2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins

Status
Not open for further replies.
Man of Leisure said:
Are we here to amuse you? This and your pizza post make me very sad. :(
Click to expand...
:lol:

Sorry, mate. If it's any consolation, I do like pizza up to a point. And you can't deny that Trump would be hilarious. Sanders is currently unelectable, but after a Trump presidency, somebody like him might have a chance. In a weird way, I think Trump would be good for the world, if only as a cautionary tale.
 
diarm said:
That's true but it's also what makes it such a shame that someone like Sanders can never win. He's been involved since the 60's yet comes across as unjaded and energetic without ever appearing insincere.
Click to expand...

Sanders's greatest obstacle is his s-tag. I do believe if Warren runs she can win against Hillary
 
Ubik said:
What do you make of his previous votes on gun laws?
Click to expand...

Think he has been pretty consistent. Explained well here: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...rnie-sanders-vote-against-background-checks-/

While I wish we could just make guns disappear I don't think it's realistic. A large portion of Americans, unfortunately, don't want to give up their firearms so we have to compromise and make it as safe as possible while allowing responsible gun owners to exercise their right to own a firearm. Bernie was voting based on what his constituents wanted and has been consistent and honest, I have no issue with that.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Sanders's greatest obstacle is his s-tag. I do believe if Warren runs she can win against Hillary
Click to expand...

I don't understand how all these people who will make their decision based on that word think the current system is working for them?
 
diarm said:
I don't understand how all these people who will make their decision based on that word think the current system is working for them?
Click to expand...

Maybe it has something to do with being scared and misled by the media for the better part of a century? Much the same with the idea of American exceptionalism.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Maybe it has something to do with being scared and misled by the media for the better part of a century? Much the same with the idea of American exceptionalism.
Click to expand...

I get that but in todays world, with the internet and with all the media options available, there is no real excuse for soaking up media bullshit unless you want to. What could happen that would be worse than what Wall Street did to them? What could a tyrannical government feasibly do to them that is worse than losing 90 people a day to guns? How is releasing their electoral system from big money influence not in the best interest of every one of them?
 
diarm said:
I get that but in todays world, with the internet and with all the media options available, there is no real excuse for soaking up media bullshit unless you want to. What could happen that would be worse than what Wall Street did to them? What could a tyrannical government feasibly do to them that is worse than losing 90 people a day to guns? How is releasing their electoral system from big money influence not in the best interest of every one of them?
Click to expand...

You will be surprised how apolitical the average Joe is. When you work 70 hours a week to put food on the table, the last thing you want to do is browsing the Internet for political blogs.

Also, I touched upon it somewhere else in this thread. There's a very unhealthy contempt/distrust for intellectuals from working class Americans. A GOP strategy paying off.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Castro will win her 2016, but the Dems will lose 2020 as a result.

VP is a dead end job in politics, usually. If the Dems are wise, they will go with Hillary-Webb or Hillary-Kaine and save the Castro card for 20/24. A Castro-Warren ticket will bring a lot of enthusiasm into the progressive base.
Click to expand...

Good points. But I don't see the Dems losing the White House in the foreseable future. The GOP just does not have the numbers and they get smaller each election, because the Republicans need to get more and more rabid appealing to their base.
 
In complete fairness, isn't dog meat consumed on a fairly widespread basis in both Koreas?

(Obviously there's a racial undertone there which is dodgy but still)
 
Red Dreams said:
Good points. But I don't see the Dems losing the White House in the foreseable future. The GOP just does not have the numbers and they get smaller each election, because the Republicans need to get more and more rabid appealing to their base.
Click to expand...

I hope you are right. I'm still fairly skeptical of the Hill's ability to energize the base and get a big turn out. Obama won his swing states with a margin of =< 3%. A lower participation rate from the African American/Hisapic/young voting blocs and things can go tits up quickly.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
You will be surprised how apolitical the average Joe is. When you work 70 hours a week to put food on the table, the last thing you want to do is browsing the Internet for political blogs.

Also, I touched upon it somewhere else in this thread. There's a very unhealthy contempt/distrust for intellectuals from working class Americans. A GOP strategy paying off.
Click to expand...

It's disgusting really. Seems like an entire political hemisphere that exists solely to protect the better interests of the wealthy by stifling the progress and personal development of their minions. In many ways, it's eerily similar to the methods used by the catholic church or more ironically, those used by the dangerous islamic fundamentalists they like to portray as backwards and barbaric.
 
naturalized said:
In complete fairness, isn't dog meat consumed on a fairly widespread basis in both Koreas?

