Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[RedKing]

Bernie is apparently fundraising for other progressive Democrats, including 300,000$ for Deborah Ross (NC).

Another reason to still <3 the Bern.


And while you guys were off in hypothetical fantasy land where you consider what would have happened if PirateZombieTrump ran against NinjaRobotSanders, something important was overlooked:

Trump's even losing his support among men, and the undereducated.

After trailing among men throughout the summer, Clinton is now winning 46 percent of their support in a hypothetical two-way race, compared to 44 percent for Trump.

Among those with no college degree, her edge is 48 percent to 44 percent, erasing Trump’s 8-point advantage in September.

[Phmcw]

Because the republican's candidate weren't better in any meaningful way and somehow even less persuasive?

Ah so you agree that it's the fault of the republican party then.  Thanks for clearing that up.

Would Trump be an issue if Clinton was wining by 80 to 20 %?

There was a "trump VS hillary" moment in France in 2002 when the election was between Chirac and Le Pen. Chirac got 82% of the vote.

[Phmcw]

Except right now it's not 2002. Things have changed a hell of a lot since 2002. Also, we're not France. Your example might capture the comparison of the candidates, but it doesn't capture the demographics involved.

If a Trump has a chance, or win the election, then your political class screwed up. All of it.


And seeing the debate here, I can see why and how.

[mainiac]

There was a "trump VS hillary" moment in France in 2002 when the election was between Chirac and Le Pen. Chirac got 82% of the vote.

Chirac was a right wing candidate while Le Pen was a far right candidate.  Chirac got 82% of the vote because all the socialists voted for him.  Chirac was ideologically closer to the socialists then Le Pen.  The 82% was in the runoff where french voters could only chose between those two and could not cast votes for the socialist candidates.

Clinton is a left wing candidate.  Trump is many things but he is not to the left of Clinton.  Clinton isn't getting 82% of the vote because most republicans are voting for Trump, who is ideologically closer to them then Clinton is.  She is doing amazingly well at attracting republican votes by the standards of a normal election.  However many republicans are treating Trump like a republican and not a joke so she is only doing well by the standards of a normal election.

So no, this is not Clinton's fault.  Republicans care more about their ideology then they fear Trump.  You can argue that's not republicans fault but it sure as heck aint Clinton's fault.

[Phmcw]

There is (or was, since things have gone worse there too) a consensus among ALL parties not to call to vote FN in any case. Chirac got 19% of the vote on the first round. Lepen was set to lose by a huge amount no matter who he'd face.


Trump nomination show that the republican party is agonising, that he do so well in the election shows that the democrat party is not healthy at all either.

[mainiac]

that he do so well in the election shows that the democrat party is not healthy at all either.

"So well" in this election means "win a large majority of republican base voters".  Democrats dont chose how republicans vote.  Republicans chose how republicans vote.  Because it's a democracy.

[LoSboccacc]

Because the republican's candidate weren't better in any meaningful way and somehow even less persuasive?

Ah so you agree that it's the fault of the republican party then.  Thanks for clearing that up.

Would Trump be an issue if Clinton was wining by 80 to 20 %?

There was a "trump VS hillary" moment in France in 2002 when the election was between Chirac and Le Pen. Chirac got 82% of the vote.

We had that moment in Italy as well, except Trumpusconi won three times here.

that he do so well in the election shows that the democrat party is not healthy at all either.

"So well" in this election means "win a large majority of republican base voters".  Democrats dont chose how republicans vote.  Republicans chose how republicans vote.  Because it's a democracy.

Eh, that's not exactly a democracy tho. It's fascism if Republicans'd chose how republicans vote. A democracy would be persons deciding to vote Republicans.

[Mephansteras]

Trump nomination show that the republican party is agonising, that he do so well in the election shows that the democrat party is not healthy at all either.

You seriously underestimate the effect of partisanship in American politics. Even more so the effect of an open Supreme Court Justice spot open for the next president to fill. I've heard quite a few republicans make statements to the effect that they feel that getting a conservative judge on the SC is worth voting Trump no matter how terrible he is.

Quite simply, it doesn't matter who the candidates are to these people, they will vote ideologically for the Republican no matter what.

And as stated by others, Trump is bleeding out Republican voters at this point. He's so terrible that the only thing that I could reasonably see letting him win would be massive Republican turnout and equally massive lack of turnout on the Democratic side. Which would be a hell of surprise given how much attention this election is getting by everyone.

[mainiac]

Eh, that's not exactly a democracy tho. It's fascism if Republicans'd chose how republicans vote. A democracy would be persons deciding to vote Republicans.

Republican voters chose how they themselves vote.  And they are choosing to cast their votes for Trump.

