I will keep doing, but not worth it! The 2016 Presidential Primary Voting Thread

^^^

The Biden scenarios never made any sense, as discussed in the appropriate one of these threads at the time. He's well-liked but would have no compelling reason to run except being slightly more clearly the "carry on with Obama's work" person and a little more of an everyday person's touch or whatever. There's just not enough that's different enough vs. Clinton for him to have been a compelling alternative, see also the O'Malley campaign, see also Biden's 2008 run. Sanders struck very different chords.

Biden is a bad candidate and a loathsome pol, wtf why don't you long for a reanimated Scoop Jackson

South Carolina might as well be Alabama or Mississippi in terms of its place in USA politics. The Democratic candidate for president, whoever it is, will not win any electoral votes there. Either Clinton and Sanders would lose the Solid South, regardless of the turnout of African-American voters there.

All the morning-after political chatter rn is about spinning the media narrative ahead of Super Tuesday, with the Clinton side trying to wound Sanders in the states where he will do well by deflating his support and the Sanders side trying to deflect the spin and project strength and resolve so his voters and volunteers show up in the greatest numbers.

his achievement will be moving Hillary and the party to the left

Christ, this is SO not gonna happen, are you people conscious?

Political gnomes will analyze the voting patterns of all these primaries very intensively and draw strategic conclusions about how to collect the most electoral votes in the general election. Sanders' campaign has been so unusually clear about his issues and positions that it will make analyzing his numbers much easier to connect to real issues, not just some vague personal appeal.

imo, I think he probably has exerted some pull to the left on Hillary's campaign. But such large tidal forces are only very apparent at the edges of the ocean, and if she's elected she'll govern from somewhere mid-ocean. So, I'd say Treeship and Morbs are each correct to a degree.

South Carolina is much more in play than Alabama

kind of crazy that gabbard resigned as vice chair of the DNC to jump aboard this sinking ship but good for her

― k3vin k., Sunday, February 28, 2016 12:00 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark

Lol

I wonder why she left this crooked political machine that openly despises and shafts its constituency at every turn... probably not for principle or anything. so crazy that someone would leave the warm embrace of the lizard cabal to stand up for something that matters -- things Liberal Worms openly muse aloud

Xp to aimless

Whether or not the dems can flip sc or not is beside the point. The Dems need to galvanize large numbers of black and latinx voters in order to win. Clinton winning 84% of black voters in sc is a signal that Sanders has done a bad job of outreach to black voters. I feel safe in extrapolating that trend across the rest of the country.

x-post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/28/why-did-this-top-dnc-official-just-endorse-bernie-sanders/

But digging deeper into Gabbard's unconventional and sometimes combative approach to politics, her alliance with Sanders starts to add up. Like the man she's endorsing for president, Gabbard is a wildcard who is willing to put her future with the Democratic Party on the line to speak out against it.

xp to Mordy: Any election in which SC votes for the democratic presidential candidate would be a walkover. In 2012, Romney won the Solid South, including SC. He did lose Florida, which I don't consider part of the Solid South. Romney still lost 206 to 332 in the electoral college.

to bise: I grant black voters might not respond as strongly to Sanders, and therefore might not turn out in the same numbers, but it remains to be seen how the Sanders vote breaks out in the industrial north, where he must win. Chicago is not Charleston and could break differently. Second, it is a long way to November and Sanders would not be facing Clinton in the general, so the dynamic would be different. Dismissing his chances against a Trump or Rubio based on this one primary is a bit premature.

Then again, his chances for the nomination never were that high.

Gabbard and Sanders probably won't stop raising havoc for the party, but at least Gabbard is no longer doing it from a leadership post within. And that's probably a good thing as far as both sides are concerned.

"raising havoc"

Sanders has not run the sort of campaign that would do irreparable damage to Hillary's reputation in November. If this is what the Democratic establishment thinks of Bernie, they are a bunch of thin skinned babies.

well...

we may have an idea of what a Trump gen election campaign will look like, but it's probably lacking in neon and flying pigs.

Xp to aimless

He lost black voters in Nevada really bad, too

Trump is calling rubio "little marco rubio" on twitter now.

Rubio is so bad at insults. He looks like a guy who went to my Catholic high school and also smiled after one of his terrible zingers.

David Atkins:

Some Republican donors have seen the truth of the situation and are already looking into the possibility of an independent run for President—though no credible conservative candidate is yet forthcoming. Some are resigned. Some are in denial. But Trump has almost certainly already locked up the nomination.

That in turn explains some of Trump’s supposedly confusing and heretical behavior for a Republican candidate in recent speeches and debates. Trump has attacked George Bush over 9/11 and Iraq. He has attacked corporate cronyism and medical insurance companies. He has derided the inability of the government to negotiate on Medicare prices. He has spoken kind words about Bernie Sanders and his populist appeal. He has defended Planned Parenthood and his support for universal healthcare.