(Obviously there's a racial undertone there which is dodgy but still)
Click to expand...

Koreans eating dog, whether north or south, is a pretty common stereo type in many circles. Huckabee was clearly pandering to Republican whites there.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
I hope you are right. I'm still fairly skeptical of the Hill's ability to energize the base and get a big turn out. Obama won his swing states with a margin of =< 3%. A lower participation rate from the African American/Hisapic/young voting blocs and things can go tits up quickly.
Click to expand...
She's been getting Obama levels of support from minority voters, don't think that will be an issue. If the Get out the Vote infrastructure left behind by Obama is still available as well, and I think Jim Messina has said he'll be working on her campaign, she's fairly safe barring something truly damaging coming out.
 
Man of Leisure said:
As much as I despise her, I do agree that Hillary comes across as the most 'presidential' when standing up there next to some of those clowns. On a personal level, I find Bernie to be much more compelling but I think America will find him too much of a nutty professor type. That and his self-proclaimed socialist tag won't fly with most Americans.
Click to expand...

People have been saying that for a while, but the turn-outs he's been seeing, and the fervour of his supporters is not exactly common. He's got room for growth, whereas Hillary's mainly seen her numbers dwindle, albeit not enough to have anybody overtake her.

This might not be as much of a done deal as people seem to think it is.

He fumbled the question about his socialist leanings, though. He should make it quite clear that he believes in free markets, just much more constrained and with much more attention being paid to the population at large, rather than the idea of the big winners.
 
sun_tzu said:
Unless Clinton drops a massive (proverbial) bollock she is nailed on to win the nomination... its going to take quite a bad campaign for her not to win the election as well I think as if they can get the turnout they should get the win. (and may even have trump as an independent to help swing things even further)
Click to expand...
yeah I agree with all of that.
My point is, that Sanders has nothing to lose. He is too old to have another go at the presidency, so this is his only shot. Regardless of his strategy, he needs a (small) miracle. Still I don´t understand why he shies away from attacking HC. His message against big money and for more social equality is almost tailor-made to point out the hypocrisy of HC. That might also be the only way how he could reach minorities.
 
Last edited:
If America does elect Saunders (unlikely as it may be), I guess it would mean that they are more progressive and left wing than we are. Madness.
 
PedroMendez said:
yeah I agree with all of that.
My point is, that Sanders has nothing to lose. He is too old to have another go at the presidency, so this is his only shot. Regardless of his strategy, he needs a small (miracle). Still I don´t understand why he shies away from attacking HC. His message against big money and for more social equality is almost tailor-made to point out the hypocrisy of HC. That might also be the only way how he could reach minorities.
Click to expand...

It was clear from yesterday, that Sanders' only agenda is to move Hillary as far left as he can. It was pretty clear he wants Hillary to be President. btw I was very disappointed with Webb. Expected a lot better from him.
 
Red Dreams said:
It was clear from yesterday, that Sanders' only agenda is to move Hillary as far left as he can. It was pretty clear he wants Hillary to be President. btw I was very disappointed with Webb. Expected a lot better from him.
Click to expand...

What makes you say that?
 
I'm not too sure on Castro to be honest. On one hand, it would buy her Latino cred, on the other, Castro himself is a bit young and from a state the Dems will lose anyway. IMO, the Dems need to choose someone who can win her a critical swing state - any of VA, IN, OH, NC, or FL would do. This is why I think the likes of Kaine, Webb, Bayh, or possibly even Crist may be in play.
 
Thinking back over the debate, I'm really really disappointed in Sanders. He let Hilary off the hook way too easily, he should have criticized her for breaking the law with her emails and her her rampant hypocrisy with banks/Snowden.

He lost the nomination yesterday, I'm sure, because he tried to be this holier than thou politician. It's all bullshit and he played right into Clinton's hands. Their policies, to the average person, are largely similar so he needed to attack the obvious deficiencies in her character.
 
The Law of Denis said:
Thinking back over the debate, I'm really really disappointed in Sanders. He let Hilary off the hook way too easily, he should have criticized her for breaking the law with her emails and her her rampant hypocrisy with banks/Snowden.

