Law School Discussion

POTUS

loki13

  • ****
  • 543
  • Exterminate all rational thought.
    • View Profile
Re: POTUS
« Reply #430 on: June 16, 2016, 02:47:43 PM »


And many of us will vote for jill stein...also, anti establishment.

Doesn't some other village need an idiot?

Re: POTUS
« Reply #431 on: June 16, 2016, 05:32:35 PM »
...and I would add that it's, well, amusing that someone keeps finding the same topic "popcorn worthy" in this election (remember- he had the popcorn ready for the Benghazi hearing), while ignoring a pretty amazing election that includes, inter alia-

1. A party's prior nominee in open warfare against their current nominee. Seriously, how amazing is the Romney/Trump split (putting Utah ... UTAH!!!! in play).

2. A sitting GOP senator saying that the GOP nominee is too bigoted and racist to be President (??? that's from Kirk, today).

3. The first-ever female presidential nominee from one of the big-two parties.

4. Having both candidates have unfavorable ratings that have never been recorded (seriously- Clinton would have serious difficulties, but for Trump).

5. The continuing and open question as to whether the GOP will revolt prior to, or during, Cleveland.

6. The open question as to whether events (the economy-Brexit, a terror attack, etc.) could substantially upset the race and ... we could actually have a President Trump.

All of the above, and more. Yes, I agree completely.

It is an incredible election, and has exposed so many fractures within the system.

This is probably a somewhat predictable response, but this Trump phenomenon demonstrates how wrong the pundits and party leaders have been at reading the tea leaves. There has been a seething anger building for a long, long time, and I think it's too simplistic to just chalk it up to racism. That certainly is the animating force for some Trump voters, but there's something else going on. There's a strong desire to burn the SOB down, start over.

So here's my question:

Let's assume that HRC wins. If she beats Trump, who is anathema to so many voters, by only say, five points, does that mean that a less Trump-y type of anti-establishment candidate would have smoked her? I mean, when you look at Trump it's hard to believe that she's not ahead by 25 (which could happen, maybe).

Further, and more importantly, does that mean that the Democrats now have to find a way to deal with the fact that nearly half the electorate is willing to go for something radically different? I think it legitimately calls into question the assumption of a permanent Democratic majority based on future demographics.

loki13

  • ****
  • 543
  • Exterminate all rational thought.
    • View Profile
Re: POTUS
« Reply #432 on: June 17, 2016, 07:07:21 AM »

So here's my question:

Let's assume that HRC wins. If she beats Trump, who is anathema to so many voters, by only say, five points, does that mean that a less Trump-y type of anti-establishment candidate would have smoked her? I mean, when you look at Trump it's hard to believe that she's not ahead by 25 (which could happen, maybe).

Further, and more importantly, does that mean that the Democrats now have to find a way to deal with the fact that nearly half the electorate is willing to go for something radically different? I think it legitimately calls into question the assumption of a permanent Democratic majority based on future demographics.

Great questions, and if I had the answers, then I'd already know the future. And I'd be buying lottery tickets instead of commenting here!

I think that we can both overestimate and underestimate what current trends "mean." For example, Trump could actually (to borrow the old phrase) get caught with a dead girl or a live boy, and he still wouldn't get completely blown out by Clinton. The reason why? Because there's so much polarization. There is a large well of people that would vote for the GOP (or anti-Democrat) if the Democrats were running George Washington reincarnated, and the GOP was running Osama Bin Laden's brain-eating zombie corpse. It's just the way it is (and in reverse, as well).

What's more interesting (to me) is that Trump exploited a core demographic in the GOP that had previously fallen into line- a large portion of which is racist, a large portion of which is populist, and a large portion of which doesn't fall into the strong "moral values" category AND is opposed to the libertarian think-tanky ideas that animate the GOP elite. That was his floor - and it was a floor within the GOP that no other candidate had. More importantly (from my perspective) is that the GOP has used a scorch earth strategy for so long in devaluing political norms, in devaluing intellectual opinion, in devaluing media and journalism, in propagating bizarre conspiracy theories (or, at least, not denouncing them), and in devaluing their own party leaders ... that when it came time to try and put some type of authority into the arena ... they couldn't. I mean, seriously, when the party has to turn to Ted "Shut Down Gummint, and Everyone Hates Me" Cruz as a savior, you know things have gone seriously wrong.

Which leads me to three final observations-

1. I never believed in a permanent majority for either party. The two party system is an artifact of first-past the post and our legislative/Presidential system, and as long as we have it, we'll have two parties. As long as there are two parties, one can attain temporary supremacy, and then the other will adapt and change. It always happens.

2. I'm more curious about what happens to the GOP. This is unprecedented. It would be nice to see them react to this by returning to more moderate positions in order to compete. But .... we'll see. Thing is, the 2010 (census) election entrenched them to such as extent in the House and at the state-level, they may view this as an anomaly and just double down.

3. The Democratic primary was unsurprising. The Clinton moderation (from 1992) has run its course. At a certain point, you have to expect some pull to the left. In addition, the Democratic party (thanks to GOP abdication) is now occupying the whole range from middle to extreme left. Assuming Clinton wins, it will be interesting to see what happens in 2020 - will someone run against her?

