2016 US Presidential Election

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
doogly
Dr. The Juggernaut of Touching Himself
Posts: 5453
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:31 am UTC
Location: Lexington, MA
Contact:

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby doogly » Thu Mar 03, 2016 7:09 pm UTC

Which is why this will probably cost Trump a grand total of maybe a dozen votes, tops? Maybe earn him a few new ones?

If only Mitt understood just how truly useless he is.
LE4dGOLEM: What's a Doug?
Noc: A larval Doogly. They grow the tail and stinger upon reaching adulthood.

Keep waggling your butt brows Brothers.
Or; Is that your eye butthairs?

User avatar
Lazar
Landed Gentry
Posts: 2151
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:49 pm UTC
Location: Massachusetts

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Lazar » Thu Mar 03, 2016 7:28 pm UTC

He's the Republican version of John Kerry.
Exit the vampires' castle.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Mar 03, 2016 7:46 pm UTC

doogly wrote:No, but scroll down a little, where he's all "Thus we need some other, any other, remaining Republican to beat Hilary."
Trump is more brashly evil than Cruz and Rubio, but not really more evil.


I'm fairly certain Cruz hasn't explicitly asked publicly for war crimes (ie: target the innocent family members of ISIS fighters) to be committed on our enemies. Cruz is bad because his policies are bad. But even Cruz hasn't thrown out black people from his rallies for no damn reason, asked for war crimes publicly. The furthest "evil" thing Cruz has stood for was the Muslim Database, which he back-peddled on rather hardcore once it became obvious how bad of an idea it was.

In contrast, Trump double-downed on the Muslim database.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6298
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Thesh » Thu Mar 03, 2016 7:49 pm UTC

I just like the fact that someone who managed to change his position on any issue depending on the audience would call someone else a phony. Seriously, is there no Republican with integrity that is well-respected by their base that they can get to denounce Trump? Actually, no, forget I said that. Dumb question.

EDIT: Ted Cruz's position on healthcare was to let people die in the streets because "who's going to pay for it?" during one of the earlier debates. He's also a huge fan of carpet bombing.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
Lazar
Landed Gentry
Posts: 2151
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:49 pm UTC
Location: Massachusetts

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Lazar » Thu Mar 03, 2016 7:51 pm UTC

Exit the vampires' castle.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Mar 03, 2016 8:09 pm UTC

Lazar wrote:Cruz spoke at a conference organized by a man who wants to execute homosexuals, and he's received almost no backlash for it.


And Obama attended Jeremiah Wright's church for many years.

In any case, I can agree that Cruz is awful. But he's shown that he has a grasp of what is and what isn't unspeakable. Frankly, Cruz's endorsement from Phil Robertson is mind-boggling if anyone hasn't seen / heard it. (Bibles and Guns... wtf?) And while Cruz associates himself with these awful people, Trump not only associates himself with awful people but serves as a loud-speaker for them as well.

Another note: Cruz isn't a danger. The wingnuts are too worried over the "conspiracy" over his Canadian Birth (serves him right). So I'm not so interested in stopping Cruz. If Cruz can continue to steal votes from Trump, the better it is for Republicans (and Americans) in general. The fact of the matter is, Trump is currently on track to become the Republican Nominee. Trump is already harming the American image abroad, and it will only get worse the louder and more successful he gets.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Lazar
Landed Gentry
Posts: 2151
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:49 pm UTC
Location: Massachusetts

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Lazar » Thu Mar 03, 2016 8:15 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:And Obama attended Jeremiah Wright's church for many years.

True, but if Obama had been a star speaker at a pro-terrorist conference organized by Wright, in which Wright explicitly said that 9/11 was a good thing, I think he would have had a lot more trouble getting elected. There are differing levels of embrace involved here. And to help establish a pattern, Cruz's campaign also touted the endorsement of a man who wants to execute abortion providers. In my mind, Cruz represents the absolute worst tendencies of Christian religious extremism, and that scares me more than Trump's scattershot bullying.

But I agree that Cruz has little chance of winning the nomination, and even less of winning the presidency. But that said, he is the only candidate who, if elected, would induce me to flee the country.
Exit the vampires' castle.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Mar 03, 2016 8:18 pm UTC

A fair point. In any case however, I find it an expedient strategy to have Cruz continue to gain support and move towards a Brokered Convention. The strategy Mitt Romney is doing here seems like the best bet at stopping Trump right now, so I have to put up with it, even if it means giving Cruz some more votes.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Quizatzhaderac
Posts: 1591
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Space Florida

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Quizatzhaderac » Thu Mar 03, 2016 8:26 pm UTC

New gold standard for political shit talking: 50 foot letters of literal shit
The thing about recursion problems is that they tend to contain other recursion problems.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Diadem » Thu Mar 03, 2016 9:46 pm UTC

Lazar wrote:For my part, I think Cruz is truly evil in a way that surpasses Trump.

