USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
- Thread starter Kepler
- Start date
- Status
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
They wont confirm him...they have put too much into the stonewall they cant back track now especially since the nutters will vote them out since they are voting for Drumpf.
They wont confirm him...they have put too much into the stonewall they cant back track now especially since the nutters will vote them out since they are voting for Drumpf.
rufus
rock and roller
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
Especially after a couple of debates between her and the Donald. I can't believe he could even lay a glove on her policy-wise, only personal atacks, which is supporters would lap up like Pavlov's dog. But she would eviscerate him on everything else.
Especially after a couple of debates between her and the Donald. I can't believe he could even lay a glove on her policy-wise, only personal atacks, which is supporters would lap up like Pavlov's dog. But she would eviscerate him on everything else.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
The Dubya debates taught me believers will see their candidate as "winning" the debate no matter what happens. The first debate in 2000 showed Dubya was a drooling moron; even the mic up his back couldn't even help him. That night Republicans overwhelmingly said they thought he "won."
You can't fix a cognitive bias that refashions reality to that degree.
The only way to grade a political debate is to have a panel of people who don't know or care about the issues evaluate it. The news shows shouldn't bother with focus groups of Dems, Republicans, or Independents. They should enpanel Nepalese sherpas or Australian aboriginees.
The Dubya debates taught me believers will see their candidate as "winning" the debate no matter what happens. The first debate in 2000 showed Dubya was a drooling moron; even the mic up his back couldn't even help him. That night Republicans overwhelmingly said they thought he "won."
You can't fix a cognitive bias that refashions reality to that degree.
The only way to grade a political debate is to have a panel of people who don't know or care about the issues evaluate it. The news shows shouldn't bother with focus groups of Dems, Republicans, or Independents. They should enpanel Nepalese sherpas or Australian aboriginees.
Last edited:
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
I can't agree. I think they will. They're afraid if Hillary gets in and the Dems take over the Senate she'll nominate a true liberal. Obama was going for super legacy by naming Garland.
I can't agree. I think they will. They're afraid if Hillary gets in and the Dems take over the Senate she'll nominate a true liberal. Obama was going for super legacy by naming Garland.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
I think they'll try to confirm him after they lose, and hopefully Hillary has already worked out whatever deal is necessary for Obama to withdraw Garland so she can nominate somebody under 35 recommended by Stephen Reinhardt.
I think they'll try to confirm him after they lose, and hopefully Hillary has already worked out whatever deal is necessary for Obama to withdraw Garland so she can nominate somebody under 35 recommended by Stephen Reinhardt.
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
Do you think Obama will withdraw? It's his legacy. I doubt he will. That would be a huge gamble still. McConnell is probably stupid enough to try it.
Do you think Obama will withdraw? It's his legacy. I doubt he will. That would be a huge gamble still. McConnell is probably stupid enough to try it.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
McConnell has no choice but to wait. He can't signal that he has given up on the election -- he'd end up as turtle soup.
Obama would have to get something very sweet in exchange for withdrawing Garland. He does want to be seen as the president who rescued the Court from the orcs. Just think of the kudos for him selflessly withdrawing his nominee so that Hillary could name the judge who then proceeds to reverse every Scalia decision? People would long remember that gesture.
Clinton could promise to nominate him for CJ if Roberts leaves the Court during her administration.
McConnell has no choice but to wait. He can't signal that he has given up on the election -- he'd end up as turtle soup.
Obama would have to get something very sweet in exchange for withdrawing Garland. He does want to be seen as the president who rescued the Court from the orcs. Just think of the kudos for him selflessly withdrawing his nominee so that Hillary could name the judge who then proceeds to reverse every Scalia decision? People would long remember that gesture.
Clinton could promise to nominate him for CJ if Roberts leaves the Court during her administration.
St. Clown
Liberal Rebel Scum, apparently
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
I think it'll be sometime in July, perhaps early August if they wait until after the conventions. Once they see the continuous results of polling numbers come in from likely voters, and Drumpf keeps getting smacked around on the electoral college counts, they'll go through the confirmation process so as to avoid giving even the shadow of a hint of a victory to the Shrill One before her term even starts.
I think it'll be sometime in July, perhaps early August if they wait until after the conventions. Once they see the continuous results of polling numbers come in from likely voters, and Drumpf keeps getting smacked around on the electoral college counts, they'll go through the confirmation process so as to avoid giving even the shadow of a hint of a victory to the Shrill One before her term even starts.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
Thing is, I think the polls are probably as wide now as they'll ever be. Hillary isn't going to win by 13 points -- the country is still somewhere between 50/50 and 55/45, and third term fatigue is a real thing.
Party going for 3rd or more term:
2008: L
2000: L
1992: L
1988: W
1976: L
1968: L
1960: L
I see a pattern.
