I see your revolutionary credentials are spotless.
Republican Candidates for 2016 Race
- Thread starter fonzob1
- Start date
- Status
I see your revolutionary credentials are spotless.
And Facebook is hardly representative of the people who get out and vote in a general election. People who think he'd have even a snowball's chance in hell fail to realize just how much of the population identifies as Democrat but has generally conservative positions, but they vote Democrat on a single issue like abortion or gay rights. All the Republican candidate would have to do is run one single ad for six months, consisting of nothing but a quote from his book saying, "I am a democratic socialist," and we would see the Republican, no matter how wingnut loony, sweep 49 states.
Oh, I don't disagree. I just think it's interesting how much attention he's getting.
It's mostly because the people who are politically active on Facebook are roughly comparable to the people who get out and vote in the party primaries -- which is to say, people who are intensely passionate about certain issues. The people who vote in primaries are not representative of the people who vote in the general.
Sanders' entire campaign is aimed at attacking Clinton from the left, because the modern Democratic Party -- heavily molded by the Clinton Democrats of the 1990s, and Obama is essentially a Clinton Democrat -- resembles the Republican Party from the 1980s. I don't think he holds any pretense of being able to win the primaries, he's just trying to throw out enough "What the fuck, why aren't we doing this" statements to make the Clinton campaign shift a bit to the left, because it really isn't a foregone conclusion that the Obama coalition from 2008 turns out -- Hillary doesn't have a tenth of the charisma that Candidate Obama did.
Essentially, Sanders is running an awareness campaign, not a Presidential campaign.
Bachmann led the field in at least two polls in July 2011. The point being, a protracted primary race that even briefly favors such ultimately marginal candidates is not good for the party or the eventual nominee.
See 1980, 1984, 1988.
My new favorite thing: The Donald Trump Insult Generator:
"If You Don’t Click on This Classy Post, You Are a Loser and a Moron"
"If You Don’t Click on This Classy Post, You Are a Loser and a Moron"
This is the one thing Trump did that is actually funny...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ell-phone-number-and-hes-not-sorry/?tid=sm_fb
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ell-phone-number-and-hes-not-sorry/?tid=sm_fb
I do. Graham is a public servant. He can take a few phone calls.
I would personally just rather reach him on his cell. lol
So, Trump is threatening a 3rd party run if the GOP doesn't fondle him.
Which would be great because it could give Hillary an east coast sweep with over 400 electoral votes. Hell, if he keeps up his immigrant rantings then Texas could go blue.
Hell...SANDERS might have a shot at winning.
Which would be great because it could give Hillary an east coast sweep with over 400 electoral votes. Hell, if he keeps up his immigrant rantings then Texas could go blue.
Hell...SANDERS might have a shot at winning.
So a Clinton is elected because of an eccentric billionaire siphoning votes from Republican side? Seems like old times...
I doubt 19 million people would vote for Donald Trump which is the amount Perot took nationwide.However I do see it playing more like Nader in 2000 who siphoned enough votes in Florida from the Democrats which helped elect Bush.
That's quite a field of candidates, should be an interesting race. It certainly would be amusing to see another Clinton vs Bush race.
Doesn't need to be that much. Hillary getting 400 EVs is just her flipping GA, NC, SC, IN, MT, MO, and AZ who all went for Romney by less than 5%. You only need 2 or 3 million Trump voters in those states to throw the election. Romney's margin of victory in those states ran from 98,000 in North Carolina to 270,000 in Indiana.
Excited women (who generally vote Dem anyway), depressed mainstream Republicans (facing the inevitiablty of a GOP defeat) and enough crazies actually voting for Trump would be the perfect storm.
I'm starting to get concerned Trump can get more traction than we think.
If we think about what he's doing. He's targeting bitter, angry people who have been brainwashed by Fox News into thinking Obama is an evil tyrant who's coming to kill your Grandma. He's doing a lot of what Nixon did in the sixties, he's grouping all of "THOSE deviants who are destroying this country" into a single evil group and playing "Us normal Murcans" against them. That tactic has worked in the past, and now look at the polls.
Though it also looks like that all the other republicans are just splitting each others' votes now so when the field is down to a handful of candidates, Trump will still have his 20% and somebody else will have 40%.
If we think about what he's doing. He's targeting bitter, angry people who have been brainwashed by Fox News into thinking Obama is an evil tyrant who's coming to kill your Grandma. He's doing a lot of what Nixon did in the sixties, he's grouping all of "THOSE deviants who are destroying this country" into a single evil group and playing "Us normal Murcans" against them. That tactic has worked in the past, and now look at the polls.
Though it also looks like that all the other republicans are just splitting each others' votes now so when the field is down to a handful of candidates, Trump will still have his 20% and somebody else will have 40%.
- Status
Similar threads