Trump and Cruz are both evil. But in addition to that, Trump is a loose cannon. And that scares more more than anything.

I'm not worried about Trump screwing over minorities or undermining constitutional rights. I'm not worried about him building a wall along the Mexican border, or kicking our Muslims. No, I'm worried about him starting world war three. He is an egomaniac with absolutely no sense of proportion, and a very short fuse. That's an extremely scary combination.

Call me insane or paranoid if you want, but I don't think that fear is so far-fetched. Trump openly disdains diplomacy and embraces bullying. He will antagonize other countries. And he will needlessly escalate disputes. He seems the kind of person who's totally incapable of backing down, or even realizing that backing down is sometimes a good idea. And I don't even think this is particularly likely, but even a 1% above baseline chance of nuclear war is utterly unacceptable, and a reason to want to avoid a Trump presidency at all cost.

It wouldn't surprise me if the Republican establishment starting cheating to keep Trump out. In this case, I completely support that.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6298
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Thesh » Thu Mar 03, 2016 9:48 pm UTC

I'd like fivethirtyeight to show updated targets given current delegate allocation. I suppose I could get the data, add current delegates to the sum of the remaining targets, and then adjust the future targets up or down proportionally based on how much they are behind or ahead. It might not be the ideal methodology, but it's probably a good approximation.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

cphite
Posts: 1292
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 5:27 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby cphite » Thu Mar 03, 2016 10:34 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
Mitt Romney wrote:I understand the anger Americans feel today. In the past, our presidents have channeled that anger and forged it into resolve, into endurance and high purpose, and into the will to defeat the enemies of freedom. Our anger was transformed into energy directed for good. Mr. Trump is directing our anger for less than noble purposes. He creates scapegoats of Muslims and Mexican immigrants. He calls for the use of torture. He calls for killing the innocent children and family members of terrorists. He cheers assaults on protesters. He applauds the prospect of twisting the Constitution to limit First Amendment freedom of the press. This is the very brand of anger that has led other nations into the abyss.


I mean, does anyone here actually disagree with this? Say what you want about Mitt Romney and his hypocrisy, but it's the truth.


I don't disagree with what he's saying at all... but HOLY SHIT the hypocrisy. Just four years ago, when Trump endorsed him, Romney was praising Trump so hard it was embarrassing to watch, for being such a wonderful businessman and role model and leader and so on and so forth...

This is one of the reasons why so many people are utterly sick of these assholes. For him to stand there and with a straight face say exactly the opposite of what he said four years ago... Trump is the SAME FUCKING ASSHOLE he was four years ago. He hasn't changed. His temperament hasn't changed, his business practices haven't changed - the only difference is that he's no longer in a position to help Mit move forward.

And yeah, I know... that's the game. That's politics. But it's also a huge part of the reason why a lot of people are so utterly fucking tired of these jackholes that someone like Trump seems like a reasonable option.

User avatar
Mighty Jalapeno
Inne Juste 7 Dayes I Wille Make You A Hero!
Posts: 11262
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 9:16 pm UTC
Location: Prince George In A Can
Contact:

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Mighty Jalapeno » Thu Mar 03, 2016 10:39 pm UTC

"I'm sick of liars... I'm voting Sociopath 2016, because he has different lies!"

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby morriswalters » Thu Mar 03, 2016 10:47 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:It wouldn't surprise me if the Republican establishment starting cheating to keep Trump out. In this case, I completely support that.
Isn't it amazing how our democratic principles go out the door when something spooks us? And I doubt if either Trump or Cruz are "evil" in any traditional sense. Extreme and stupid maybe. But that doesn't equal evil.
Diadem wrote:No, I'm worried about him starting world war three. He is an egomaniac with absolutely no sense of proportion, and a very short fuse. That's an extremely scary combination.
If Trump can trigger a nuclear war by throwing a temper tantrum than the country is doomed in any case. And any of this presupposes that Trump can win an election. If any other Democrat was running I wouldn't worry. But a depressed turnout could give him the election. But that is 8 or 9 months out, which is a long time in the election cycle.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Mar 03, 2016 10:49 pm UTC

