S John Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 10 minutes ago, OnionAhaiReborn said: Well, I agree, if the Republicans nominate Trump or Cruz it will be a rout. I just reject the idea that Clinton is somehow the more electable choice for Democrats, she has some very serious liabilities. I think Clinton's popularity is generally overestimated by her fans. I don't see an easy victory for her no matter who the R's put out there. A LOT of people do not like her. Sure, she'd probably end up shoring up most of the likely Dem voters should she win the nomination, but so would Bernie and he lacks the investigations and the decades of Clinton related scandal. As for Bernie, while he's my guy for sure, - I have doubts that America is ready to accept a self-described socialist as president. That word is anathema to a very large portion of Americans and I worry that come time for the general election, whoever the R candidate is will be able use it to sink Bernie. To me, Trump vs. Sanders is an interesting possibility. I wonder if Americans who might otherwise like Bernie but are worried about the socialist label would ultimately prefer to pull the lever for a boorish reality TV star. I just have a hard time imagining that Trump will get huge numbers when people vote to decide to send that guy to the most powerful position on earth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altherion Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 6 minutes ago, S John said: To me, Trump vs. Sanders is an interesting possibility. I wonder if Americans who might otherwise like Bernie but are worried about the socialist label would ultimately prefer to pull the lever for a boorish reality TV star. I just have a hard time imagining that Trump will get huge numbers when people vote to decide to send that guy to the most powerful position on earth. Keep in mind that if it is Trump vs. Sanders, Bloomberg will quite likely run as well (based precisely on your thoughts about the Americans who won't vote for a socialist, but don't like boorishness). It would be a fairly amusing election with a choice between three radically different flavors of New Yorker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S John Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 Just now, Altherion said: Keep in mind that if it is Trump vs. Sanders, Bloomberg will quite likely run as well (based precisely on your thoughts about the Americans who won't vote for a socialist, but don't like boorishness). It would be a fairly amusing election with a choice between three radically different flavors of New Yorker. God help us all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 58 minutes ago, NestorMakhnosLovechild said: I don't think anybody but the hardcore Bernites really think there's going to be a political revolution. Sanders has captured the imagination of a significant portion of the Democratic base, but in terms of inspiring the politically uninvolved to participate, he is simply nowhere near the motivator that Barack Obama was when he first ran. Well, and Sanders himself. But the voter totals for the Democratic Primaries so far indicate business as usual. Looks like a return to normal after a big upward tick for Obama in 2008 from what I've seen. I don't know if the demographics have shifted or if we are just seeing the usual demos with certain groups (young, white, liberal, etc) breaking hard for Sanders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alguien Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 1 hour ago, OnionAhaiReborn said: I just reject the idea that Clinton is somehow the more electable choice for Democrats, she has some very serious liabilities. Well, the majority of polls completely disagree with that, so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnionAhaiReborn Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 11 minutes ago, alguien said: Well, the majority of polls completely disagree with that, so... What polls are you talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alguien Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 2 minutes ago, OnionAhaiReborn said: What polls are you talking about? A quick check on RCP has Clinton up nationally by 18, 2, 21, and 12 points in the last four national polls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Her unfavorability is what oar and others talk about when they say she's unelectable, but the actual polls indicate she'd win handily over whoever repub emerges. But that doesn't matter a whole lot right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnionAhaiReborn Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Just now, alguien said: A quick check on RCP has Clinton up nationally by 18, 2, 21, and 12 points in the last four national polls. Against Sanders, yes. I'm talking about who is the more electable choice for Democrats to send into the general election. Trump currently leads the Republican field by a wide margin, but few are willing to argue that he's the Republican's most electable choice for the general election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alguien Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 1 minute ago, Kalbear said: Her unfavorability is what oar and others talk about when they say she's unelectable, but the actual polls indicate she'd win handily over whoever repub emerges. But that doesn't matter a whole lot right now. Ah. I see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 See, I want to like Bernie because his positions are much closer to mine than Clinton's, but I am more risk averse than profit maximizing when it comes to leaders of powerful militaries. Thus I'd rather feel safe with Clinton's mehnes keeping the GOP out of the WH than running a more ideal block of positions I can easily see the country that elected Reagan and re-elected Dubya deciding isn't 'strong enough' or w/e. