Law School Discussion

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - loki13

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 62
Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: July 13, 2016, 11:33:07 AM »

I agree that the vast majority of Sanders supporters will vote for Clinton, if grudgingly.

My question is about they view Sanders himself after his endorsement of Clinton. This is anecdotal, but so many of the Sanders supporters I know were as opposed to Clinton as they were to Trump. I think Cinnamon falls into that category.

So, when the guy who they supported so strongly endorses someone who they oppose so strongly, does that change their opinion of Sanders? Do they think he's a sellout, or do they say "Hey, it's politics and the most important thing is defeating Trump!" (Which is essentially Sanders' line).

I'm curious because it seems like there would have to be some cognitive dissonance involved in order for it to NOT change their opinion of Sanders, at least somewhat.

Well, I don't think you can easily categorize all Sanders voters, as I alluded to in my earlier post. How they feel about Sanders himself will likely depend on what type of Sanders voters they were to begin with.

There is the old-school, mostly white, left wing of the Democratic party. They either already get it, or will get it.
There are the young people for whom this is their first election. "Politics" and "compromise" is a dirty word, and the idea of losing the battle, but then fighting the war, is a new one. Again, though, I'm not overly worried about them.
Then there are those who were motivated primarily for hatred of Clinton and/or Obama (call them the Spiced Troll / West Virginia voters). To be honest, I don't think they'll come around, and I don't think it was really about Sanders at any point.

It's the second category that's the most interesting to me, and that's the area that Sanders himself will have to work on.

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: July 12, 2016, 10:03:42 AM »

Do you really want to ask Spiced Troll? As in, do you think his answers are representative of the overall Sanders vote?

In the more, ahem, tied-to-reality, living on things other than popcorn community, I would look to the following-

1. Past is prologue. Whenever there is an interesting fight within a party, you end up seeing those who declare, "I will never vote for the other person." (Remember the PUMAs - party unity my ... behind, who supported Clinton and not Obama?). But the majority eventually comes back to the fold. Heck, even *Trump* is getting a fair amount of GOP support, and he's ... well, not a typical GOP candidate. After all is said and done, support for the party (or dislike of the other party) counts for more than the intra-party differences.

2. The nature of Sanders' support. Yes, he did attract a lot of "super liberal" folks, and those people will be appeased by the changes made to the Democratic platform. But a fair amount of support in the primaries came from those who disliked Obama (yeah, I know) - see, for example, his victory in West Virginia. He attracted not just supporters, but those who were simply protesting - and Sanders would not have received their votes in the general, anyway (unless you think a New England socialist is going to win West Virginia is the general). This isn't to discount the fact that he identified a key Democratic constituency and motivated them, but it also speaks to the fact that this constituency is over-represented in the actual support he received.

Anyway, Sanders will campaign with and for Clinton and appear at the convention. You'll see the usual rates of people returning to the fold; cf. the rates for the Clinton/Obama race.

A few things to think about-

First, don't be disappointed by a 160. A 160 is a good score. There are many, many people that would kill for a 160. Yes, if you hang out at certain boards (the "T14 or bust" boards) you'll see people talking smack- mostly people who haven't gotten into law school, and anonymous commenters that lie to make themselves feel better. But a 160 is perfectly fine.

Moving on- the LSAT is a test of aptitude for law school, at least theoretically. To a certain extent, you will not be able to improve. That said, the two main areas that you might see some improvement are in overall test taking (strategy, comfort, time management) and logic games. How much any individual can improve differs from individual to individual, and also depends on where they are starting from.

Long story short- given what you've relayed, I'd work on logic games. You should see some small improvement in your scores.

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: July 07, 2016, 09:41:14 AM »

Again, look at the objective statistical data.

You forgot who you were talking to, right? Conversations involve people that occupy a shared reality. ;)

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: July 06, 2016, 03:22:10 PM »
Bernie was booed by house establishment democrats pissed off that he wont suspend his campaign....

Precious.🎇 will be an honor to cast my vote for him in the fall😊

That's called a full throated conscious clear, principled vote which separates us from those democrats who will be secretly or openly voting for trump---- trumpheads.

Oh, you think you're principled. Bless your heart!

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: July 06, 2016, 01:23:38 PM »

So, I changed my registration to No Preference and grumpily concede that I am no longer represented by either party. I guess I'm a Kennedy Democrat, or maybe a Kemp Republican. Sad times.

Well, function follows form, in this case. With our system of governance (first past the post, federalism, Republic, Presidential), we are doomed to have a two-party system. If you look at history, you can see that there are brief period where there is a partly-viable third party that either gets destroyed, subsumed in another party, or becomes one of the two parties (the current GOP). That's it- there's no way in our system to have more than two for any sustained length of time.

Given that, we all must map our interests on to the party that is least offensive to us, I guess.

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: July 06, 2016, 11:54:47 AM »

As I've said before, I'm not a Clinton fan. In fact, the legitimate criticism from Comey was well deserved and illustrates why I'm not a Clinton fan. All politicians lie, but she does it clumsily.

You know, it's a weird thing. I'm not even so much of a Democrat by desire, as much of a not-Republican by circumstances. A Rockefeller Republican that, by default, has become a Democrat (although still registered as an Independent).

And when it comes to Clinton, I'm really meh. I could not be less enthused - although she was a better choice than Sanders, but only because Sander was only ever a protest candidate. The scary thing, though, is that there isn't a large number of prominent national Democrats to choose from. Seriously- I still couldn't pick out O'Malley in a lineup.

Warren? Booker? ummm....... See what I mean? The scary thing isn't that Clinton is the nominee, or that she is so uninspiring, it's that I have a hard time picking a better person for this cycle. *sigh*

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: July 06, 2016, 10:02:37 AM »
Lol, James comey and the FBI have completely destroyed hillarys credibility.

You better read what he said-- I've been telling you what they would find for a while now and i am vindicated.....i dont give a shite that Obama is not going to prosecute.

I accepted that trump would be president a long time ago.

I still will write in bernies name for president.....its about principle.

Clinton is finished.

Truth and facts hurt dont they?

This has been such fun. ;)

Keep posting though are a fun punching bag.lololol

Qui, moi? I don't need to bother refuting your points- they refute themselves! Seriously, you've been banging this drum that blah blah Sanders will win the nomination blah blah Clinton will be indicted blah blah Trump won't win. And, as everyone else already said- it doesn't matter what happens, you'll just move on to the next point. I'm quite sure that next year, after we have President Clinton, you'll be saying, "Ha, that's what I always said, but I've got my popcorn ready because of (whatever, we're laughing at you)."

Seriously, u mad bro? Clowned again? Just to think; by gracing us with your presence, you have deprived some poor village of their idiot.

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: July 06, 2016, 07:40:30 AM »

Now I will write in sanders name in November...hopefully trump will only get one term.

Cinnamon Troll's stages of popcorn-

1. Denial. But Sanders is still going to win! I don't understand math, so ... delegates? California?
2. Anger. But Clinton is really Nixon!
3. Bargaining. Despite reality, something something Sanders will still win the nomination.
4. Depression. Where is my popcorn now?
5. Acceptance. Boy, I hope that Trump wins!

Politics and Law-Related News / Re: POTUS
« on: July 05, 2016, 12:05:56 PM »

Her run for higher office is over.

Based on the immutable Law of Cinnamon Troll*, that means her run for higher office is just beginning!

Seriously- can you give us your NFL picks? There's some money to be made here.

*The Law of Cinnamon Troll, loosely stated, is that if Cinnamon Troll says it, it is either wrong now, or will be wrong shortly.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 62