alguien

Members
  • Content count

    4,634
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About alguien

  • Rank
    formerly "nadie"
  • Birthday 06/09/1981

Contact Methods

  • Website URL http://
  • ICQ 0

Profile Information

  • Gender Male
  • Location Seattle, WA

Recent Profile Visitors

5,986 profile views
  1. U.S. Election - Because we know better than you do

    Gotcha.  For Trump, I always figured he realized early on that if he cornered the racist/crazy contingent, that the rest of the primary was split so many ways between the GOP establishment, he'd score some early victories. Since the GOP establishment continues to be a bland failure, focused on stabbing themselves rather than him, it's worked out better for Trump than I thought it would.  I used to worry about Jeb or Rubio, but now suspect that even if one of them made it, either one would get destroyed in a debate with Hillary or Bernie. Hell, I think Cruz or Trump would get thumped by either Dem nominee.  Much as a Trump nomination would seem to guarantee a Democratic president (and while I favor Hillary, I'd be fine with her or Bernie)... I won't cheer for it. It's already such a sad commentary that he's gotten as far as he has in this race, and the further he gets, my sadness just changes to outright disgust. 
  2. U.S. Election - Because we know better than you do

    A quick check on RCP has Clinton up nationally by 18, 2, 21, and 12 points in the last four national polls. 
  3. US Politics: Scalia Dead at 79

    Hell, that's the Nixon playbook, that Reagan just inherited. 
  4. U.S. Election - Because we know better than you do

    Well, the majority of polls completely disagree with that, so...
  5. U.S. Election - Onward to New Hampshire

    Meh. It seems like they always do, according to media spin. 
  6. U.S. Election - Onward to New Hampshire

    I'll definitely be curious to see where the trend goes, especially after the debates and more state primaries finish up.  I get the sense that Sanders's numbers, more then Clinton's, are tied to his perceived electability, and will closely reflect how he does in primaries. I wouldn't be surprised if it rose even more after NH if he wins by a lot there but also drops if he loses by a lot somewhere else. 
  7. How the heck can that be misinterpreted as "just friends"?! ETA: unless you've been friends for awhile or something. Maybe that, I could see. 
  8. U.S. Election - Onward to New Hampshire

    I'm unfamiliar with how accurate Quinnipiac is (though I wonder, if it seriously predicts Clinton would tie with Cruz), but I would wait until several polls show this before predicting a trend. RCP showed a PPP national with Clinton up by 21 points just the day before the Quinn. polls were released. (Which is up from the one before that, which showed her only up 12) http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html ETA: thought it could very well be that Bernie is doing so well in the debate that his numbers are on the rise--I think both candidates acquitted themselves well in the last debate. 
  9. I don't think trying to be Post-Partisan = not trying to keep your grass roots movement going.  I mean, it's not as though the constant emails about movements, pledging, rallies, and contacts stopped coming after he got elected...
  10. An even more cynical view is that bored college kids thought their participation was done after the election and left the president with nothing to work with. 
  11. You're right, where I was when Obama won isn't empirical evidence--it's just awesome. But speaking of evidence, most of the articles I read said have said that there was a combination of independent voters, young voters, and minorities that helped Obama win. I believe Mitt Romney won more independent votes in certain states last time around, but that doesn't mean you can discount the Independent vote--it's very important Obama still needed to win a handy amount of these to win the necessary swing states. See this chart for a good reference of the breakdown: http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/11/13/infographic-obama-lost-the-independent-vote-in-almost-every-swing-state Note that in 2008, independent votes were a critical part of his absolute domination, and in 2012, they were still necessary to win the states he needed. He didn't need to win the majority of them, but enough so that his other coalition factors could come out on top.  The reason they're paid attention to, is because they're the only folks who's mind can change. I don't think they even do, most of the time. But even if it happens some of the time, it's critical. Most declared folks vote along party lines almost all the time. Most youths and minorities vote liberal. And Democrats are terrible at voting during off calendar elections. Not just youth votes, but across the line; they are just terrible at it.   
  12. I think if anyone has anything to be happy about at the Iowa caucus, it's Marco Rubio. Cruz had to win. Trump didn't. (and most likely doesn't care). Iowa hasn't really been reliable to pick GOP candidates in the last two elections, but the fact that Rubio did so well in urban conservative precincts paints a hopeful picture for him in other states. He's going to pitch himself as the least crazy and hope that the relief at not having Trump or Cruz can bring out the GOP base and sway independents.  Also, he's photogenic, can potentially sway Latino voters, can maybe bring Florida with him.  Once Jebber brilliantly said he'd invade Iraq and took himself out of the game, I wondered if Rubio would be a dangerous candidate. Also, I have to admit, if Sanders somehow manages to win the democratic nomination and Rubio wins for the GOP, as a liberal, from an optics standpoint, it'd be a little surreal to have Democrats pitching the old white guy and Republicans pitching the young and upcoming Latino. 
  13. Well, it was true in the last two elections. Independents and undecideds, along with minority votes were key components to Obama victories. Independents nowadays, I find are super-old school former fiscal Republicans who don't want to vote democrat, but have drifted toward the middle because of right-wing lunacy and do so while "holding their noses." (anecdotally, I am related to about 50 of them) And Florida, at least, was a non-factor in 2008 for sure. I remember, because I was in Grant Park about half a mile from the president, and had already done the math--and was super happy because Obama had already won before that dipshit state had finished their voting. In fact, in both elections, Obama would still have won without Florida and Ohio. (which, again, was so refreshing to me).
  14. Re: the Dems, it seems like either side could spin this as a win, regardless of the actual results. I like Sanders, but I still lean Hillary, because I think of myself as American Center Left. Also because I think she stands moderately better chance of capturing the crucial, frustrating 5-10% of independents that are necessary to win a general election. There are just too many old Supreme Court Justices for me to be comfortable with the calculus of Sanders winning the general election. And, it'd also be cool to finally have a female president, honestly.  That said, I'm glad Bernie is in the race. He's forced Hillary to veer slightly leftward, and I think that's a good thing.  Whichever one of them wins, and I still tend to think it will be Hillary, I will vote for them. (I live in Washington state, so it won't matter too much anyway.  )