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alguien Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Just now, OnionAhaiReborn said: Against Sanders, yes. I'm talking about who is the more electable choice for Democrats to send into the general election. Trump currently leads the Republican field by a wide margin, but few are willing to argue that he's the Republican's most electable choice for the general election. 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Marquis de Leech Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 I think the Sanders/Clinton electability argument is seriously overblown. Whoever wins, the Democratic coalition will coalesce around the nominee - the electorate is so incredibly polarised these days that there will be minuscule cross-over. Recall that we were having exactly the same argument back in 2008 about Obama/Clinton, and in hindsight either would have won the general election comfortably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Marquis de Leech Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 1 hour ago, Altherion said: Keep in mind that if it is You-Know-Who vs. Sanders, Bloomberg will quite likely run as well (based precisely on your thoughts about the Americans who won't vote for a socialist, but don't like boorishness). It would be a fairly amusing election with a choice between three radically different flavors of New Yorker. It would be a ****ing terrifying election. A Bloomberg run is the most realistic way of ensuring President Donald J. Trump, because all he would do is take votes off Sanders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Dunno about that. Obama won comfortably because record numbers of voters - especially young and minority - turned out, and a lot of that was because of Obama. Clinton might have won that, but don't discount Obama's appeal there. And it's even more likely that Romney would have beaten Clinton in 2012. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Marquis de Leech Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Obama won comfortably because of the Global Financial Crisis and a toxic Republican incumbent. Swap around Indiana and Arkansas, and you have a pretty similar results with Clinton. 2012 assumes four years of alternate history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Even if Clinton doesn't get the same youth turnout as Obama did, I think she'd replace that with working class whites. Youth generally break heavily for Democrats, but there's never very many of them that actually vote. The white vote share for democrats since 1996 has been: 44%, 42%, 41%, 43%, 39%. If Clinton can just get that back to 42%, she can afford to lose quite a few youth voters without a problem. And I still think Clinton can do that. That's assuming she maintains the Democratic vote share among minorities, and I think that won't be a problem for her. Not with these Republicans. By contrast, I worry that Sanders won't drive the same level of turnout among African Americans and I think that he'll lose white vote share over the Socialism! attacks. He'd do about the same as Clinton among other minorities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Arryn Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Yeah, I wonder if Trump's brand of xeno-crazy might be a negative vote generator. I know it's never really happened, but maybe he's the guy who drives people out of their houses just to keep him out of the White House. Then again, and I cannot repeat this enough, the U.S. re-elected WMD's...er, we meant Freedom!/Gitmo/mission accomplished/etc. You cannot underestimate an electorate that's capable of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteGabriel Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 17 minutes ago, Fez said: Even if Clinton doesn't get the same youth turnout as Obama did, I think she'd replace that with working class whites. Youth generally break heavily for Democrats, but there's never very many of them that actually vote. The white vote share for democrats since 1996 has been: 44%, 42%, 41%, 43%, 39%. If Clinton can just get that back to 42%, she can afford to lose quite a few youth voters without a problem. And I still think Clinton can do that. Are you at all afraid of Clinton losing working class white votes to Trump? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karaddin Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Personally I remain pretty terrified of the polls being inaccurate and Trump sweeping the general as well. I know I'm not in the US, but it's not like y'all don't influence everything. Of particular concern to me is those results from NH with youth only breaking..what 55/45? to the Dems. I know the youth motivated enough to get out for a primary, particular in cold weather with long queues, may not be representative of the general turn out, but Trump isn't fitting the normal rules anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.