cphite wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:
Mitt Romney wrote:I understand the anger Americans feel today. In the past, our presidents have channeled that anger and forged it into resolve, into endurance and high purpose, and into the will to defeat the enemies of freedom. Our anger was transformed into energy directed for good. Mr. Trump is directing our anger for less than noble purposes. He creates scapegoats of Muslims and Mexican immigrants. He calls for the use of torture. He calls for killing the innocent children and family members of terrorists. He cheers assaults on protesters. He applauds the prospect of twisting the Constitution to limit First Amendment freedom of the press. This is the very brand of anger that has led other nations into the abyss.


I mean, does anyone here actually disagree with this? Say what you want about Mitt Romney and his hypocrisy, but it's the truth.


I don't disagree with what he's saying at all... but HOLY SHIT the hypocrisy. Just four years ago, when Trump endorsed him, Romney was praising Trump so hard it was embarrassing to watch, for being such a wonderful businessman and role model and leader and so on and so forth...

This is one of the reasons why so many people are utterly sick of these assholes. For him to stand there and with a straight face say exactly the opposite of what he said four years ago... Trump is the SAME FUCKING ASSHOLE he was four years ago. He hasn't changed. His temperament hasn't changed, his business practices haven't changed - the only difference is that he's no longer in a position to help Mit move forward.

And yeah, I know... that's the game. That's politics. But it's also a huge part of the reason why a lot of people are so utterly fucking tired of these jackholes that someone like Trump seems like a reasonable option.


I'll disagree there. 4 years ago, Trump was simply claiming Obama was a Muslim and that his Birth Certificate was from Kenya.

Contrast to Trump this past week. Trump on Monday, just three days ago, yelled at protesters, ejected them out of his rallies and called them "Mexians". He then ejected silent African American students at his rally. Only in recent months has Trump actually said that he wants to create a Muslim database, ban Muslims from this country, and then kill the innocent family members of ISIS fighters.

The level of vitriol that Trump has brought forth is above and beyond his anti-Obama calls in 2011 / 2012. His speech pattern has evolved from mostly Anti-Obama to straight up Xenophobic. Trump 2012 and Trump 2016 are two sides of the same coin... yes... but one is being much more blatantly obvious about his dangerous viewpoints.

Romney of 2016 is also very different: like many former-Presidential candidates, he is no longer weighed down and no longer has the responsibility to represent the parts of the Republican base he dislikes. Romney of 2012 had to appeal to the Xenophobia himself in the hopes of winning the nomination, and maybe the election. Romney of 2016 is free to say whatever the hell he wants now. In short, as someone vying for a leadership position in 2012, Romney had to appeal to people he disagreed with.

morriswalters wrote:
Diadem wrote:It wouldn't surprise me if the Republican establishment starting cheating to keep Trump out. In this case, I completely support that.
Isn't it amazing how our democratic principles go out the door when something spooks us? And I doubt if either Trump or Cruz are "evil" in any traditional sense. Extreme and stupid maybe. But that doesn't equal evil.


I know Diadem is not actually American, so keep that in mind. With that said, I'm personally speaking from the mindset of a Republican, who wants Republicans to do well this election. We Republicans are going to get owned in the general election if this keeps up.

Diadem wrote:No, I'm worried about him starting world war three. He is an egomaniac with absolutely no sense of proportion, and a very short fuse. That's an extremely scary combination.
If Trump can trigger a nuclear war by throwing a temper tantrum than the country is doomed in any case. And any of this presupposes that Trump can win an election. If any other Democrat was running I wouldn't worry. But a depressed turnout could give him the election. But that is 8 or 9 months out, which is a long time in the election cycle.


Donald Trump will have nearly unilateral access to the nuclear codes if he becomes President. Diadem has a legitimate concern here. Is Trump the man you want to hold the nuclear football?

I say, fuck no.

Say what you will about the other candidates, but they actually have the temperament to hold back a nuclear war. I don't fully trust Trump in that situation. Remember that it is standard US procedure for the President to always be armed with the Nuclear Football, every waking hour while he (or she) is President. This isn't a position that you can just fuck around with, this is the President of the US. The most powerful commander-and-chief to the most powerful army ever created on this Earth.

