US Politics - Why we can't have even mediocre things

[Mudguard]

 

Polls of Democrats show Clinton is popular with them. Google and ye shall find.

 

Here's a nice insight into what endorsements really mean.

Thanks for the link to the chart of the polls over time.  Very interesting.  Clinton's number's have been really tanking since July and still haven't shown signs of leveling off.  Meanwhile, Sanders numbers have been steadily climbing since March.  If these trends hold for another month or two, they will be tied in the polls, which is amazing considering that Sander's was polling at around 5% at the beginning of the year. 

 

Clinton and her backers have got to be really worried by now.  I think that explains why she finally decided to do an interview and apologize for the email controversy.  Not sure if it's too late to seem genuine.  Her response so far to criticism and adversity during her campaign has been horrendous.  She has to turn it around soon and get past these controversies, but I'm not sure that will be possible, at least not for the next month or two, and possible much longer.  They've only released 25% of her emails, and she's due to testify to a Congressional panel in October.  By then, Sander's could be about even with her nationally, and Biden could be in the race.  If she starts losing endorsements from the establishment in the next 2 to 3 months, I think her campaign is probably finished.

 

At this point, even if Clinton holds on to win the primary, I'm concerned that enthusiasm for her will be relatively low.  She lack's Obama's and Bill's charisma.  If turnout for the Democrats is low, then they could lose the election despite the favorable demographics.

[Hayyoth]

Thanks for the link to the chart of the polls over time.  Very interesting.  Clinton's number's have been really tanking since July and still haven't shown signs of leveling off.  Meanwhile, Sanders numbers have been steadily climbing since March.  If these trends hold for another month or two, they will be tied in the polls, which is amazing considering that Sander's was polling at around 5% at the beginning of the year. 

 

Clinton and her backers have got to be really worried by now.  I think that explains why she finally decided to do an interview and apologize for the email controversy.  Not sure if it's too late to seem genuine.  Her response so far to criticism and adversity during her campaign has been horrendous.  She has to turn it around soon and get past these controversies, but I'm not sure that will be possible, at least not for the next month or two, and possible much longer.  They've only released 25% of her emails, and she's due to testify to a Congressional panel in October.  By then, Sander's could be about even with her nationally, and Biden could be in the race.  If she starts losing endorsements from the establishment in the next 2 to 3 months, I think her campaign is probably finished.

 

At this point, even if Clinton holds on to win the primary, I'm concerned that enthusiasm for her will be relatively low.  She lack's Obama's and Bill's charisma.  If turnout for the Democrats is low, then they could lose the election despite the favorable demographics.

My opinion is that Hillary being anointed so early was a sign to how lazy and entitled the Dems have become. Take the aside in your post 'they could lose the election despite the favorable demographics.' I was reading similar comments right before the GOP landslide in the midterms. I hear all the apologies for her but she's just a bad candidate. Wooden, uninspiring and tone deaf to criticism. The lessons she took from clutching defeat from the jaws of victory in 2008 seem purely focused on locking down donations and improving tactically, her campaigning style and demeanor are exactly the same.

[TerraPrime]

And if she had changed her campaign direction or style there would have been accusations that she's a scheming insincere triangulator falling over for each poll number.

*shrugs*

[lokisnow]

Finally! The winnowing of the field has begun! Rick perry dropped out of the race today.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

So the "Bush brother from another mother" (Bill Maher) is out?

I thought Santorum would be the first to drop from the more known candidates.

Well, I am curious who is next? Graham or Santorum?

[Shryke]

Thanks for the link to the chart of the polls over time.  Very interesting.  Clinton's number's have been really tanking since July and still haven't shown signs of leveling off.  Meanwhile, Sanders numbers have been steadily climbing since March.  If these trends hold for another month or two, they will be tied in the polls, which is amazing considering that Sander's was polling at around 5% at the beginning of the year. 