He lost the nomination yesterday, I'm sure, because he tried to be this holier than thou politician. It's all bullshit and he played right into Clinton's hands. Their policies, to the average person, are largely similar so he needed to attack the obvious deficiencies in her character.
Click to expand...

How is anybody surprised at this? He's got a record for speaking to his own stances on issues rather than beating on other candidates throughout his career.

He objects to how politics is generally done, and he's trying to embody the principles he wants to see things run by. It might be idealistic, but people respond to it. It wasn't as if it went down badly that he threw aside the phone issue rather than used it as a stick to beat Hillary with.

He's been clear on wanting to do things this way throughout his campaigning so far.
 
Eriku said:
How is anybody surprised at this? He's got a record for speaking to his own stances on issues rather than beating on other candidates throughout his career.

He objects to how politics is generally done, and he's trying to embody the principles he wants to see things run by. It might be idealistic, but people respond to it. It wasn't as if it went down badly that he threw aside the phone issue rather than used it as a stick to beat Hillary with.

He's been clear on wanting to do things this way throughout his campaigning so far.
Click to expand...

I think you are right, but he went way over the top. He made it a complete non issue. He could have easily stated that if any politician is suspected of breaking the law then they should be persecuted and then still accused Republicans of focusing on non policy issues.

Hilary's actions do not deserve to be treated as unimportant to the wider picture.
 
The Law of Denis said:
I think you are right, but he went way over the top. He made it a complete non issue. He could have easily stated that if any politician is suspected of breaking the law then they should be persecuted and then still accused Republicans of focusing on non policy issues.

Hilary's actions do not deserve to be treated as unimportant to the wider picture.
Click to expand...

It's been done to death and the people suited to investigate are doing so... One of the other candidates tried to sound stern about it, didn't exactly get the room going.
 
Eriku said:
What makes you say that?
Click to expand...

He helped her so much by brushing aside the email issue. If he were serious about being President, he would have at least being silent. But after that statement no democrat will bring it up again, even if the GOP will of course keep stirring the pot.

Sanders made it seem a GOP and Media obsession thing. Unless there are serious repercussions from the emails, this will not affect her at all.
 
Red Dreams said:
He helped her so much by brushing aside the email issue. If he were serious about being President, he would have at least being silent. But after that statement no democrat will bring it up again, even if the GOP will of course keep stirring the pot.

Sanders made it seem a GOP and Media obsession thing. Unless there are serious repercussions from the emails, this will not affect her at all.
Click to expand...

Like I said earlier, it's totally in keeping with Sanders' attitude in general during this campaign. He rightly considers the media's obsession with divisive issues like these, rather than engaging with real political issues that need to be addressed, as part of the problem. I don't think it signals that he's not serious at all.

Anyway, I seem to be in the minority on here in terms of actually thinking this will be a close race. If that happens we'll certainly have our answer.
 
Red Dreams said:
He helped her so much by brushing aside the email issue. If he were serious about being President, he would have at least being silent. But after that statement no democrat will bring it up again, even if the GOP will of course keep stirring the pot.

Sanders made it seem a GOP and Media obsession thing. Unless there are serious repercussions from the emails, this will not affect her at all.
Click to expand...

Thinking like this bothers me a bit "if he were serious about being president he would have descended into the mud - slinging instead of focusing on real issues that affect real people." I am so happy he stuck to issues that have a large impact on many people instead of commenting on something that is still under investigation and at most a second tier issue in terms of impact on the general population.

There are a number of things in this country that must be addressed before this situation and Sanders is attempting to do that.
 
Red-Jeff said:
Thinking like this bothers me a bit "if he were serious about being president he would have descended into the mud - slinging instead of focusing on real issues that affect real people." I am so happy he stuck to issues that have a large impact on many people instead of commenting on something that is still under investigation and at most a second tier issue in terms of impact on the general population.

There are a number of things in this country that must be addressed before this situation and Sanders is attempting to do that.
Click to expand...

indeed
 
Raoul said:
I'm not too sure on Castro to be honest. On one hand, it would buy her Latino cred, on the other, Castro himself is a bit young and from a state the Dems will lose anyway. IMO, the Dems need to choose someone who can win her a critical swing state - any of VA, IN, OH, NC, or FL would do. This is why I think the likes of Kaine, Webb, Bayh, or possibly even Crist may be in play.
Click to expand...