To see the man-child Donald Trump actually having a realistic shot at this position does freak the hell out of me. And if you understood what is at stake here, it should freak you out too.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Diemo
Posts: 393
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 8:43 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Diemo » Thu Mar 03, 2016 11:11 pm UTC

This article claims the problem is not Trump, and I am inclined to agree. Blaming it on a single person seems far far too simplistic.

Much of the polarization dividing American politics was fueled not just by gerrymandering or money in politics or the other oft-cited variables, but by an unnoticed but surprisingly large electoral group — authoritarians.

Their book concluded that the GOP, by positioning itself as the party of traditional values and law and order, had unknowingly attracted what would turn out to be a vast and previously bipartisan population of Americans with authoritarian tendencies.

This trend had been accelerated in recent years by demographic and economic changes such as immigration, which "activated" authoritarian tendencies, leading many Americans to seek out a strongman leader who would preserve a status quo they feel is under threat and impose order on a world they perceive as increasingly alien.
In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
--Douglas Adams

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby morriswalters » Thu Mar 03, 2016 11:43 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:Donald Trump will have nearly unilateral access to the nuclear codes if he becomes President. Diadem has a legitimate concern here. Is Trump the man you want to hold the nuclear football?
I wouldn't let Trump hold my umbrella. But neither does he have unlimited access to the nuclear codes. He doesn't punch a button and send missiles flying, and the military itself isn't so foolish launch missiles that will cause their families to die in the ensuing conflagration. His ability to use conventional force in any fashion is limited in the here and now because we are heavily committed already.
KnightExemplar wrote:And if you understood what is at stake here, it should freak you out too.
You don't have any special knowledge and neither do I. But either democracy works or we need to get down to the revolution. But Syria is what happens when things fall apart. And this isn't an exclusively American problem. The right is rising across Europe as well.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6537
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby sardia » Fri Mar 04, 2016 12:02 am UTC

morriswalters wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:Donald Trump will have nearly unilateral access to the nuclear codes if he becomes President. Diadem has a legitimate concern here. Is Trump the man you want to hold the nuclear football?
I wouldn't let Trump hold my umbrella. But neither does he have unlimited access to the nuclear codes. He doesn't punch a button and send missiles flying, and the military itself isn't so foolish launch missiles that will cause their families to die in the ensuing conflagration. His ability to use conventional force in any fashion is limited in the here and now because we are heavily committed already.
KnightExemplar wrote:And if you understood what is at stake here, it should freak you out too.
You don't have any special knowledge and neither do I. But either democracy works or we need to get down to the revolution. But Syria is what happens when things fall apart. And this isn't an exclusively American problem. The right is rising across Europe as well.

You guys are looking too far into the future. We got bigger concerns right now, like if Rubio is gonna concede his own home state to Trump.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/ele ... emocratic/
Polls plus model gives Rubio a 30% vs Trumps 70% chance of victory. That's pretty demoralizing, and opens up the awful awful possibility of a Trump Cruz fight, and nobody is gonna win there.
Even Rubio may be betting on a contested nomination instead of eeking out a win via delegates.

User avatar
Lazar
Landed Gentry
Posts: 2151
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:49 pm UTC
Location: Massachusetts

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Lazar » Fri Mar 04, 2016 12:08 am UTC

Oh. M'God. The self-destruction of the GOP is accelerating. A laundry list of Republican national security figures have signed a letter saying that Trump will endanger the United States, and that they cannot support him as the nominee. And meanwhile, Romney is exploring ways to block Trump from winning at the convention.
Exit the vampires' castle.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Fri Mar 04, 2016 12:11 am UTC

I think Cruz / Rubio / Kasich have begun to work together at this point.

The only reason Kasich is still in the race is to win Ohio (maybe) so that the chances of a Brokered election are up. If the Republicans pull out all the stops, we can hope that opinion shifts in the coming weeks. Never before have so many high-profile Republicans come out and outright rejected the leading nominee this late in the game. It wasn't just Mitt Romney, but McCain has joined the chorus... as well as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. These are powerful names within the Republican Party who have started spewing an anti-Trump message.

The main issue is that the Trump supporters are wise to the political game. With the anti-Trump SuperPAC forming, injecting more money into negative campaign ads may only serve to rally Trump supporters against the Koch Brothers.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Lazar
Landed Gentry
Posts: 2151
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:49 pm UTC
Location: Massachusetts

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Lazar » Fri Mar 04, 2016 12:14 am UTC

I think at this point, the Republican establishment has crossed its Rubicon. It looks increasingly likely that there will be a third party run – either Trump as an independent, or some independent backed by half of the GOP.
Exit the vampires' castle.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Fri Mar 04, 2016 12:15 am UTC

Shedding the bigoted anti-Muslim anti-Immigrants crap that is the Tea Party will be the best thing ever. I can go back to supporting conservative values without feeling like I'm half-helping the KKK.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Carlington
Posts: 1588
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 8:46 am UTC
Location: Sydney, Australia.