 

Clinton and her backers have got to be really worried by now.  I think that explains why she finally decided to do an interview and apologize for the email controversy.  Not sure if it's too late to seem genuine.  Her response so far to criticism and adversity during her campaign has been horrendous.  She has to turn it around soon and get past these controversies, but I'm not sure that will be possible, at least not for the next month or two, and possible much longer.  They've only released 25% of her emails, and she's due to testify to a Congressional panel in October.  By then, Sander's could be about even with her nationally, and Biden could be in the race.  If she starts losing endorsements from the establishment in the next 2 to 3 months, I think her campaign is probably finished.

 

At this point, even if Clinton holds on to win the primary, I'm concerned that enthusiasm for her will be relatively low.  She lack's Obama's and Bill's charisma.  If turnout for the Democrats is low, then they could lose the election despite the favorable demographics.

 

Yeah, but why would they continue to hold for another month or two? That's like saying if the murder rate keeps dropping eventually people will start spontaneously appearing from the aether.

 

Even ignoring the vagaries of the polling in question, the demographics still don't support that kind of narrative. You have to remember that most of what you are seeing in the recent numbers is white very liberal people like Sanders.

[Mudguard]

 

Yeah, but why would they continue to hold for another month or two? That's like saying if the murder rate keeps dropping eventually people will start spontaneously appearing from the aether.

 

Even ignoring the vagaries of the polling in question, the demographics still don't support that kind of narrative. You have to remember that most of what you are seeing in the recent numbers is white very liberal people like Sanders.

Your murder rate argument is nonsensical.  Whether the trends continue to hold is anyone's guess; that's why I used the word "if".  Are you saying the trend will not hold for another month or two, that Clinton's drop and Bernie's rise are about to level off?    

[lokisnow]

California passed positive voter registration, today. Meaning peoples eligible to vote but not registered to vote will be automatically registered to vote when applying for or renewing a drivers license (you can chose to opt out of registering if you don't want to be registered, ser scot). It's great that a barrier to voting is being done away with.

California also passed an aid in dying bill to allow physician assisted suicide for terminally ill patients with a diagnosis of less than six months to be live, although I expect Jesuit Jerry Brown to veto this bill since the Catholic Church official position is that Jesus enjoys sick people suffering horrific pain.

[Altherion]

Thanks for the link to the chart of the polls over time.  Very interesting.  Clinton's number's have been really tanking since July and still haven't shown signs of leveling off.  Meanwhile, Sanders numbers have been steadily climbing since March.  If these trends hold for another month or two, they will be tied in the polls, which is amazing considering that Sander's was polling at around 5% at the beginning of the year. 

 

Clinton and her backers have got to be really worried by now.  I think that explains why she finally decided to do an interview and apologize for the email controversy.  Not sure if it's too late to seem genuine.  Her response so far to criticism and adversity during her campaign has been horrendous.  She has to turn it around soon and get past these controversies, but I'm not sure that will be possible, at least not for the next month or two, and possible much longer.  They've only released 25% of her emails, and she's due to testify to a Congressional panel in October.  By then, Sander's could be about even with her nationally, and Biden could be in the race.  If she starts losing endorsements from the establishment in the next 2 to 3 months, I think her campaign is probably finished.

There's one other interesting thing coming up in October: the very first of the Democratic primary debates. This is an area where being the establishment candidate paid off big for Clinton: debates are a chance for lesser known candidates to share the stage with the famous front-runner so the DNC reduced the number of debates by more than a factor of 4 relative to 2008 (!) and Sanders et al are forbidden from organizing their own debates on pain of being excluded from the official ones. However, they couldn't quite get rid of the debates altogether and the first one of them is coming up on October 13th. If Clinton does poorly, it's entirely possible that even the establishment will begin to abandon her.

[Shryke]

Your murder rate argument is nonsensical.  Whether the trends continue to hold is anyone's guess; that's why I used the word "if".  Are you saying the trend will not hold for another month or two, that Clinton's drop and Bernie's rise are about to level off?    

 

No, my murder rate argument is the same as your argument. It's looking at a trend and saying "If this goes on forever unchanged, X will happen!" Saying "if this trend continues" is a silly and nonsensical statement without considering what is going on behind the trend.