[Rolan7]

that he do so well in the election shows that the democrat party is not healthy at all either.

"So well" in this election means "win a large majority of republican base voters".  Democrats dont chose how republicans vote.  Republicans chose how republicans vote.  Because it's a democracy.

Yeah, Americans tend to vote straight tickets along party lines (when we vote at all).  It's pathetic, but it is what it is.

There are undecideds, and I try to be one, but they're a minority.  That's why candidates pander to their base so much...  It's often easier to get a decided voter to *actually go to the polls* than to reach across the aisle.
Personally I think the Democrats do a better job of winning over undecideds, while Republicans prefer to drum up fear and hate in their base, but obviously I'm biased

Ninja'd by Meph

[smjjames]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/10/20/amid-rigged-election-charges-russia-wants-monitor-us-vote/92456558/

Russia want to send monitors to the US vote. This election is now a giant forum troll-fest and we need Toady there ,it's the only way.

They aren't going to be the only election observers. There will be others too, lots of foriegn people come over just to watch how it works and stuff. I know there was an article that also said about it, but can't find it.

Also, Trump's 'wait and see' attitude (rhetoric aside) is in itself, not unprecedented. Which makes me feel better about it, but if the top republicans in Congress decide not to concede for him (as unlikely as that would be), what then? And of course, there's Trump and all of his primed up followers.

Eh, that's not exactly a democracy tho. It's fascism if Republicans'd chose how republicans vote. A democracy would be persons deciding to vote Republicans.

Republican voters chose how they themselves vote.  And they are choosing to cast their votes for Trump.

Exactly, the voters choose how they vote. Not sure who you're saying is not exactly a democracy.

[UXLZ]

that he do so well in the election shows that the democrat party is not healthy at all either.

"So well" in this election means "win a large majority of republican base voters".  Democrats dont chose how republicans vote.  Republicans chose how republicans vote.  Because it's a democracy.

Yeah, Americans tend to vote straight tickets along party lines (when we vote at all).  It's pathetic, but it is what it is.

There are undecideds, and I try to be one, but they're a minority.  That's why candidates pander to their base so much...  It's often easier to get a decided voter to *actually go to the polls* than to reach across the aisle.
Personally I think the Democrats do a better job of winning over undecideds, while Republicans prefer to drum up fear and hate in their base, but obviously I'm biased

Ninja'd by Meph

Honestly, don't think it's that pathetic Rolan. The entire electoral system is massively inherently flawed, it was destined to be a two-party-system from the start, regardless of what the people actually.

As this election shows, everyone votes against who they don't want, rather than for who they do want.

[mainiac]

I can name a lot of people who voted or will vote for Clinton because they want Clinton, not because they don't want Trump.

And quite a few Trump supporters are totally down with what he says.

[UXLZ]

Right right right, yes I was hyperbolic, but the point remains that a lot of people are voting against who they don't like rather than who they like. That's one of the big problems with first-past-the-post voting systems. I'm sure there are a lot of people who'd like to vote for a lot of the third party people, Jill Stein, Gary Johnson, whoever the hell else is running for third party if there are any, but they can't vote for those people in good conscience because of how the system works.

[smjjames]

BTW, Sabato's Crystal Ball shows Clinton winning with 352 to Trump's 173, 538 has it 341/195, and 270towin has a listing of EC projections, while none of them are anywhere like historical landslides, they're still in the range that Obama did in 2008 and 2012.

Spoiler:  Crystal Ball map, spoilered for big image (click to show/hide)

that he do so well in the election shows that the democrat party is not healthy at all either.

"So well" in this election means "win a large majority of republican base voters".  Democrats dont chose how republicans vote.  Republicans chose how republicans vote.  Because it's a democracy.

Yeah, Americans tend to vote straight tickets along party lines (when we vote at all).  It's pathetic, but it is what it is.

There are undecideds, and I try to be one, but they're a minority.  That's why candidates pander to their base so much...  It's often easier to get a decided voter to *actually go to the polls* than to reach across the aisle.
Personally I think the Democrats do a better job of winning over undecideds, while Republicans prefer to drum up fear and hate in their base, but obviously I'm biased

Ninja'd by Meph

Honestly, don't think it's that pathetic Rolan. The entire electoral system is massively inherently flawed, it was destined to be a two-party-system from the start, regardless of what the people actually.

As this election shows, everyone votes against who they don't want, rather than for who they do want.

Well, it's more of a voting-against election than typical due to the unpopularity of both candidates. Also, yes there are massive flaws, I'll admit that, no electoral system is absolutely perfect.

I would love for things to get better, yes, but it's going to be a heck of a lot harder with the current partisan climate. Though if the Democrats take back the Senate, it'll be somewhat easier with Clinton.