the actual primaries get closer.  The only Republicans to drop out so far were Perry and Walker.  They didn't drop just because of low numbers, otherwise several others would be gone by now too.  They dropped because they went big with staffing and spending, then didn't get results.  The lower tier candidates can stay in a lot longer and bide their time because they aren't failing expectations.

Speaking of top tier candidates with financial issues:
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-10-23/jeb-bush-orders-across-the-board-pay-cuts-for-struggling-campaign

Remember kids, always dump bad news on Friday afternoons!
Probably not a Goat, either.


Offline eropS

  • Out Run Speedster
  • *****
  • Posts: 5117
  • That's right, I went there
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #264 on: October 23, 2015, 08:20:42 pm »
Rubio is a billionaire whipping boy, I think Trump has legs.
No, no, he did. In the everything else section, at least. Officially, this makes him king.

Offline dndfreak

  • 1942 Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 3766
  • The GM
    • View Profile
    • PathLosers
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #265 on: October 24, 2015, 11:17:46 am »
I had to do a presentation on one of my classes, and I was lucky enough to get my hands on Trump. Everyone, professor included, thought I was going to tear the man apart, but I took a different angle. I talked a lot about trump wanting to build a giant wall, because that was the popular thing to talk about at the time, and how unfeasible it is. And that Trump, being in the business of constructing properties, should know how unfeasible it is. He's also a show runner and a professional entertainer of sorts. He knows how to grab and hold attention. What's the conclusion?

To me, the immigration issue for Trump looks like a massive scapegoat. It's a large obnoxious solution to an equally obnoxious problem, and it's hardly a solution at all. It will never happen, especially if Trump expects Mexico to pay for it (let alone maintenance and manning it). But it's a great magnet for media attention because it's an easy way for his opponents to attack in a million different ways. Meanwhile, more complicated ot tougher issues slip through the cracks. Why do things like research or interviews when you could write another quip about how many Mexicans fit on a single airplane? There's nothing modern media loves more than a massive bull's-eye.

In the past few years, Obama has found it very difficult to get anything past congress and I can't help but feel like the next administration will face the exact same issue. It's debatable on whether Trump will do anything good in this country, but with this massive scapegoat, whether he realizes it's a scapegoat or not, he may at the very least be able to do something, which is more than I can say for the rest of the field. The more media attention there is on a topic, the more voter attention, and the more voter attention, the more vehemently congress will fight it. If Trump can use diversionary tactics like this throughout his hypothetical presidency, that would pave the way to enact some actual changes.

Offline eropS

  • Out Run Speedster
  • *****
  • Posts: 5117
  • That's right, I went there
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #266 on: October 24, 2015, 08:43:07 pm »
Honestly, who's better on the GOP field than Trump?

I wouldn't vote for him over HRC, but I mean he's far and away the best GOP candidate.

Seriously, Carson is insane. INSANE!





SAND SAND SAND doe
No, no, he did. In the everything else section, at least. Officially, this makes him king.

Offline dndfreak

  • 1942 Veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 3766
  • The GM
    • View Profile
    • PathLosers
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #267 on: October 24, 2015, 11:56:37 pm »
The thing is that Trump might be crazy and a tad power hungry, but when he's actually in office, he's used to being a boss who throws money at talent and expects results. If you want to talk about positions and what his administration would actually do, look at his administration. Look to the people he'd hire, the people working his campaign behind the scenes. Trump himself is a showman.

Would I vote for him? Probably not. Would I vote for the collective thinktank he can easily put on his payroll? probably.

Offline PatMan33

  • Fable Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 28834
  • GREAT SCOTT!!
    • View Profile
    • DuckDuckGo
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #268 on: October 25, 2015, 09:50:03 am »
The simple fact of the matter is that more or less anyone is fit to be President. While you may get glimmers here and there of who the actual person behind the name is, for the most part you can expect the pressures and obligations of the job to bubble up to the top. You are the administrator of the system, not the dictator. You can add some of your own flavor, but you don't decide on all of the ingredients. The job itself and the power of the individual is overblown to a caricature of what the position actually is.

Trump wouldn't be able to build his wall regardless because he'd have ten different agencies telling him why he can't. And no matter how much he bitches and moans about it, he won't get it because he or any President wouldn't have the power to make it happen.

I like to look at the President as the human element that gets plugged into the machine. It's the only office we have where one natural-born citizen over the age of 35 that has lived here for over 14 years gets to behold the entire process in action. And it can be anyone that meets those simple qualifications. They watch the machine and guide it as best they can.

Trump would probably be divisive in a social sense, but in terms of policy I doubt he'd be able to do anything very crazy given how the two major parties view him and his ideas. He'd effectively become a one-man third party if he got to office, which admittedly wouldn't be terrible. Sanders would probably yield a similar result, though he'd skew much more toward the Democrats. And most of the other candidates would simply be a mouthpiece for their respective party.

In my view, I'd like to see a system where the Presidency could not be held by the parties with the most or second-most sway in Congress. If we want to have parties we need to have a balance of party power in addition to our regular separation of powers between government bodies. This forces more than two parties in the systems and prevents the rabid fight we see every few years for control of all the houses at the expense of good policy and the public.

Offline Inkling

  • S.T.U.N. Runner
  • *****
  • Posts: 8054
  • Not a Squid.
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Elections
« Reply #269 on: October 25, 2015, 02:26:28 pm »
If you're going to be paying attention to Trump, it may be worth looking at the interactions with that main super PAC before he said he said screw all the super PAC's.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/the-inside-story-of-donald-trumps-connections-to-a-big-money-super-pac/2015/10/18/532b61d4-72b5-11e5-8248-98e0f5a2e830_story.html
Probably not a Goat, either.