Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
You may well be right. But remember, you are Scooby.
You may well be right. But remember, you are Scooby.
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 XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
- Thread starter ExileOnDaytonStreet
- Start date
- Status
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
That's the possible fallout of a Bernie who has gone negative on Hillary and attacked the DNC.
That's the possible fallout of a Bernie who has gone negative on Hillary and attacked the DNC.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
I doubt this will mean anything in 2 months, let alone 5.
I doubt this will mean anything in 2 months, let alone 5.
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
Perhaps. Based on the polls, it appears to mean something today.
There are two simple options for the Dem party. I think its likely anything else results in Trump overcoming long electoral odds and taking the presidency. Those options are:
1. We focus on making Hillary the strongest candidate possible as soon as possible. This helps her fix her image of not being strong enough to will through results and it also minimizes risks that she cant turn it around in 3 months.
2. Put Bernie in the chair. The trick is he can't win the popular vote at this point in large part due to minorities. Its pretty much impossible. This means that we throw out the set system of primaries and just arbitrarily pick someone based on the opinions of a handful of people. Not only is that against the democratic way, its likely to turn off many potential voters who will assume the results were rigged because they were.
Now personally I'm fine with whoever ends up winning the nomination. But we shouldn't take the worst course which is let each democratic nominee remain under attack from an extremely effective persuader in Trump, the GOP and the multitude of conservative pacs....and at the same time the other Dem nominee and half of the democratic party. From any sort of theoretical standpoint, that's just asking for defeat.
Perhaps. Based on the polls, it appears to mean something today.
There are two simple options for the Dem party. I think its likely anything else results in Trump overcoming long electoral odds and taking the presidency. Those options are:
1. We focus on making Hillary the strongest candidate possible as soon as possible. This helps her fix her image of not being strong enough to will through results and it also minimizes risks that she cant turn it around in 3 months.
2. Put Bernie in the chair. The trick is he can't win the popular vote at this point in large part due to minorities. Its pretty much impossible. This means that we throw out the set system of primaries and just arbitrarily pick someone based on the opinions of a handful of people. Not only is that against the democratic way, its likely to turn off many potential voters who will assume the results were rigged because they were.
Now personally I'm fine with whoever ends up winning the nomination. But we shouldn't take the worst course which is let each democratic nominee remain under attack from an extremely effective persuader in Trump, the GOP and the multitude of conservative pacs....and at the same time the other Dem nominee and half of the democratic party. From any sort of theoretical standpoint, that's just asking for defeat.
Last edited:
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
I think that's just "some settling may occur" as the polls adjust to two nominees. We are now back where we always begin: 45 D, 45 R before we even bother to check for a pulse.
Bernie will either support Hillary or have his entire gig lifted by Warren who will support Hillary. Just as the Cruz and Kasich people lined up behind the R, the Bernie people (and Martin O'Malley's immediate family) will line up behind the D. The name on the front's more important than the name on the back.
I think that's just "some settling may occur" as the polls adjust to two nominees. We are now back where we always begin: 45 D, 45 R before we even bother to check for a pulse.
Bernie will either support Hillary or have his entire gig lifted by Warren who will support Hillary. Just as the Cruz and Kasich people lined up behind the R, the Bernie people (and Martin O'Malley's immediate family) will line up behind the D. The name on the front's more important than the name on the back.
Last edited:
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
So, reading today that Trump is concerned about Global Warming in Ireland because the sea is taking away precious real estate from his golf course. He wants to build a seawall. Yet, during the campaign it's a myth.
Clinton's should be bashing him over the head on this one.
So, reading today that Trump is concerned about Global Warming in Ireland because the sea is taking away precious real estate from his golf course. He wants to build a seawall. Yet, during the campaign it's a myth.
Clinton's should be bashing him over the head on this one.
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
Gotta agree with Kep here
eek: 
). Anybody getting nervous about polls only needs to look at the crosstabs. One had Trump winning a third of Hispanics. Another had him tied with 18-29 year olds. One had more men than women voting. Lets not forget the 20% of Sanders voters supporting Trump. Its all nonsense. The bottom line is to attract attention pollsters are going to fiddle with the makeup of the sample in order to show a tie race. There's no consequences for doing so in the months leading up to election night. Only on the weekend beforehand do you want to get your polling right, otherwise you get left holding the bag like Gallup did in 2012 (Romney 51-Obama 46)! 
Gotta agree with Kep here
eek: ). Anybody getting nervous about polls only needs to look at the crosstabs. One had Trump winning a third of Hispanics. Another had him tied with 18-29 year olds. One had more men than women voting. Lets not forget the 20% of Sanders voters supporting Trump. Its all nonsense. The bottom line is to attract attention pollsters are going to fiddle with the makeup of the sample in order to show a tie race. There's no consequences for doing so in the months leading up to election night. Only on the weekend beforehand do you want to get your polling right, otherwise you get left holding the bag like Gallup did in 2012 (Romney 51-Obama 46)!
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
Well, Clinton may be winning the black vote, women vote, and hispanic vote but the margins that Trump is winning the white man vote is a lot larger than any of the other gaps.