That’s because Donald Trump is a much smarter politician than almost anyone gives him credit for. Aware that he mostly has the Republican primary sewn up regardless of what he says or does, Trump is already pivoting to center. He is establishing his dual-purpose populist bona fides for the general election as a Jacksonian Democrat—fiercely racist and anti-immigrant, brash and outspoken, autocratic and authoritarian, anti-interventionist, anti-establishment and anti-corruption...

...Democrats, for their part, seem likely to nominate in the general election a candidate who is a quintessential neoliberal establishment figure and long-time supporter of free trade and high finance, and who will make a perfect foil and punching bag for Trump’s populist arguments. Rather than counter and anticipate Trump’s unique appeal, Democrats seem likely instead to believe that exposing Trump’s sleazy past will be enough to turn serious-minded independent voters away from him, and that Trump’s xenophobia will be enough to generate record turnout among the growing number of Hispanic and other minority voters.

Rubio is so bad at insults. He looks like a guy who went to my Catholic high school and also smiled after one of his terrible zingers.

― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Sunday, February 28, 2016 3:10 PM (5 minutes ago)

he called a heckler "the valedictorian of trump university" today. thought that was a good one

That’s because Donald Trump is a much smarter politician than almost anyone gives him credit for.

Idk about this. Some of his statements are so radioactive, it's hard to imagine they're part of some grand strategy.

Democrats seem likely instead to believe that exposing Trump’s sleazy past will be enough to turn serious-minded independent voters away from him, and that Trump’s xenophobia will be enough to generate record turnout among the growing number of Hispanic and other minority voters.

the latter really does look like an impossible albatross but democrats are in for their usual stunned frustration over the former

Rubio is the Drake of this election

he called a heckler "the valedictorian of trump university" today. thought that was a good one

― k3vin k., Sunday, 28 February 2016 20:16 (7 minutes ago) Permalink

Makes me think of Hank on Larry Sanders getting Phil to write him some comeback zingers for an upcoming roast. "Little Marco" kills me.

marquito

marco boobio

I've a friend we call Marquito. He wasn't a valedictorian. Solid B student.

If Trump pulls a J.J. Hunsecker and says he doesn't fancy shooting fleas with elephant guns, he'll officially be my new hero. (I mean, you know, the whole KKK thing aside.)

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/us/politics/hillary-clinton-libya.html?_r=0

I've spent the afternoon reading those articles and have laundry and Oscars.

the most worrying thing in those was implicit: how incredibly personally frustrated hillary clinton must be by now with obama-style reluctance to invade the middle east

quiet, lackey

is the alfred diminiuitive "alfrito"

his statements are so radioactive

trump seems to be counting on the idea that his shit talk up to now is like a cloud of smoke that he can wave away whenever he needs to replace it with a newer cloud of smoke. his media experience would tend to back this up. it remains to be seen how that idea works out for the rest of the campaign.

shes a monster lol

(xpost) That was Christie's interview on CNN today: blithely (and quite unconvincingly) waving away clouds of smoke from a month or two ago.

is the alfred diminiuitive "alfrito"

― denies the existence of dark matter (difficult listening hour),

Alito.

Yeah, it's true that by constantly churning out new awful statements he also diminishes the importance and notoriety of earlier awful statements

he wipes shit with other shit

One of the scariest things about Trump as a candidate is the idea that he may be the tip of an iceburg, not so much in terms of racism but in terms of politicians being able to say and do anything and being able to get away with it.

...if they are beloved television stars!

I feel like this was already sort of the lesson of Reagan...

while that's true, his candidacy largely succeeded due to the GOP not being able to find a strong candidate to emerge. they always do this, with 5 or 6 people jostling and even sometimes winning the first caucus, whereas Democrats often have a 2-horse race even earlier. by the time they were ready to pounce on him, he'd already become teflon. Trump has run before but usually never seriously, and the political climate on the right hasn't been the way it is now.

will wonder if GOP will start trying to coalesce around a smaller, more focused # of candidates in future runs. when the arrows are all firing inward, a Machiavellian candidate can use that to his advantage.

Problem was the gop just had so many amazing candidates. Just ask the media.

it's funny too - I wonder if we'll ever see another crossover candidate again from the right.

i'd sooner fist a bull than vote Republican, but idk, maybe if we had a really terrible candidate (worse than Kerry if that's imaginable) and the Republican actually broke party lines on a few things (namely abortion/LGBT rights) and wasn't horrible economically.

it'll be 2032 before that happens i'd bet

ahh I'm hoping i'm dead by then anyway

trump will get it this go round, and then we'll endure conservative hand-wringing about how the LIBRUL media palmed off Trump upon these unsuspecting rubes for ratings and if the GOP could have just had a "real conservative" they would have taken the White House. and the librul media will be all "yeah that's prob right lol"

xxxp No way. Parties like being in power. They'll figure out something before then. Even if it's just raising Eisenhower from the dead.

Dems made Trump in their chemistry sets

http://static.politifact.com.s3.amazonaws.com/politifact%2Fphotos%2Ftrumpclinton.jpg

well science is a liberal conspiracy so