Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

1. Yes, Hillary has showed excellent qualifications through a long political career, but God forbid someone running for President actually wants the job. Hillary must be the first person running to ever be like that. Oh wait, no, all of them have, she's the first woman to dare doing so. That's going to be the big difference between Obama and Hillary. Racism might be uglier, but latent sexism is far more pervasive.

So anyone who doesn't like Hillary is a sexist? Nice.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

So anyone who doesn't like Hillary is a sexist? Nice.

No, just the majority of people who hate her are. Just like the majority of people who hate(d) Obama are racist.

[unofan]

So anyone who doesn't like Hillary is a sexist? Nice.

Not anyone. But a not insignificant portion.

[MaizeRage]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

So anyone who doesn't like Hillary is a sexist? Nice.

Not necessarily. But people that admit her outstanding qualifications, but say they dislike her for a characteristic that has applied to every other (male) candidate for the job ever and has never been an issue before definitely are.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Russell Kirk said it best. "Not all conservatives are reactionaries, but all reactionaries are conservatives."

I would not want to be the person in charge of woman outreach in the GOP. Todd Akin is going to look enlightened compared to the stuff we are going to hear this summer. If the GOP winds up permanently -20 with women along with -40 with Latinos and -80 with blacks, there literally aren't enough white males to save them.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Jeff Sessions? Seriously?

[Slap Shot]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

The county legislature chairman, a Democrat, was on my morning show this week. To paraphrase his response to my question about the historic-level negatives for Trump and Clinton, he said his comes from insulting women, minorities, etc., while hers comes from 25 years or so of "doing things."

He's not wrong.

[5mn_Major]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Palin says she is working to take down P Ryan. The left media should have a daily conversation with her.

[Slap Shot]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Take down Paul Ryan but let's roll with Drump? The GOP is FUBAR.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

Take down Paul Ryan but let's roll with Drump? The GOP is FUBAR.

If Ryan doesn't jump on the Trump train then Trump is going to destroy him in the media. He left Romney and the Bush Family in his wake this morning on the Meet the Press. It's going to be very entertaining to watch.

[WeAreNDHockey]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

The county legislature chairman, a Democrat, was on my morning show this week. To paraphrase his response to my question about the historic-level negatives for Trump and Clinton, he said his comes from insulting women, minorities, etc., while hers comes from 25 years or so of "doing things."

I don't know that I get the eye-roll. He's spot on in his assessment of why her negatives are high. She's been doing things since the early 90s that have been politically visible and a lot of people don't like a lot of those things (me included in large part). I don't see his comment as some sideways endorsement of her as in "well when you tell it like it is you pi55 a lot of people off" or some similar comment. A generation ago most people did not have a negative opinion of Trump. He was seen as simply a figure in the world of business or finance, if you paid any attention to him at all. But for the last year his comments are what have driven his negatives to a historical high for a presumptive nominee of either major American political party. Whether or not you agree with him or disagree with him, I don't see how this is not evident.

[mookie1995]

A generation ago most people did not have a negative opinion of Trump..

You appear to have missed out on the short but heavenly run of "Spy" magazine

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

A generation ago most people did not have a negative opinion of Trump. He was seen as simply a figure in the world of business or finance, if you paid any attention to him at all.

It's all in the exposure. As a New Yorker I've been over-exposed to him since high school, and I can tell you thirty years ago everybody from the Hudson to Montauk thought he was a boorish, classless, orangutan-resembling moron. At best people thought he was Al Czervik, but anybody who knew anybody in NYC real estate or business knew he was just an empty-headed silver spoon jackoff.

[rufus]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

A generation ago most people did not have a negative opinion of Trump.

Really? Cause I've never liked the guy. He just oozed smarm and entitlement. He's not even a great businessman. If he'd simply invested the money he inherited from his father in an Index 500 fund, he'd be worth more today.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem

GOP is about to make NV caucus walk the plank.

If they really replace it with a CO primary that seems like a very big deal to me. CO probably has more delegates than IA, NH and SC combined. It would also make a fairly moderate, very important, solidly purple state early enough that candidates would probably pay a ton of attention to it.