Gotta agree with Kep here
Well, Clinton may be winning the black vote, women vote, and hispanic vote but the margins that Trump is winning the white man vote is a lot larger than any of the other gaps.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
Clinton is going to take the black vote > 90-10. Trump is going to win white males, but not 90-10 he aint.
But if you are talking about sheer number of votes and not percentage, the estimates I have seen are that if other gaps stay the same as the past elections, Trump will need to take white males 70-30 to have a chance. Reagan didn't even manage that in '84 so no, that's not going to happen.
Trump needs to somehow improve in at least one of those other categories, and he's poison in all of them.
Clinton is going to take the black vote > 90-10. Trump is going to win white males, but not 90-10 he aint.
But if you are talking about sheer number of votes and not percentage, the estimates I have seen are that if other gaps stay the same as the past elections, Trump will need to take white males 70-30 to have a chance. Reagan didn't even manage that in '84 so no, that's not going to happen.
Trump needs to somehow improve in at least one of those other categories, and he's poison in all of them.
Last edited:
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
Fair enough. It's the others that the gap is bigger on the white man side.
Fair enough. It's the others that the gap is bigger on the white man side.
Twitch Boy
Defacing this tagline is a MAX foul
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
Been playing around with 270towin. Tall order, but it's doable, especially with an unknown quantity like him.
Assuming Hillary holds FL, Trump needs to take all four of WI, MI, OH, and PA and he's in. He can squeak by with three, but he'll need EVERYTHING else on the board to make up for it (NC, NV, IA, MO, and NH for good measure.) Two or less and it's lights out.
That said, I'm pretty confident he's not getting MI because of the Flint water mess. Republican is a dirty word there right now.
Been playing around with 270towin. Tall order, but it's doable, especially with an unknown quantity like him.
Assuming Hillary holds FL, Trump needs to take all four of WI, MI, OH, and PA and he's in. He can squeak by with three, but he'll need EVERYTHING else on the board to make up for it (NC, NV, IA, MO, and NH for good measure.) Two or less and it's lights out.
That said, I'm pretty confident he's not getting MI because of the Flint water mess. Republican is a dirty word there right now.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
This charge is ridiculous and it might stick.
This brings up an opportunity for the Hillaries. 98% of America has no idea how finance or real estate work. But they do know that a bunch of rich NYC scumbags destroyed the economy and were never punished for it. Trump is a rich NYC scumbag.
You play that guilt by association card, white girl!
This charge is ridiculous and it might stick.
This brings up an opportunity for the Hillaries. 98% of America has no idea how finance or real estate work. But they do know that a bunch of rich NYC scumbags destroyed the economy and were never punished for it. Trump is a rich NYC scumbag.
You play that guilt by association card, white girl!
Last edited:
ScoobyDoo
NPC
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
I think that's a fair charge. We do not have (not supposed to anyway) unfettered capitalism. In fact I can't think of anything more dangerous. The fact that no one went to jail for destroying the economy still bothers me to this day.
I think that's a fair charge. We do not have (not supposed to anyway) unfettered capitalism. In fact I can't think of anything more dangerous. The fact that no one went to jail for destroying the economy still bothers me to this day.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
The charge against the banksters is fair. Come the revolution they go up against the wall right after the neocons.
But of the many, many faults of Trump, this isn't one of them. Trump is such a financial lightweight I'm sure he didn't even understand what was happening, and he hasn't actually done anything but sell his name for 2 decades anyway. He's not smart enough or important enough to have had anything to do with the crash. That was engineered by the people who actually matter. That was Harvard and MIT people, not Wharton people.
The charge against the banksters is fair. Come the revolution they go up against the wall right after the neocons.
But of the many, many faults of Trump, this isn't one of them. Trump is such a financial lightweight I'm sure he didn't even understand what was happening, and he hasn't actually done anything but sell his name for 2 decades anyway. He's not smart enough or important enough to have had anything to do with the crash. That was engineered by the people who actually matter. That was Harvard and MIT people, not Wharton people.
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
Yes. I'd hate to think I'm alone. I mean really hate the idea that people could support Trump.
...unless, of course, political ads can show that Hillary's husband had a whiff of adultery back in the 90s. That would change everything.
Yes. I'd hate to think I'm alone. I mean really hate the idea that people could support Trump.
...unless, of course, political ads can show that Hillary's husband had a whiff of adultery back in the 90s. That would change everything.
Last edited:
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
True. The Clintons are such an unknown that attack ads could really define them.
True. The Clintons are such an unknown that attack ads could really define them.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
Shows what you know...I qualified "highly" for immigration
Shows what you know...I qualified "highly" for immigration
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
The Clintons need to play the long game on this one...let him bury himself in contradictions and sit back and smile Come the debates he will have to pick a stance or he will get buried.
The Clintons need to play the long game on this one...let him bury himself in contradictions and sit back and smile
Come the debates he will have to pick a stance or he will get buried.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XII: What Have We Done To Deserve This?
I didn't understand the language portion of the adaptability section. What is the deal with that?
Shows what you know...I qualified "highly" for immigration
I didn't understand the language portion of the adaptability section. What is the deal with that?
- Status