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Carlington » Fri Mar 04, 2016 1:01 am UTC

Attacking Trump directly can't really hurt him, though. His supporters are supporters because they see him as opposed to the establishment. A solid bloc of establishment people and establishment-sanctioned candidates condemning him can only serve to reinforce this narrative and fortify the existing support. I don't think that they'll be able to pull votes from Trump's established bar - only dissuade voters who haven't yet decided. Unfortunately, this would have been better stopped earlier, but nobody foresaw it developing into something that needs stopping so nobody bothered.
Kewangji: Posdy zwei tosdy osdy oady. Bork bork bork, hoppity syphilis bork.

Eebster the Great: What specifically is moving faster than light in these examples?
doogly: Hands waving furiously.

Please use he/him/his pronouns when referring to me.

Sheikh al-Majaneen
Name Checks Out On Time, Tips Chambermaid
Posts: 1075
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:17 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Sheikh al-Majaneen » Fri Mar 04, 2016 3:31 am UTC

Thesh wrote:The best *likely* scenario? Hillary will win but face a Republican majority in the House through her first four years who will spend half their time in Benghazi hearings and the rest passing bills they know Hillary will have to veto, with the occasional budget showdown where we are placed at the verge of default, with at least one partial government shutdown. At some point in that time there will be a recession that will continue through 2020, Hillary will lose in 2020, and Republicans will take over the House, Senate, and Presidency. Republicans will institute tax cuts for businesses and the wealthy and spending cuts to reduce the deficit to get us out of the recession, which won't work. They will then continue with deregulation and anti-immigration policies, while ignoring the fact that wages will be declining for most Americans. The public will get fed up, and Democrats will take over in 2024, do the bare minimum to get us out of recession, wages will then stagnate as we spend the next 8 years slowly seeing unemployment decline and wages flatten off below their pre-recession norm, as we freak out more about the debt and deficit, cut social security, and struggle with lowering poverty.

Worst case scenario, Trump wins and the same thing happens, but faster and with more war and fewer hearings.

I may be a bit cynical, however.

EDIT: There's probably a payroll tax increase in there somewhere as well.

Trump getting us into more wars than HRC would? I find that very hard to believe. In some ways, a Trompe presidency might be a huge disaster, but she's a tool of the military industrial complex, just as much at their beck and call as every other president for the past fifty years.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6298
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Thesh » Fri Mar 04, 2016 4:08 am UTC

I don't think Hillary would be any different than Obama on that. Trump is belligerent, vindictive, obsessed with seeming tough, and gets angry when he doesn't get his way. Hillary at least understands the concept of diplomacy.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6537
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby sardia » Fri Mar 04, 2016 4:44 am UTC

Carlington wrote:Attacking Trump directly can't really hurt him, though. His supporters are supporters because they see him as opposed to the establishment. A solid bloc of establishment people and establishment-sanctioned candidates condemning him can only serve to reinforce this narrative and fortify the existing support. I don't think that they'll be able to pull votes from Trump's established bar - only dissuade voters who haven't yet decided. Unfortunately, this would have been better stopped earlier, but nobody foresaw it developing into something that needs stopping so nobody bothered.

You don't seem to realize that very little money has actually been spent attacking trump until just a few days ago. I've posted this several times, so you can look it up yourself.

A Quick Look Ahead To Saturday
natesilver2_light

As we watch tonight’s debate, we’re really all just waiting for March 15, when winner-take-all Ohio and Florida vote, right? Nope. As you can see from our delegate tracker, eight states will vote between Saturday and March 15, along with three territories and the District of Columbia.

True, some of these states are on the smaller side; the biggest delegate prize is Michigan, which votes on Tuesday, March 8. But here are my quick thoughts — subject to revision — on the four states that will vote on Saturday.

