Political Prediction Thread
- Thread starter Birdjaguar
- Start date
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
If it happened. If he does as well with non Hispanic whites voters, which given that over half of them are women and "better" means winning by 20 points like Romney is unlikely. He will also have to do as well with Hispanic voters, which is also unlikely. Oh, and these are all based on the demographic mix of Florida voters remaining unchanged, which is also unlikely.
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
Trump is generally unlikely. Given Trump's results so far, why would he not do as well as Romney's dismal showing?
J
Bernie Sanders voted for the 1994 Clinton crime bill. So my choices are to vote for someone who voted for the crime bill because it was politically expedient or someone who was loyal to their spouse by supporting the crime bill.
Why the build up, why not just tell us? Is it because you're a Carolina Panthers fan? Is it because you like the character Bagheera in "The Jungle Book"? Is it because you're a card carrying member of the Black Panther Party?
As an aside... With all that build up, Im gonna be really, really, really disappointed, and frankly disgusted if its not precisely one of those three things...
Sure, at the risk of being (again) accused of being condescending for posting a link to readily available info, in response to a seemingly rhetorical question... 2016 Primary Results courtesy of Google.
The rest of what you said in that post just sounds like "Trump is a super awesome charlatan and a liar... and he will fool everyone with his awesome dizzying lie-fu." I just don't buy into those types of arguments as they are a little too self (as an American) loathing.
Lexicus
Deity
Sommerswerd said:
Bernie voted for the crime bill because of its domestic violence provisions, not because it was politically expedient to do so. Indeed he is on record criticizing the meat of the bill and predicting exactly the outcomes which Tim now claims were an unforeseen circumstance.
Sommerswerd said:
It was the Civ 4 avatar most suggestive of political radicalism. I'm a bit young to have been a Black Panther, but I'm also a member of the hip-hop generation. I know what radicalism is, and Barry Goldwater's campaign is not it.
So he compromised his principles in order to get something he supported and/or could campaign on. This seems to be the epitome of the kind of rank political status quo behavior that typically gets associated with Hillary.
So not black, not a panther, not a Black Panther, not a Panthers fan, and not a Jungle Book enthusiast...
Lexicus
Deity
Sommerswerd said:
No argument from me, this has never been my view but you are seemingly right that it is widespread among Bernie supporters.
Bernie is a politician who gets things done, not a Prophet who accomplishes change through the sheer moral force of his personality or whatever your preferred caricature of him is.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
Which dismal showing is that? The one where he won the old white guy vote by twenty points?
That's the Republican problem, and it is a problem Drumpf chose to make worse instead of better. While the Republican party leadership was wrestling with how to broaden their appeal beyond the shrinking "angry old white guy" demographic Drumpf snuck up on them with his "excite the angry old white guys by attacking literally everyone else" strategy.
Zkribbler
Deity
I shudda mentioned this long ago. 
Because the GOP is solely focused on cutting taxes for the rich, it has no proposals which will help everyday Americans. Thus, its talking points will consist of scandals: real, overblown, made up, fantastical, but scandals, scandals, scandals, and more scandals! The Chelsea Clinton shoe-buckle scandal, peanut-brittle-gate, Whitewater, Bluewater, Greenwater, and Yellowsnow. And, regardless of the fact that six (6) government investigations and one (1) independent investigation have come up empty: Benghaaaaaaaaaazzzzzzzi!
The FBI investigation has found no evidence of any lawbreaking with Hillary's emails. It is now so desperate it is granting immunity in an attempt to find anything. The GOP is so delusional they think this is a good thing. The GOP talks as if she's already been convicted.
What you will hear nothing (or at least no specifics about) is how to narrow the gap between rich and poor, how to make our schools better, how to repair our infrastructure, how to make college affordable, what they plan to replace Obamacare with, how they will clean up our air & water, how they can assure that America's elders will have comfortable retirements.
Because the GOP is solely focused on cutting taxes for the rich, it has no proposals which will help everyday Americans. Thus, its talking points will consist of scandals: real, overblown, made up, fantastical, but scandals, scandals, scandals, and more scandals! The Chelsea Clinton shoe-buckle scandal, peanut-brittle-gate, Whitewater, Bluewater, Greenwater, and Yellowsnow. And, regardless of the fact that six (6) government investigations and one (1) independent investigation have come up empty: Benghaaaaaaaaaazzzzzzzi!