Re: POTUS
« Reply #433 on: June 18, 2016, 11:23:31 PM »
Clinton beat pinko, and he was too stupid to quit even after the math was done, but meh, commies ain't smart (its why they commies)

Trump is a bit alarming, but will win. People want to watch it burn. Reality TV and the internet broke the already weakened minds of the idiot masses.................IT GONNA BURN BITCHES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Re: POTUS
« Reply #434 on: June 20, 2016, 08:02:43 AM »
Bernie sanders is sticking to his platform and change agenda just like he said he would.

We are delighted that he neither suspended his campaign nor gave a concession speech.

Make no mistake, many of bernies supporters will be voting for him in november because the democratic establishment must be torn down--corporate political parties are getting a recall. 

Feel the Bern!!!!!

Re: POTUS
« Reply #435 on: June 20, 2016, 08:09:29 AM »
Bernie sanders will continue his campaign because of two reasons.

He wants to fundamentally change corporate government and he can continue to change minds by keeping his message actively driving all the way to the convention.

He believes Hillary will be excoriated by the FBI and thus have new serious legal problems.....effectively Clinton will have to suspend her campaign....then Bernie is the only one standing.

See, its simple.

So exciting!!!!

Re: POTUS
« Reply #436 on: June 20, 2016, 01:40:18 PM »
...and I would add that it's, well, amusing that someone keeps finding the same topic "popcorn worthy" in this election (remember- he had the popcorn ready for the Benghazi hearing), while ignoring a pretty amazing election that includes, inter alia-

1. A party's prior nominee in open warfare against their current nominee. Seriously, how amazing is the Romney/Trump split (putting Utah ... UTAH!!!! in play).

2. A sitting GOP senator saying that the GOP nominee is too bigoted and racist to be President (??? that's from Kirk, today).

3. The first-ever female presidential nominee from one of the big-two parties.

4. Having both candidates have unfavorable ratings that have never been recorded (seriously- Clinton would have serious difficulties, but for Trump).

5. The continuing and open question as to whether the GOP will revolt prior to, or during, Cleveland.

6. The open question as to whether events (the economy-Brexit, a terror attack, etc.) could substantially upset the race and ... we could actually have a President Trump.

All of the above, and more. Yes, I agree completely.

It is an incredible election, and has exposed so many fractures within the system.

This is probably a somewhat predictable response, but this Trump phenomenon demonstrates how wrong the pundits and party leaders have been at reading the tea leaves. There has been a seething anger building for a long, long time, and I think it's too simplistic to just chalk it up to racism. That certainly is the animating force for some Trump voters, but there's something else going on. There's a strong desire to burn the SOB down, start over.

So here's my question:

Let's assume that HRC wins. If she beats Trump, who is anathema to so many voters, by only say, five points, does that mean that a less Trump-y type of anti-establishment candidate would have smoked her? I mean, when you look at Trump it's hard to believe that she's not ahead by 25 (which could happen, maybe).

Further, and more importantly, does that mean that the Democrats now have to find a way to deal with the fact that nearly half the electorate is willing to go for something radically different? I think it legitimately calls into question the assumption of a permanent Democratic majority based on future demographics.

Some advice for both of you: Look in the mirror--you are both Hillary Clinton fans who cant see that your candidate is a war monger who, like Richard Nixon is a fatally compromised and politically finished......otherwise she should have run away with her nomination....now the only persons endorsement who counts is the one who refuses to give it to her.....more drip drip problems to come.

Secondly, not only Republicans party is being  blown up....but Democrats party is now being berned to the ground.

Bernie is there to pick us up after Hillary has her interrogation and then gets indicted.

Re: POTUS
« Reply #437 on: June 20, 2016, 01:42:13 PM »
Change has come for Republicans and change is about to come for democrats....like it or not.

Sanders vs. Trump!!!!

Re: POTUS
« Reply #438 on: June 20, 2016, 05:56:47 PM »
Bernie sanders is sticking to his platform and change agenda just like he said he would.

We are delighted that he neither suspended his campaign nor gave a concession speech.

Make no mistake, many of bernies supporters will be voting for him in november because the democratic establishment must be torn down--corporate political parties are getting a recall. 

Feel the Bern!!!!!
Did vs Do fool........He has NOW..........pinko will be dead of oldcommie disease before the swear in anyways

Re: POTUS
« Reply #439 on: June 20, 2016, 06:46:26 PM »
Secondly, not only Republicans party is being  blown up....but Democrats party is now being berned to the ground.

Bernie is there to pick us up after Hillary has her interrogation and then gets indicted.

I'm actually not a big fan of HRC, which is why, unlike, Cinnamon, I can be at least somewhat objective about her candidacy. You're so obsessed with Sanders as a panacea for all that ails the nation, that you've seriously departed from reality.

The fracture in the Democratic party is not even close to the absolute implosion of the Republicans this year.

The Dems have moved to the left as a party over the last couple of decades anyway, and have picked up on the concerns and lingo of Sanders supporters and have incorporated them into the party platform. Stuff like "inequality" will figure big at the convention, and Sanders will play a role. But at the end of the day, HRC is the nominee and Bernie will go home to Vermont.

The vast majority of people who voted for Sanders will vote for HRC. A few diehards (like you) won't, but it won't make much difference. She'll win with or without you.

As far as your wish for an indictment, good luck. Did you see Loretta Lynch on MTP this weekend? She made it clear that DOJ won't lift a finger. Cronyism at it's best. 

Trump will lose, Clinton will win, the Republicans will freak, and Sanders will have a new career as a disheveled late night guest. The new center-left administration will chug predictably along, and you will no doubt update us on every new fake scandal.