Louisiana is the only one of states where we have enough polling to officially run a forecast, and our model has Donald Trump as a 95-percent favorite. That seems just a pinch aggressive, given that Louisiana has a history of quirky outcomes and mediocre polling. Still, Trump’s nearest opponent, Ted Cruz, is 17 points down in the polling average and Trump has performed very well in the other states in the Deep South.
In Kentucky, Trump leads in the only recent poll. (Why don’t we have a forecast there? We generally like to wait for two polls before turning one on.) But Kentucky has switched from a primary to a caucus, a move that was originally supposed to help Rand Paul and which could leave pollsters a bit in the dark. Cruz, who has tried to woo Paul supporters, might have an outside shot, but Kentucky’s demographics suggest it should be a pretty good Trump state.
Maine has an extremely low-turnout caucus and is idiosyncratic as it gets, having elected politicians ranging from a conventionally moderate Republican, Sen. Susan Collins, to an independent, Sen. Angus King, to the tea party-aligned governor, Paul LePage. Meanwhile, the Ronpaul nearly won the caucuses there in 2012. So the outcome is anyone’s guess, but Trump — who has LePage’s endorsement — probably counts as the favorite by default, with John Kasich (who was second in both Vermont and New Hampshire) also worth watching.
Kansas, which also holds a caucus, is the only Saturday state where Trump isn’t favored, according to prediction markets. They deem Cruz the favorite instead. That sounds right to me; Trump hasn’t performed all that well in the Midwest so far. (As a native Midwesterner, I’m going to assert without evidence that Trump’s bombastic style isn’t a good fit for “our” part of the country.) Marco Rubio could be a factor in Kansas as well, having done relatively well in the Midwest so far and having the endorsement of both Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts and (not-very-popular) Gov. Sam Brownback. The other place where Rubio has a shot at a win this weekend is Puerto Rico, which votes on Sunday.

March 5 is just gonna be more Trump-balling to victory, so nothing too interesting outside of a surprise Kasich victory in Maine or maybe a Cruz victory in Kentucky. These states aren't too important, but it'll feed the media machine about Trump. I'll be looking for underperformance or overperformance based on what you'd expect vs demographics of the state.

During the debate, I keep forgetting how good a debater Cruz is, despite how awful a person he is.

ijuin
Posts: 904
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:02 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby ijuin » Fri Mar 04, 2016 2:44 pm UTC

Given how desperate everyone except for his supporters are to stop Trump, I would not be surprised if assassination attempts are made upon him. Not that I think that it's a good idea, but some might if it becomes the only way to prevent President Trump.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7505
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Zamfir » Fri Mar 04, 2016 4:17 pm UTC

CNN: Donald Trump defends size of his penis
I can't help but appreciate the show. It gets better and better. At some point one has to wonder, is it all staged like those wrestling matches?

User avatar
Mighty Jalapeno
Inne Juste 7 Dayes I Wille Make You A Hero!
Posts: 11262
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 9:16 pm UTC
Location: Prince George In A Can
Contact:

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Mighty Jalapeno » Fri Mar 04, 2016 4:21 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:CNN: Donald Trump defends size of his penis
I can't help but appreciate the show. It gets better and better. At some point one has to wonder, is it all staged like those wrestling matches?

There's a whole 'nother universe out there, brother...

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Mar 04, 2016 4:26 pm UTC

cphite wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:
Mitt Romney wrote:I understand the anger Americans feel today. In the past, our presidents have channeled that anger and forged it into resolve, into endurance and high purpose, and into the will to defeat the enemies of freedom. Our anger was transformed into energy directed for good. Mr. Trump is directing our anger for less than noble purposes. He creates scapegoats of Muslims and Mexican immigrants. He calls for the use of torture. He calls for killing the innocent children and family members of terrorists. He cheers assaults on protesters. He applauds the prospect of twisting the Constitution to limit First Amendment freedom of the press. This is the very brand of anger that has led other nations into the abyss.


I mean, does anyone here actually disagree with this? Say what you want about Mitt Romney and his hypocrisy, but it's the truth.


I don't disagree with what he's saying at all... but HOLY SHIT the hypocrisy. Just four years ago, when Trump endorsed him, Romney was praising Trump so hard it was embarrassing to watch, for being such a wonderful businessman and role model and leader and so on and so forth...

This is one of the reasons why so many people are utterly sick of these assholes. For him to stand there and with a straight face say exactly the opposite of what he said four years ago... Trump is the SAME FUCKING ASSHOLE he was four years ago. He hasn't changed. His temperament hasn't changed, his business practices haven't changed - the only difference is that he's no longer in a position to help Mit move forward.

And yeah, I know... that's the game. That's politics. But it's also a huge part of the reason why a lot of people are so utterly fucking tired of these jackholes that someone like Trump seems like a reasonable option.