 

And then I pointed out to you one of the big factors behind the trend. Ya can't get around the demographics issue. The Democratic party is not the party of only the very liberal white man.

[Shryke]

There's one other interesting thing coming up in October: the very first of the Democratic primary debates. This is an area where being the establishment candidate paid off big for Clinton: debates are a chance for lesser known candidates to share the stage with the famous front-runner so the DNC reduced the number of debates by more than a factor of 4 relative to 2008 (!) and Sanders et al are forbidden from organizing their own debates on pain of being excluded from the official ones. However, they couldn't quite get rid of the debates altogether and the first one of them is coming up on October 13th. If Clinton does poorly, it's entirely possible that even the establishment will begin to abandon her.

 

I guess if she rapes and/or murders a child on stage that could happen?

[Mudguard]

There's one other interesting thing coming up in October: the very first of the Democratic primary debates. This is an area where being the establishment candidate paid off big for Clinton: debates are a chance for lesser known candidates to share the stage with the famous front-runner so the DNC reduced the number of debates by more than a factor of 4 relative to 2008 (!) and Sanders et al are forbidden from organizing their own debates on pain of being excluded from the official ones. However, they couldn't quite get rid of the debates altogether and the first one of them is coming up on October 13th. If Clinton does poorly, it's entirely possible that even the establishment will begin to abandon her.

The debate could move the needle and get things back on track for Clinton if she does well, but if she does poorly, I agree, things could get very ugly for her, depending on what else happens in October.  We should know by then whether Biden is going to run.  If he does, it will be interesting to see whether any of her endorsements switches over to Biden, and whether more of Clinton's supporters or Sander's supporters switch over to Biden.

 

Yeah, it's clear the establishment is backing Clinton and trying to stack the deck in her favor.  If she can't maintain a lead under these circumstances, where the other democratic candidates have largely avoided criticizing her, then how will she do in the general election when 100% of the opposition's focus will be on taking her down?  Right now, the Trump circus is deflecting a lot of attention off of her, but that will eventually end.

[Mudguard]

 

No, my murder rate argument is the same as your argument. It's looking at a trend and saying "If this goes on forever unchanged, X will happen!" Saying "if this trend continues" is a silly and nonsensical statement without considering what is going on behind the trend.

 

And then I pointed out to you one of the big factors behind the trend. Ya can't get around the demographics issue. The Democratic party is not the party of only the very liberal white man.

Your argument is nonsense because I never said the trend is going on forever.  Your strawman arguments are tiresome.  

[Shryke]

Your argument is nonsense because I never said the trend is going on forever.  Your strawman arguments are tiresome.  

 

I never said you thought it would go on forever. I said you thought it would go on without changing while ignoring the underlying reality that means that won't happen. This isn't a strawman this is me directly referencing what you said and you getting all salty cause you said something silly.

[Mudguard]

 

I never said you thought it would go on forever. I said you thought it would go on without changing while ignoring the underlying reality that means that won't happen. This isn't a strawman this is me directly referencing what you said and you getting all salty cause you said something silly.

 

 

 

No, my murder rate argument is the same as your argument. It's looking at a trend and saying "If this goes on forever unchanged, X will happen!" Saying "if this trend continues" is a silly and nonsensical statement without considering what is going on behind the trend.

 

And then I pointed out to you one of the big factors behind the trend. Ya can't get around the demographics issue. The Democratic party is not the party of only the very liberal white man.

 

 

 

Yeah, but why would they continue to hold for another month or two? That's like saying if the murder rate keeps dropping eventually people will start spontaneously appearing from the aether.

 

Even ignoring the vagaries of the polling in question, the demographics still don't support that kind of narrative. You have to remember that most of what you are seeing in the recent numbers is white very liberal people like Sanders.

You seem to have trouble remembering what you've been stating.  I've made it easier for you by bolding the nonsensical portions of your posts.

 

ETA: this is my last reply to you on this subject.  Not going to waste anymore time.