With the race "tightening," nobody on the GOP side will want to do anything that can later be blamed for a loss.
Thing is, I think the polls are probably as wide now as they'll ever be. Hillary isn't going to win by 13 points -- the country is still somewhere between 50/50 and 55/45, and third term fatigue is a real thing.
Party going for 3rd or more term:
2008: L
2000: L
1992: L
1988: W
1976: L
1968: L
1960: L
I see a pattern.
With the race "tightening," nobody on the GOP side will want to do anything that can later be blamed for a loss.
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
While I don't think there's much question that Sanders is more likeable. In a run up, he'd have his own problems. He would be painted as an outright communist...and that's a message I bet that would stick much more than crooked. The country largely knows Hillary...much of the middle would be introduced to Sanders as a communist by a Donald Trump, someone they know. While Trump might be starting further back...running against radical 'Commie' Sanders, Trump could potentially pull all this off.
While I don't think there's much question that Sanders is more likeable. In a run up, he'd have his own problems. He would be painted as an outright communist...and that's a message I bet that would stick much more than crooked. The country largely knows Hillary...much of the middle would be introduced to Sanders as a communist by a Donald Trump, someone they know. While Trump might be starting further back...running against radical 'Commie' Sanders, Trump could potentially pull all this off.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
Probably, though the GOP has a Chicken Little problem there. They call every Democrat a communist, so why should anybody not already in their cult listen this time?
Probably, though the GOP has a Chicken Little problem there. They call every Democrat a communist, so why should anybody not already in their cult listen this time?
busterman62
I got a pocket full of kryptonite
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
Even Obama's biggest critics know he is too intelligent to believe anything Claire Underwood might promise.
rufus
rock and roller
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
He'd need collateral. Maybe a photo of Vince Foster's final moments.
He'd need collateral. Maybe a photo of Vince Foster's final moments.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
St. Clown
Liberal Rebel Scum, apparently
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
I'm not calling a landslide in terms of overall voter split 56-43, etc., rather in electoral vote count. People know these two people's names. They're not being introduced to the public at their conventions.
If push came to shove, I see Drumpf losing ground by the time the convention rolls around. He's made some truly polarizing statements, ones he already starting to somewhat change. The problem for him is that his most polarizing statements are where he's getting the most support with his base bloc. He'll pivot off those, trying to capture the middle and even the social conservative Republicans who are turned off by him, and his current base will become disenfranchised and skip the election. He'll have such an exodus of support due to painting himself into an extremely high profile corner that he simply won't be able to recover.
This election will basically come down to which party has fewer base voters staying home that day. Shrillary has, at the very least, kept her campaign's message fairly consistent, and won't have to pivot much to capture the moderates this year, unlike Drumpf. That'll give her the appearance of being more stable (probably true), and less toxic (questionably true).
I'm not calling a landslide in terms of overall voter split 56-43, etc., rather in electoral vote count. People know these two people's names. They're not being introduced to the public at their conventions.
If push came to shove, I see Drumpf losing ground by the time the convention rolls around. He's made some truly polarizing statements, ones he already starting to somewhat change. The problem for him is that his most polarizing statements are where he's getting the most support with his base bloc. He'll pivot off those, trying to capture the middle and even the social conservative Republicans who are turned off by him, and his current base will become disenfranchised and skip the election. He'll have such an exodus of support due to painting himself into an extremely high profile corner that he simply won't be able to recover.
This election will basically come down to which party has fewer base voters staying home that day. Shrillary has, at the very least, kept her campaign's message fairly consistent, and won't have to pivot much to capture the moderates this year, unlike Drumpf. That'll give her the appearance of being more stable (probably true), and less toxic (questionably true).
unofan
Well-known member
The odds of Roberts leaving the Court voluntarily in the next 20 years is akin to none.
The next ones gone, absent any deaths, will be RBG, Kennedy, and Breyer.
Alito, Roberts, Kagan, and Sotomayor will all outlast the next president and the one after that, too. Maybe even the one after that.
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
Before you get too worked up, read the article and get the context.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XI: the Two Party Problem
You never know. Justices used to leave the Court for reasons others than a pine box. Roberts was made CJ of a Court that he would be writing the majority opinion for. He may be about to be in the minority for the rest of his career. We may well have a 6-3 liberal majority by 2020, with all 6 liberals being fairly young. He may not want that; he may even think that it's not a good thing for the CJ to be diametrically opposed to the Court's main line of thinking.
You never know. Justices used to leave the Court for reasons others than a pine box. Roberts was made CJ of a Court that he would be writing the majority opinion for. He may be about to be in the minority for the rest of his career. We may well have a 6-3 liberal majority by 2020, with all 6 liberals being fairly young. He may not want that; he may even think that it's not a good thing for the CJ to be diametrically opposed to the Court's main line of thinking.
- Status