The FBI investigation has found no evidence of any lawbreaking with Hillary's emails. It is now so desperate it is granting immunity in an attempt to find anything. The GOP is so delusional they think this is a good thing. The GOP talks as if she's already been convicted.
What you will hear nothing (or at least no specifics about) is how to narrow the gap between rich and poor, how to make our schools better, how to repair our infrastructure, how to make college affordable, what they plan to replace Obamacare with, how they will clean up our air & water, how they can assure that America's elders will have comfortable retirements.
Lexicus
Deity
Zkribbler said:
Hey, don't forget the foreign wars and torture and deregulation and attacking unions and balanced budgets and...
Zkribbler said:
To be fair, they have "answers" for most of this stuff. Economic deregulation will narrow the gap between rich and poor by making the economy more competitive. You can make our schools better by destroying teachers' unions and privatizing where possible. Let the free market repair our infrastructure. AFAIK they don't want college to be more affordable since people who go to college get infected with all sorts of librul race-mixing ideas. They plan to replace Obamacare with the previously existing system I guess, and they think deregulation/privatization will clean up the air and water, and of course Americans can control their own retirements if you privatize social security.
All of this is BS but I think it is what they would say.
And shutting down the EPA and the Department of Education and the "Five Agencies of Government" that they can't even remember what the name of them are
Which as you have pointed out numerous times is not a "solution" at all because the problem is a lack of demand, caused by wealth concentration...
But what can they do? They all signed the "tax-pledge".
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,378
About the US presidential elections. I think people are underestimating one very important actor: the current president. I've already mentioned: Obama is young still. I don't think he wants to quit active politics. I don't think he intends to do that.
There is no place for Obama in US politics under a Hillary presidency. She'll pay lip service to his "legacy" - and proceed to dismantle it. And the Democratic Party will be the Clinton Party throughout.
There is, obviously, no place for him under a Trump presidency either. There will be an opposition led by figures of the Democratic Party, but those will be future presidential hopefuls, and he can't be one of them.
The one scenario where Obama gets to continue to play a key role in politics is one of internal change in the Democratic Party. Sanders can't count on the cooperation of the current "establishment" of the party even if he takes the presidency, the people from Clinton's days still dominate it. Unless he has influential allies to lead a change inside the party...
Political prediction: I think Hillary may be in for a nasty surprise from the DoJ soon.
There is no place for Obama in US politics under a Hillary presidency. She'll pay lip service to his "legacy" - and proceed to dismantle it. And the Democratic Party will be the Clinton Party throughout.
There is, obviously, no place for him under a Trump presidency either. There will be an opposition led by figures of the Democratic Party, but those will be future presidential hopefuls, and he can't be one of them.
The one scenario where Obama gets to continue to play a key role in politics is one of internal change in the Democratic Party. Sanders can't count on the cooperation of the current "establishment" of the party even if he takes the presidency, the people from Clinton's days still dominate it. Unless he has influential allies to lead a change inside the party...
Political prediction: I think Hillary may be in for a nasty surprise from the DoJ soon.
Lexicus
Deity
innonimatu said:
In what way do you think she'll do that?
Zkribbler
Deity
In his defense, the FBI has been making some...interesting statements on this matter lately. So that prediction is, at the very least, a possibility.
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
True. That decision is purely political.
We may never know the extent of the case. Talk radio would have you believe it is stacked like the Nuremburg trials. They also thought the impeachment of Bill Clinton was clear cut on the evidence.
J
Not that I consider it likely, but if she were to be indicted, what would happen? I mean, it might cost her some votes, but if voters in general don't consider it to be a big deal (at least compared to a Trump/Cruz presidency) and elect her anyway, how does the case proceed once she is in office? And, in a parallel universe where she were somehow convicted of a felony before the election, would that affect her ballot access in some states? I mean, it would bar her from voting in some states, but could she still run for president there?
This supposed crime happened what, 5 or 6 years ago?
And they are just getting around to investigating it now?
Nothing will happen until after the election.
If Hillary loses the Presidency, then she can be indicted.
If she wins the Presidency, then the DOJ will decline to prosecute using their Prosecutorial Discretion if the FBI recommends she be indicted.
Probably say "No substantial Federal interest would be served by prosecuting President Clinton". (9-27.220 A_1)
I think her political opponents are hoping it won't get that far. I think her opponents don't actually want her to go to jail, they just want an indictment to force her to abandon her bid for the White House.
I don't think Hillary will be indicted, but the enemy will be looking for tv and twitter material to keep her on the defensive.
Similar threads