Yeah, the only thing this is going to accomplish is making everyone think of Romney again. Negatively.

That's it. It will hurt Trump not at all, and nobody really cares about Romney, so...meh.

Mighty Jalapeno wrote:"I'm sick of liars... I'm voting Sociopath 2016, because he has different lies!"


How often, on facebook, do you see "Cthulhu 2016, why vote for a lesser evil?" or a similar meme?

Pretty much what's going on here.


As for the nuclear topic, I do not think Trump would actually have the ability to nuke things with abandon. However, I do think that he would present a stronger external face, which can be valuable on foreign policy issues. I don't think he understands the lesson of knowing when to lose, which is a downside, but overall, I think he's a net gain over the status quo w/regards to dealing with external conflicts. Not really worried about the world on fire, it's more of the practical things. Bluster and refusing to back down might be fine for intimidating a geopolitical opponent when you do have ludicrous military might, but it's pretty much shit at handling budget debates and things.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6537
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby sardia » Fri Mar 04, 2016 4:55 pm UTC

What's this, are you a closet Trump supporter?

Trump has a core of diehard voters(30%) who will stick with him regardless. But he also has a shell of bandwagoners who can easily be scared off via attacks. During the new Hampshire debates, Trump fell down to his core supporters after he was roundly criticized. That's not a big effect, but it's not useless either.

User avatar
Quizatzhaderac
Posts: 1591
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Space Florida

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Quizatzhaderac » Fri Mar 04, 2016 4:56 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:As for the nuclear topic, I do not think Trump would actually have the ability to nuke things with abandon.
Let me ask you then, (as someone who probably knows the US military better than I) where specifically you'd expect the order to be blocked?
The thing about recursion problems is that they tend to contain other recursion problems.

maybeagnostic
Posts: 625
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 3:34 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby maybeagnostic » Fri Mar 04, 2016 4:58 pm UTC

ijuin wrote:Given how desperate everyone except for his supporters are to stop Trump, I would not be surprised if assassination attempts are made upon him. Not that I think that it's a good idea, but some might if it becomes the only way to prevent President Trump.
Now that's a terrifying idea. I'd take President Trump over an establishment desperate enough to assassinate candidates for simply not being their cronies any day.

Terrible as he is, Trump wouldn't be able to achieve much as President with both Democrats and Republicans working against him. Obama can barely do anything with just Republicans opposing.
T: ... through an emergency induction port.
S: That's a straw, Tali.
T: Emerrrgency induction port.

User avatar
eran_rathan
Mostly Wrong
Posts: 1821
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in your ceiling, judging you

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby eran_rathan » Fri Mar 04, 2016 5:03 pm UTC

headlines like this, with Trump in place of Kim Jong Il, are what I expect to see regularly if a Trump Presidency comes to pass.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/in ... story.html
"Does this smell like chloroform to you?"
"Google tells me you are not unique. You are, however, wrong."
nɒʜƚɒɿ_nɒɿɘ

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby morriswalters » Fri Mar 04, 2016 5:09 pm UTC

@Tyndmyr
The danger of this in my mind is the possibility that Trump could break the balance between the civilian and military. Either by issuing illegal orders which commanders might refuse, or by getting commanders to do things that are both dangerous and immoral. A fool is a fool and the best advisers can't change that.
Quizatzhaderac wrote:where specifically you'd expect the order to be blocked?
See this article on The National Command Authority. It has been recognized for some time that the President could go rogue. The chain can be broken at a number of points, with uncertain outcomes.


User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3940
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Dauric » Fri Mar 04, 2016 5:54 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:As for the nuclear topic, I do not think Trump would actually have the ability to nuke things with abandon. However, I do think that he would present a stronger external face, which can be valuable on foreign policy issues. I don't think he understands the lesson of knowing when to lose, which is a downside, but overall, I think he's a net gain over the status quo w/regards to dealing with external conflicts. Not really worried about the world on fire, it's more of the practical things. Bluster and refusing to back down might be fine for intimidating a geopolitical opponent when you do have ludicrous military might, but it's pretty much shit at handling budget debates and things.


