Buttload of Faith: the 2016 Presidential Primary Thread (Pt 2)

wouldn't read too much into that, since the sample was probably 200-300 people. i'd characterize it as merely remaining huge

I always thought Trump's big appeal was in how simple he made everything sound, like these sorts of massive complex issues really are as simple as a Facebook meme. Particularly the "you enter North Korea illegally, they shoot you on sight...you enter the USA illegally, you get a job, a house, free health care, education...what happened to our country?" one

xpost yeah, good point, MOE is +5.2%

but either way, the relative lack of gains among black/latino voters stands in stark contrast to just about every other area, where he made significant gains b/w december and now.

are we still pretending that Bernie has a chance at the nomination

margin for just the black/latino subgroup doesn't look like it's reported but is probably much higher xxp

are we still pretending that Bernie has a chance at the nomination

No; his failure to support reparations has doomed his campaign.

shakey out of curiosity, whom would you vote for in a primary?

like, if California's primary was held right now, ahead of every other state's?

right. i know that by the time it gets to you it probably won't matter

I think of voting strategically, for the most part. The ideal goal is a Democrat in the White House, preferably one that's as liberal as possible, with Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress, esp a Democratic caucus in the House led by Pelosi. This would be the ideal, but I realize that in all likelihood the best case scenario for the next four years is actually just gonna be more gridlock, occasional executive action, and hopefully skillful management of some insane foreign policy crises.

I agree with Bernie about certain things (tax rates, financial regulations, universal healthcare) and not about others (guns, foreign policy) but also think his odds in the national election would be much, much worse than Clinton's. I disagree with Hillary on tons of stuff (foreign policy especially) but think she would fare better against whatever nutjob loser the GOP ends up putting up. Since Hillary ostensibly offers the party wider margin of victory and an accompanying increase in the likelihood of downticket victories, I'm inclined to think that a vote for her would bring my goal closer to reality. So that would make me inclined to vote for her, but honestly I find my ideological differences with her to be too deep. And I wouldn't vote for Bernie given that I think his nomination would be a disaster (and much more likely given how many delegates California has). So in the end I probably wouldn't vote in this hypothetical early CA primary at all.

but since sanders isn't going to get the nomination, couldn't voting for him in the hypothetical early CA primary also be 'strategic' as a way of reminding the democrat in the white house that being as liberal as possible might be well-received? (or, more importantly i think, reminding other democrats that they can run on a sanders-style platform and potentially get into that democratic caucus in congress?)

twitter claims that sarah palin is blaming her son's domestic violence charge on obama's lack of respect for the troops

XXpost

So why do you think the multiple polls showing Bernie doing better in the general election wrong? Do you think that he just hasn't been tested yet, or that he will choke in debates against the GOP or something?

but since sanders isn't going to get the nomination

he might if CA's primary was actually first.

"So why do you think the multiple polls showing Bernie doing better than Hillary in the general election are wrong?"

Stupid grammar.

So why do you think the multiple polls showing Bernie doing better in the general election wrong?

I'm not sure what polls you're referring to. Generic matchups of all the potential candidates invariably reflect party preferences above all else. There is no way Sanders would do better than Clinton against Cruz or Trump in the general election, he is just not a good politician with broad appeal. He is a dude with narrow appeal, the appeal to people who like to be lectured by cranky old white guys - which is not a majority of the population.

So why do you think the multiple polls showing Bernie doing better in the general election wrong?

according to Nate Silver's latest "you shouldn't be reading this website right now" disclaimer:

Head-to-head polls of hypothetical general election matchups have almost no predictive power at this stage of the campaign

(i don't disagree with his recommendation, but it's just funny to be in a situation where you want traffic on your website but you don't really want people to put too much stock in what you're saying yet)

So in the end I probably wouldn't vote in this hypothetical early CA primary at all.

welp

why is palin back now. this is awful.

I mean a Democratic woman running against Trump is going to be able to exploit demographic advantages that Sanders is not, for example. And Dems need to turn out large percentages of Latino and Black voters, which Clinton is better positioned to do. It's about what voting blocs are going to be excited to vote for the candidate - and college educated whites are not a large enough voting bloc to make up for deficits in other demos.

xp

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01003/pain-biden-debate_1003371c.jpg

why is palin back now. this is awful.

― goole, Wednesday, January 20, 2016 1:37 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Gearing up to be Trump's VP pick, obvs!

she never left!

it's been interesting watching certain liberal journalists go after sanders for calling Planned Parenthood and the HRC part of the "establishment." i mean, clearly they *are*

as the establishment candidate hillary also has resources + allies (and enemies of course) from throughout her career. i also think she'll be more palatable to moderates and i think sanders is a relatively unknown quantity that might be extremely vulnerable in a general election race. hillary has been attacked throughout her career (also apparently this impresses no one but me, she is vastly more experienced) so we more-or-less know what to expect; all not to mention that she's married to one of our nation's most popular recent presidents and served as SOS for another (maybe not as popular and more divisive but i think she's right to try to run on Obama's legacy). otoh sanders might be able to GOTV due to enthusiasm among the youth + far left voter base.

in fairness hypothetical head-to-head polls this far in advance have like zero validity. i (cautiously) support sanders and i accept that running him in the general election is a risk xxxxl

ultimately i think that a lot of "pragmatic" clinton supporters are seduced by the same cult of personality that sanders supporters are accused of falling for. they think that clinton, by virtue of her experience, will somehow be able to wrestle useful legislation through congress, or be BFFs with more world leaders, or use executive power to do some meaningful work. my feeling is that any democratic president is going to surround him/herself with capable people to run the various parts of the executive branch, but that sanders would be better by some degree when it came to actual decision-making