Crist??? . . . christ, you have to be joking, Raoul. Bayh is too straiht/white/mid western conservative dem with ties to corporate and big oil and has been out of the pictue for a while. . . just what a dynamic dem party doesn´t want. Webb and his macho Vietnam military bs even less, Caine . . . who? Snooze. None of these straight white geezers are remotely charismatic for a changing dem party with an already moderate dem like Hills.

I think Castro is ideal. Young, charismatic, good looking, experience in local and national politics, could help loads with Florida and maybe even deliver Texas over from the dark side, energize the now prominent mex/amer sizeable populations that are present in nearly every state . . . and a very possible, excellent future presidential candidate. Castro makes so much sense.


S4FIZMF.jpg
 
Nobby style said:
Crist??? . . . christ, you have to be joking, Raoul. Bayh is too straiht/white/mid western conservative dem with ties to corporate and big oil and has been out of the pictue for a while. . . just what a dynamic dem party doesn´t want. Webb and his macho Vietnam military bs even less, Caine . . . who? Snooze. None of these straight white geezers are remotely charismatic for a changing dem party with an already moderate dem like Hills.

I think Castro is ideal. Young, charismatic, good looking, experience in local and national politics, could help loads with Florida and maybe even deliver Texas over from the dark side, energize the now prominent mex/amer sizeable populations that are present in nearly every state . . . and a very possible, excellent future presidential candidate. Castro makes so much sense.


S4FIZMF.jpg
Click to expand...

Crist would be a bit of a long shot, but I'm not sold on Castro either. He's definitely going places but is still a bit of a lightweight imo. And besides, if Trump is the nominee I'm pretty sure it will negate the need for the Dems to take a Latino politician just because he's latino. Hillary should be focusing on the swing states and frankly, the hispanic vote is less important in most of them.
 
After watching both debates, I don't undertand how someone can vote for the republicans. My issue with Hilary is that she doesn't seem like someone you can trust and this TPP deal is the latest example. As for Sanders, he's not as extreme as he was painted to be.
 
Raoul said:
Crist would be a bit of a long shot, but I'm not sold on Castro either. He's definitely going places but is still a bit of a lightweight imo. And besides, if Trump is the nominee I'm pretty sure it will negate the need for the Dems to take a Latino politician just because he's latino. Hillary should be focusing on the swing states and frankly, the hispanic vote is less important in most of them.
Click to expand...

It goes beyond the Latin aspect (just compare him to Cruz). Just like Obama was way more than just an African American. Both these guys are youngish, handsome charismatic human beings who come off as really nice dudes with nice families, smart as feck and very successful. Regardless of their race. Castro would get fantastic experience as VP and would make an ideal candidate post Clinton. Democratic leadership would be blind not to realize this.

. . . and keep the douche republicans at bay for a long time!
 
Nobby style said:
Crist??? . . . christ, you have to be joking, Raoul. Bayh is too straiht/white/mid western conservative dem with ties to corporate and big oil and has been out of the pictue for a while. . . just what a dynamic dem party doesn´t want. Webb and his macho Vietnam military bs even less, Caine . . . who? Snooze. None of these straight white geezers are remotely charismatic for a changing dem party with an already moderate dem like Hills.

I think Castro is ideal. Young, charismatic, good looking, experience in local and national politics, could help loads with Florida and maybe even deliver Texas over from the dark side, energize the now prominent mex/amer sizeable populations that are present in nearly every state . . . and a very possible, excellent future presidential candidate. Castro makes so much sense.


S4FIZMF.jpg
Click to expand...
Kaine has been both the Governor and a Senator of Virginia, he's not some random. Castro's elected experience is as a mayor. A VP is not just a campaigning helper, they're a heartbeat away from the Presidency and people will rightly judge whether they're capable of this. I'm also confused as to why it's Julian rather than Joaquin that always gets touted as the VP pick, since Joaquin has at least been a member of the House for a few years. Julian may well be a superb future presidential candidate, but he needs to actually get elected to national office somewhere first. Difficult in Texas if you're aiming at Senator or Governor, admittedly.
 
Last edited:
Have to admit I knew next to nothing of Kaine, but reading up on him, he does sound like a decent choice. Even for a future run for pres. As mentioned before, he would help loads in delivering Virginia and help assure those in America who don´t want to drift too far away from a traditional white male in and around the White House. Seems to be a successful politician and a sensible guy without baggage, which on a basic level is far better than anything the douche party could offer up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.