Increased belligerence on the part of the U.S. would only work do increase similar rhetoric from Russia and China. Both countries reacted strongly with Bush-II administration's insistence on engaging in "Regime Change", what Trump has suggested goes well beyond what GWB actually did and would provide ample fodder for the more militaristic factions in our rivals/enemies. A return to the Cold War and the proxy wars it spawned is not good for long-term stability. This is not to mention possible weakening of U.S. ties to our allies if we were to engage in outright war crimes (as Trump has suggested).
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
Mighty Jalapeno
Inne Juste 7 Dayes I Wille Make You A Hero!
Posts: 11262
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 9:16 pm UTC
Location: Prince George In A Can
Contact:

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Mighty Jalapeno » Fri Mar 04, 2016 6:12 pm UTC

Dstillery tracks caucus-goers by their cel phones.

Dstillery found some interesting things about voters. For one, people who loved to grill or work on their lawns overwhelmingly voted for Trump in Iowa, according to Phillips. There was some pretty unexpected characteristics that came up too.

"NASCAR was the one outlier, for Trump and Clinton," Phillips said. "In Clinton's counties, NASCAR way over-indexed."

We then use some pretty sophisticated machine learning techniques to extrapolate behaviors. We can only do this because we see such a broad view of digital behavior. In other words we know that seeing you on sites A, B and C mean that you are likely a New Mom, but seeing you on A, D and E mean that you are Health Conscious.


And from my favorite review of the debate:

The Master was untouchable, unfathomable, inescapable, ethereal, blisteringly fucking nuts. He ate contradictions and shit out bumper sticker slogans. He consumed criticism and expelled tirades that would make fourth-grade mean girls question their own dignity. He referred to the inability to hold a major policy position for 24 hours in a row as the kind of flexibility necessary for business success. He referred to his business failures as business success. He converted a D- rating of Trump University by the Better Business Bureau into an A rating by the Better Business Bureau, and when given direct facts to the contrary, simply re-concluded that he had an A because it must be an A, quod erat demonstrandum, you fuckers.

The Master just became larger, swelling, expanding, a gas and a solid, a liquid and a plasma of pure self-regarding divinity, the Alpha and the Omega of the species, the pinnacle of evolution and its end, the explanation for the human race and the conclusion of why it was a dubious idea. And then he got some momentum going.

ijuin
Posts: 904
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:02 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby ijuin » Fri Mar 04, 2016 6:35 pm UTC

maybeagnostic wrote:
ijuin wrote:Given how desperate everyone except for his supporters are to stop Trump, I would not be surprised if assassination attempts are made upon him. Not that I think that it's a good idea, but some might if it becomes the only way to prevent President Trump.
Now that's a terrifying idea. I'd take President Trump over an establishment desperate enough to assassinate candidates for simply not being their cronies any day.

Terrible as he is, Trump wouldn't be able to achieve much as President with both Democrats and Republicans working against him. Obama can barely do anything with just Republicans opposing.


I'm thinking it's more likely the people who actually believe that Trump would start WW3 who would try killing him off.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Mar 04, 2016 7:04 pm UTC

sardia wrote:What's this, are you a closet Trump supporter?

Trump has a core of diehard voters(30%) who will stick with him regardless. But he also has a shell of bandwagoners who can easily be scared off via attacks. During the new Hampshire debates, Trump fell down to his core supporters after he was roundly criticized. That's not a big effect, but it's not useless either.


Not particularly. But trying to come to terms with likely outcomes. I do feel pretty confident that he'll be worse on domestic issues. He'll make loud, angry noises, and maybe bomb a few countries with crappy militaries, but...that's not actually that strange. Par for the course, really, past the bluster.

I'm more concerned about what is in store for us, who have to live in the country he runs. More probability for a bad decision to affect us directly, than for his overseas policy to be a big deal.

Quizatzhaderac wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:As for the nuclear topic, I do not think Trump would actually have the ability to nuke things with abandon.
Let me ask you then, (as someone who probably knows the US military better than I) where specifically you'd expect the order to be blocked?


I didn't work nukes, but the first logical stopping point would be secdef. The last would be the two men in the missile silo. It's...less "push a button" than often framed. It's more about having enough delay if there's no obvious good reason for inertia to take over. If there's no succession of alerts and such, this ain't the cold war. People are gonna require confirmation.

And, frankly, most things can be accomplished with conventional weaponry anyways. The US has a goodly amount of that, if he wants a given location turned into rubble, he can almost certainly get that without nukes being relevant. I see that as way more probable.

The idea that assassination is being talked about even, in the US, is extremely worrying. I don't see that as a logical solution to...anything. And a failed attempt would grant horrible, horrible power, instead of merely having four years of deadlock.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CorruptUser, Majestic-12 [Bot] and 13 guests