(nb this is not my case for hillary, just some stray thoughts about why i think she'd be a stronger candidate in the general. i happen to like her for a number of reasons beyond her electability.) xp

i don't have video to hand but (via twitter) i see palin's speaking right now on her son's domestic assault charge? and blaming it on PTSD and/or obama? i think this is happening at a trump rally?

as the establishment candidate hillary also has resources + allies (and enemies of course) from throughout her career. i also think she'll be more palatable to moderates and i think sanders is a relatively unknown quantity that might be extremely vulnerable in a general election race. hillary has been attacked throughout her career (also apparently this impresses no one but me, she is vastly more experienced) so we more-or-less know what to expect; all not to mention that she's married to one of our nation's most popular recent presidents and served as SOS for another (maybe not as popular and more divisive but i think she's right to try to run on Obama's legacy). otoh sanders might be able to GOTV due to enthusiasm among the youth + far left voter base.

― Mordy, Wednesday, January 20, 2016 2:42 PM (6 seconds ago)

certainly, for moderate and conservative voters her track record as senator/SOS/bill's wife is a great selling point

they think that clinton, by virtue of her experience, will somehow be able to wrestle useful legislation through congress,

not as long as the GOP as currently constituted controls the House. Absolutely nothing is going to pass.

or be BFFs with more world leaders,

maybe. she does like some shitbags.

use executive power to do some meaningful work

Another maybe, and not one I'm all that excited about, beyond the fact that she would be unlikely to repeal Obama's climate change-related efforts. (tbf Bernie would probably be about the same on this count).

Surely the blame for any PTSD suffered by Palin's progeny can be placed squarely at the feet of their mother.

if, through some miracle, the GOP nominates Cruz and Trump runs third party, then by all means the best candidate to unify the party, exploit the ensuing electoral catastrophe for the GOP, and possibly recapture Congress would be Hillary. but idk so many hypotheticals there (and even in that best-case scenario I don't think the Dems could actually take the House)

Every time one of you mentions how experienced HRC is I go back to the number of stories, real or leaked by miffed staffers, about how Sanders' popularity caught her offguard. I mean, Jesus fucking Christ, you lost in 2008 to a guy whose hold on the affections of the electorate sure didn't look quixotic in the weeks before Iowa. I know administrations aren't campaigns, but how can you NOT expect a challenge?

not being snarky to anyone in particular

how on earth

https://twitter.com/dick_nixon/status/689850640722456577

HRC is clearly not a great politician (or doesn't have amazing campaigning instincts more precisely) but you can't deny that she has a tremendous wealth of experience. Whether that translates to things like good, effective policy is a good/different question.

pretty evident that it does not. She seems to be frozen in 1995.

she has experience selling weapons to the middle east, so there's that

it's undeniable that HRC has experience, but her lack of notable accomplishments as senator or secretary of state is equally hard to deny

She's manifestly a terrible politician.

as long as we're talking big picture, i find myself being almost totally unexcited by this race. the GOP clown car berlusconi-style bigot parade is compelling stuff but i have close to zero strong opinion on the dem side.

i don't have any real faith in or respect for hillary. her record as flotus, senator and secstate are all pretty bad imo, either good ideas bungled or bad ideas pursued expediently or crises left to fester because of paranoia (not an uncommon political problem, granted). i didn't want a trip thru the gutter of 90s politics in 08 and i still don't. i don't have any trust that she'll surround herself with competent people.

all that said, i just don't buy bernie's pitch. his core idea is that an activated, energized dem+independent base -- a mass popular movement -- will break the gridlock and allow his ambitious legislative plan to work. i think he's wrong! just flat wrong. i have doubts the party or the country will go for an old jewish socialist, but i guess we'll see.

i agree that sanders' plan for political change is naive, and i think he's channeling a lot of anger + frustration on the left but a lot of the finer details of the policy stuff (in financial reform, healthcare, gun control, etc) seem more superficial than hillary's stated policies.

why is palin back now

because... she's not dead?

it's just funny to be in a situation where you want traffic on your website but you don't really want people to put too much stock in what you're saying yet

doesn't matter in 538's case. liberals and 'centrist' Dems in particular absolutely cannot get enough of meaningless morsels about The Prez Auction from midterms on.

see you in April! or not.

xpost To that extent, Sanders is kinda the Trump of the left. Don't just tell us what we want to hear, give us some idea of how you hope to actually achieve these things.

has anyone asked hillary about reparations

iirc she gets a pass because she's 'not a radical' or something

all that said, i just don't buy bernie's pitch. his core idea is that an activated, energized dem+independent base -- a mass popular movement -- will break the gridlock and allow his ambitious legislative plan to work. i think he's wrong! just flat wrong. i have doubts the party or the country will go for an old jewish socialist, but i guess we'll see.

― goole, Wednesday, January 20, 2016 3:05 PM (8 minutes ago)

i'd honestly be surprised if either bernie or his closest advisors actually believed this -- it's just so obviously impossible. (if by some miracle he were elected, i don't doubt that he'd realize his more ambitious goals are pretty impossible to achieve and he'd probably settle into just being a relatively liberal president. which is probably all we can hope for.) but, as you (and mordy) allude to, it's an important selling point for prying votes from hilary.

i can't wait to see the programs Pragmatic Hillary gets through a Congress that loves her so much

i'm really surprised that none of the democratic candidates are running on the We'll do the best we can but republican gridlock will make substantial progress pretty much impossible Platform, that seems like a real motivator