Jump to content

The 2016 US Presidential Election


Adamski

Recommended Posts

Frightening, he's not a total idiot and he has some blue collar credibility unlike Trump.

No he doesn't; the Bridgegate scandal cost him any genuine independent goodwill, and as a political moderate who was utterly trounced even in New Hampshire, wouldn't offer much to Trump as a VP. He's a totally busted flush for this election cycle.

Getting (white) 'blue collar credibility' isn't actually the Republicans' route to the White House anyway, because it isn't 1980 and white blue collar workers aren't actually the decisive demographic factor in elections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 5.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The results so far suggest otherwise.

But there's a valid point being made about "alternative" messages. A Trump vs Clinton election... jesus, bring back Richard Nixon! Because then you'd have a history of Bush - Clinton - Bush - Obama - Clinton.

If Obama taught us anything, it is that no matter how "grass roots" the campaign proclaims itself, once in the White House, the president is at the mercy of the financial system.

Primaries - even less so Republican primaries - aren't representative of the US electorate as a whole. Though Clinton is certainly a weak enough candidate to allow the usual Republican primary fail to end up in a default presidency.

It's much ado about nothing really. The Democrats (and Clinton above most other Democrats) retain a crucial demographic advantage among minority groups, that have only grown since 2012 in swing states like Florida, New Mexico, Colorado etc. Particularly over a racist like Trump (remember: the Nevada primary Trump won was of Republicans engaged in primary elections - ordinary voters aren't the same constituency). Compared to 2012, Trump could certainly win Ohio on angry white votes but after that I don't see where he can add to the existing red states, where he'd just pile up many more useless votes. Which US states can an openly racist, anti-immigrant candidate flip in 2016?

Clinton's major weakness would be a weak Democratic turnout, particularly after being drubbed by Sanders on the ideology during the primary. But given that Trump will eventually stand, I can't see a low turnout happening. Liberals and Sanders activists will hold their noses and vote for Clinton once the stench of Trump actually reaches the ballot box.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Primaries - even less so Republican primaries - aren't representative of the US electorate as a whole. Though Clinton is certainly a weak enough candidate to allow the usual Republican primary fail to end up in a default presidency.

It's much ado about nothing really. The Democrats (and Clinton above most other Democrats) retain a crucial demographic advantage among minority groups, that have only grown since 2012 in swing states like Florida, New Mexico, Colorado etc. Particularly over a racist like Trump (remember: the Nevada primary Trump won was of Republicans engaged in primary elections - ordinary voters aren't the same constituency). Compared to 2012, Trump could certainly win Ohio on angry white votes but after that I don't see where he can add to the existing red states, where he'd just pile up many more useless votes. Which US states can an openly racist, anti-immigrant candidate flip in 2016?

Clinton's major weakness would be a weak Democratic turnout, particularly after being drubbed by Sanders on the ideology during the primary. But given that Trump will eventually stand, I can't see a low turnout happening. Liberals and Sanders activists will hold their noses and vote for Clinton once the stench of Trump actually reaches the ballot box.

Clinton is clearly the lesser of two evils.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clinton isn't evil at all; she's just a fake, earlier generation, career politician with a train car of baggage that will be lit up like firecrackers during the campaign, including a potential federal inditement for the email scandal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rubio on the attack,basically saying trumps a democrat

I'll bear that in mind when i'm breaking rocks in a President Trump endorsed internment camp for Scottish people after we fucked up the view from his golf course.

Salmond will be living in a cave in Kandahar province after Don's inauguration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would Hillary win against Sanders if Trump wasn't in play? I'm not so sure. I think a lot of Democrats are going for the bigger name, the established candidate, rather than taking a risk like they were prepared to do in 2008 with the country fed up of Bush and the Republicans.

Genuinely sad that the world will be praying for her to become President. When is the result of her FBI investigation due? That could be huge further down the line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would Hillary win against Sanders if Trump wasn't in play? I'm not so sure. I think a lot of Democrats are going for the bigger name, the established candidate, rather than taking a risk like they were prepared to do in 2008 with the country fed up of Bush and the Republicans.

Genuinely sad that the world will be praying for her to become President. When is the result of her FBI investigation due? That could be huge further down the line.

They probably are, but it's twisted logic as Trump has far more chance of beating Clinton than Sanders. Trump's popularity is based on setting himself up as an anti-establishment figure and attacking the stereotypical politician. The anti-establishment part is why he could so easily savage Jeb Bush and he'll be able to do even worse to Clinton, with Clinton also having a list of scandals even longer than a list of her husband's affairs to attack.

The anti-establishment shtick would just bounce off Sanders as he also has that appeal, while not being completely lacking in political experience and having no skeletons in the closet. With Clinton it can't possibly fail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump is up to 49% nationally (up 8%) amongst Republican voters, in the latest CNN poll. The other figures are Rubio 16%, Cruz is 15%, Carson 16%, Kasich 6%. Trump is rated badly by swing voters so Clinton will thrash him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Best thing if you don't want Trump would be for him to wipe out Cruz in Texas and for Rubio to come a good second in a few, or even win one. Cruz would probably pack it in leaving Rubio one on one with Trump if you ignore the also rans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The GOP need to pick their anti-Trump man and quick. Chances of it being a straight Trump v Rubio fight after 'super Tuesday' ?

Rubio is the GOP establishment's and neocon's candidate. He's making basic errors like his condescending plea to christie for his endorsement. Rubio is inexperienced and his debate performances suggest that he's out of his depth at this level. Cruz could easily beat him tomorrow and he'll stay in the race anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cruz is said to be the most unpopular man in Congress and has managed to alienate the power brokers in Texas. He only appeals to the evangelicals and Trump has hoovered up their votes. He's rapidly running out of states with a high proportion of them, if he does badly tomorrow I think he's fcuked. If Rubio doesn't do humiliatingly badly he'll be expected to do better in states where urban voters count for more, he's said to have concentrated his campaigning on suburbia and has done quite well in that sector already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...