Jump to content

U.S. Elections: Is Keeping The SC Worth Risking A Dictatorship?


Mr. Chatywin et al.

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, The Great Unwashed said:

So I'm not usually one to complain about the moderators, but what was up with Elaine Quijano asking the question about the national debt and implying that the Trump plan and Clinton plan will both equally add to the national debt and then stating that this would be "disastrous"?

For context, Clinton's plan would add about $200 billion to the debt over the next decade. Trump's plan would add $5.3 trillionSource

The moderator was awful on substance. For example:

 

Quote

 

Instead, she asked just two questions about economic policy, and she explicitly attributed both of them to the “nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.” The first asked if the two vice presidential candidates are “concerned that adding more to the debt could be disastrous for the country.” The second warned of a grim future, “when the Social Security Trust Funds run out of money.”

So who is the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget? They are probably the leading advocacy group promoting the idea that federal deficits are out of control and shrinking them should be a top priority. Their board members include both Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles, co-chairs of a government commission that tried and failed to advance various proposals supported by deficit hawks in 2010. Pete Peterson, a billionaire who is probably the nation’s leading funder of anti-deficit advocacy, is also a board member.

 

https://thinkprogress.org/debate-moderator-outsourced-all-of-her-questions-on-the-economy-to-a-group-of-fiscal-conservatives-20b81a28159a#.w1d1bgwg6

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kalbear said:

So Gary Johnson has apparently stated that he guesses he wasn't meant to be president - and now his running mate has basically given up and is focused on stopping trump entirely.

When a third party says yep, don't vote third party, that's kind of special.

Since Clinton has a better margin of victory in a four way race than a two way race in most polls, wouldn't staying int he race have been a better move if the goal was to stop Trump? Is there some electoral college angle I'm missing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SerPaladin said:

Since Clinton has a better margin of victory in a four way race than a two way race in most polls, wouldn't staying int he race have been a better move if the goal was to stop Trump? Is there some electoral college angle I'm missing?

She doesn't. In virtually every poll listed she does worse in the 4 way.

Also

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clinton is losing youngsters and minorities to third party candidates, but the reason she is ahead is because Trump is doing worse among white voters than Romney (on balance, he does better among whites without a college degree and poorly among whites with a college degree). On balance, all these demographic rearrangements compared to previous years, say, put Clinton at +4.

The biggest fear for Democrats is white voters without a college degree showing up for the polls in numbers despite having shown little inclination for doing so in the past. But there is little evidence it will happen this time around. I guess the flip side is the Democrat's hoping for much higher hispanic turnout than usual etc etc....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Castel said:

It almost certainly did. There was a real-time look at focus group numbers during the presidential debate and one of the things noted was that everyone hated interruptions and talking over the moderator.

Which is odd since it seems like everyone does it.

I suspect that, like negative campaigning, everybody hates it but it's effective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

She doesn't. In virtually every poll listed she does worse in the 4 way.

Huh. RCP has it as a tenth of a percentage difference your way, EP has two tenths your way. FiveThirtyEight won't show me those differences. Those are tiny margins, but I cede the point. Anecdotally, most Gary Johnson voters I know are Republicans who don't like Trump, along with the handful of objectivist true believers.

If Gary Johnson wants to hurt Trump, it looks like he should bow out immediately

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, SerPaladin said:

Huh. RCP has it as a tenth of a percentage difference your way, EP has two tenths your way. FiveThirtyEight won't show me those differences. Those are tiny margins, but I cede the point. Anecdotally, most Gary Johnson voters I know are Republicans who don't like Trump, along with the handful of objectivist true believers.

If Gary Johnson wants to hurt Trump, it looks like he should bow out immediately

As an example, on the 3rd CBS had a poll where Clinton is up +6 in a two way, +4 in a 4 way. That's been the typical thing. Best to look at the same poll given to the same people and if they're asked 2 vs. 4 way. And while Trump loses a bit, Clinton loses more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

Clinton is losing youngsters and minorities to third party candidates, but the reason she is ahead is because Trump is doing worse among white voters than Romney (on balance, he does better among whites without a college degree and poorly among whites with a college degree). On balance, all these demographic rearrangements compared to previous years, say, put Clinton at +4.

The biggest fear for Democrats is white voters without a college degree showing up for the polls in numbers despite having shown little inclination for doing so in the past. But there is little evidence it will happen this time around. I guess the flip side is the Democrat's hoping for much higher hispanic turnout than usual etc etc....

Yeah, well, young people are stupid:

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/10/3/13122208/trump-financial-regulation

Quote

 

Gallup polled young Americans about whether they prefer Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton on a range of issues, and Trump holds the advantage on just one: “government regulation of Wall Street and banks,” where he’s ahead by 7 points.

Trump’s edge here is probably a legacy of the Democratic primary, where Clinton was repeatedly assailed by Bernie Sanders as relatively soft on Wall Street and where her paid speaking appearances for Goldman Sachs were a prominent issue.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

Clinton is losing youngsters and minorities to third party candidates, but the reason she is ahead is because Trump is doing worse among white voters than Romney (on balance, he does better among whites without a college degree and poorly among whites with a college degree). On balance, all these demographic rearrangements compared to previous years, say, put Clinton at +4.

The biggest fear for Democrats is white voters without a college degree showing up for the polls in numbers despite having shown little inclination for doing so in the past. But there is little evidence it will happen this time around. I guess the flip side is the Democrat's hoping for much higher hispanic turnout than usual etc etc....

I think Trump's base is specifically white men without a degree, I saw an article somewhere yesterday that white women of all educational categories are going to Clinton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Maltaran said:

I think Trump's base is specifically white men without a degree, I saw an article somewhere yesterday that white women of all educational categories are going to Clinton.

That's correct, though it's not always been that way. 

Also, Buzzfeed apparently is releasing all of Trump's bankruptcy filings in the 90s. This ought to be interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, and the window to register new voters in that demographic is slowly closing (in Michigan it is October 11, and I see no effort to register first time voters from the Trumpers)

Someone as 'smart' as him should have easily figured out how to get this group to the polls at historically high numbers......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...