[oberonus]

Jindal decided to end its medicaid contract with PP. When faced with a lawsuit that ending Planned Parenthood contracts in the state would violate federal law, jindal and his lawyers defends that move by stating there are thousands of health care providers that can provide for woman's reproductive health care needs

 

 

HIs list of providers? 

 

 

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/09/louisiana-said-women-could-go-dentist-if-planned-parenthood-were-defunded

 

 

i mean i really dont understand it. I really don't. Those o'keefe videos are blatantly edited like his acorn video. Multiple investigations have shown PP being innocent. yet these idiots constantly spit out the same regurgitated shit. I honestly just cant

[TrackerNeil]

Thanks for the link to the chart of the polls over time.  Very interesting.  Clinton's number's have been really tanking since July and still haven't shown signs of leveling off.  Meanwhile, Sanders numbers have been steadily climbing since March.  If these trends hold for another month or two, they will be tied in the polls, which is amazing considering that Sander's was polling at around 5% at the beginning of the year. 

 

I think you have to be careful with polls, which often reflect whom the voters are hearing about most in the news, and right now that is often Sanders. Same with Trump, really. As the primaries draw closer voters will pay more attention, and then we'll see who's actually going the distance and who's falling by the wayside. Looked at over time, Clinton is still pretty popular with Democrats, but we'll see what happens over the autumn.

 

And if she had changed her campaign direction or style there would have been accusations that she's a scheming insincere triangulator falling over for each poll number.

*shrugs*

 

I know, right? If Clinton changes her stance she's insincere, but if she stands her ground she's obstinate. The fact that she's locking up tons of support from the party apparatus, which normally indicates a high level of partisan appeal, in this case is said to mean she has only elite backing and is out of touch with actual voters. It's maddening, and I can't help but sympathize with her because of it. 

[Commodore]

-  PP videos were not done by O'Keefe

 

- Unedited versions of all the interviews were released simultaneously, which is more than can be said for most media news reports (imagine 60 Minutes showing an unedited interview, lol)

 

- That PP receives money for baby organs is not in dispute. The questions being investigated are 1) Are they charging more than just to cover costs 2) are they altering the abortion procedure to preserve organs

[lokisnow]

-  PP videos were not done by O'Keefe
 
- Unedited versions of all the interviews were released simultaneously, which is more than can be said for most media news reports (imagine 60 Minutes showing an unedited interview, lol)
 
- That PP receives money for baby organs is not in dispute. The questions being investigated are 1) Are they charging more than just to cover costs 2) are they altering the abortion procedure to preserve organs

the videos they claim were unedited, were in fact edited. They were trying to be super extra sneaky in their claims.

**

California passed their watered down climate change bill 51 to 26 in the assembly, senate shouldn't be a problem.

And Los Angeles got permission from the state to put forward their huge transit ballot measure for 2016. This looks to be a $0.005 sales tax levied for 60 years that would raise 40 billion plus for public transit and 20+ billions for freeway infrastructure as well. It will still have to clear a 66.66% majority to pass which is doable, however the 2012 ballot measure failed by only garnering a 66.65% majority. California has extreme anti democracy system in popular voting where all NO votes are counted as two votes, which is why one needs a two third majority of YES votes.

[Seaworth'sShipmate]

I would love a reasonable estimate from someone, on just who the Republican nominee will likely be.

 

Assuming she avoids jail time, it will probably be Hillary for the Dems. Yet her likeability factor is a huge issue, its not outlandish to think Biden could take it from her, should he decide to join.

 

Donald Trump is leading, but there is no way the Reps will back him when it comes time to make a choice.

 

It seemed like it would be Jeb! at one point, yet in spite of his "electability" is not making any headway with the base, and all the positive case about him as candidate have already been made, to little effect. He also seems like such a poor politician (similar to Romney/Mccain) that the dem candidate will attack him mercilessly, while he will insist on being a passive gentleman in the face of it all.

 

I think perhaps it will be Rubio, or at least he would be the best pick. He is smart, accomplisehd and reasonably articulate. Those argue that his inexperience will work against him are forgetting the case of Obummer, whose inexperience turned out to be inconsequential.