The Anti-Targ Posted February 21, 2016 Share Posted February 21, 2016 I thought this was an interesting observation. " Rubio crushed Trump 47 percent to 21 percent among voters whose top priority is having a nominee who “can win in November.” Worrisome for the Florida senator, though: That group was just 15 percent of the electorate. " https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/whitehouse/trump-clinton-ride-key-groups-to-clear-front-runner-status/2016/02/21/d916482e-d8e3-11e5-8210-f0bd8de915f6_story.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan the Man Baratheon Posted February 21, 2016 Share Posted February 21, 2016 1 hour ago, TerraPrime said: Liberal values like not talking about a national registry for all Muslims and not banning all immigrants from Muslim-majority countries? Yeah, those dirty freedom-hating liberals. Couldn't be anymore wrong. So much misinformation. He only wants for Syrian refugees. Ofcourse if you have any material that comes after this article where he might have said it, please link it. Read this, perhaps the unbiased piece on Trump regarding his comments on muslims and how liberal extremists have twisted his comments to suit their agenda. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/nov/24/donald-trumps-comments-database-american-muslims/ Quote He then explained that he couldn’t hear the MSNBC or NBC reporter’s questions well. "But I do want databases for those people coming in, but I also insist on a wall. And it was all fine, all of a sudden I end up with some story, and I’m saying, what are you talking about? So here’s the story -- just to say it clear -- I want surveillance of these people. I want surveillance if we have to, and I don’t care. Are you ready for this folks? Are you ready? They’re going to make it such a big deal … I want surveillance of certain mosques." Question: "You did stir up a controversy with those comments over the database. Let's try to clear that up. Are you unequivocally now ruling out a database on all Muslims?" Answer: "No, not at all," Trump responded. "I want a database for the refugees that -- if they come into the country. We have no idea who these people are. When the Syrian refugees are going to start pouring into this country, we don't know if they're ISIS, we don't know if it's a Trojan horse. And I definitely want a database and other checks and balances. We want to go with watchlists. We want to go with databases. And we have no choice." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted February 21, 2016 Share Posted February 21, 2016 On the "English only" thing thought this was a good article about how both sides were wrong and right. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/21/why-neither-side-is-quite-right-in-their-reads-on-that-dolores-huerta-english-only-shout-down/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan the Man Baratheon Posted February 21, 2016 Share Posted February 21, 2016 34 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said: I thought this was an interesting observation. " Rubio crushed Trump 47 percent to 21 percent among voters whose top priority is having a nominee who “can win in November.” Worrisome for the Florida senator, though: That group was just 15 percent of the electorate. " https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/whitehouse/trump-clinton-ride-key-groups-to-clear-front-runner-status/2016/02/21/d916482e-d8e3-11e5-8210-f0bd8de915f6_story.html Oh and here is a counter poll for people decrying his ''''''''''''''unelectibility''''''''''''''''''''. Competence and decisiviness is key amongst Republican voters which Trump is the champion of and they also value it higher than likability. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/21/ap-poll-86-republicans-think-donald-trump-can-win-general-election/ Quote His critics have argued for months he’ll never be able to grow that wide-but-only-so-deep coalition by clashing with Pope Francis, attacking former President George W. Bush and skipping debates like he did once in Iowa. His negatives, they say, are just too high. But a new AP-GfK poll finds registered Republicans and GOP-leaning voters put Trump at the top of the still-unwieldy GOP field when it comes to which candidate fits best with their stand on the issues. They give Trump the best marks for competence and decisiveness. Far more Republicans than not say they’d vote for Trump in the general election, and 86 percent of Republican voters think he can win in November – giving him a 15 percentage point advantage over his nearest rival. By comparison, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) 79% leads the field in terms of favorability and likability. But he’s yet to come close to the top of the pack, perhaps because those same voters put “likability” at the bottom of their list of priorities, with just half of GOP respondents calling it important. Competence and decisiveness, the measures on which Trump dominates, were important to more than 9 out of 10 Republican voters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan the Man Baratheon Posted February 21, 2016 Share Posted February 21, 2016 Trump support is rising Hollywood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan the Man Baratheon Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 10 minutes ago, Triskan said: Very scientific. Very much! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 6 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said: I can't get rid of the quote above. Lokisnow, I there a particular reason you are refering to Sander's supporters as "Bernie bros"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Pepper Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 20 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said: I can't get rid of the quote above. Lokisnow, I there a particular reason you are refering to Sander's supporters as "Bernie bros"? He's talking about a subset of Bernie supporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 6 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said: He's talking about a subset of Bernie supporters. I think lockisnow is using the term to refer to all Sanders' supporters in this case. Which would not be how the term is "defined" (as much as any such term can be defined). It's usually just attributed to the type of people that link is referring too. Young white internet-active males who support Sanders in a rather trolly vitriolic way. The subtitle "Live by the Redditors, die by the Redditors." kinda covers it pretty well I think. Not reflective of the candidate himself, obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maithanet Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 3 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said: Honestly, I don't see anything as effective as getting the Democrat vote mobilized as Trump winning the GOP nomination. There is no way I'm staying home if that guy is on the other side of the ledger. The possibility of that man becoming President is far more motivating for me than whether or not I particularly want to vote for Hilary or not. I agree 100%. I'm not super thrilled with Sanders or Clinton, nor about yet another election where the Dems are playing defense to prevent the apocalypse rather than, ya know, actually make some progress is really tiresome. But the thought of a Trump (or Cruz really) presidency is just so awful, I'm sure I would have to make a donation and possibly start volunteering just to do what little I can to prevent Virginia from going Republican. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnionAhaiReborn Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 3 hours ago, lokisnow said: Personally, I agree slightly more with sanders on the issues (96% according to "i side with", 92% with clinton), but I slightly support Clinton more because I think she has been more honest in the primary than sanders who pledges revolution, but does not support coalition building to make a revolution possible--so his rhetoric rings incredibly empty and outright false to me. The Obama years have reduced the size of the Democratic party (inclusive of all partisan elections) by at least one third, it has been utterly devastating and seemingly unaddressed, sanders really COULD do something about that because the system has enormous slack in it that would support a new sanders faction given how depleted the democratic party is. That is a historic anomaly and a yuuge opportunity to make his rhetoric reality, but he is doing nothing to take advantage of that opportunity, again a very typical politician move to look out only for oneself. This is a ridiculous complaint. Bernie Sanders is a 74 year old man who decided to spend a year campaigning for an office he had almost no chance of attaining at the outset, and little more chance now, because he wanted to make sure there was a challenge to Clinton from the left (which there would not have been without him!), and get his democratic socialist ideas into public discourse. He's managed to build an unexpectedly strong campaign through millions of small donations, and the support of young volunteers and voters. When all is said and done, there is no real question that he's going to end up endorsing Hillary Clinton and helping her to become President. How exactly he is expected to satisfy your demand that he create a new faction in the party beyond what he's already doing is beyond me. The man cannot be expected to come from obscurity, take on the most famous name in Democratic politics, and at the same time, what, recruit candidates to primary challenge Democrats across the country (should we even want this?), or, conversely, manage to fund-raise for the DNC, established candidates, and state parties, even though Clinton long ago locked up almost all of their support and corralled them into a fundraising scheme with her? 'Only looking out for himself'- give me a fucking break. The man has almost no chance of winning and never did, he's not going to get anything out of this beyond the satisfaction that his message, the same one he's been pushing his entire career, has resonated with a generation of young Democrats, and you disparage him because he hasn't cleared some impossible hurdle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 Sanders could have been building a group for a long time now. There's no reason he had to start in 2015. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnionAhaiReborn Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 1 minute ago, Kalbear said: Sanders could have been building a group for a long time now. There's no reason he had to start in 2015. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Progressive_Caucus Co-founded it in 1991. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 More pertinent is the fact that if all this stuff is too hard or impossible then this whole revolution he keeps talking about is a lie. It's not gonna happen and he's not even trying to make it happen and I guess if we assume he never bothered supporting other candidates cause he didn't have the time/money/whatever, then he knew that all along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 Yep. And then he switched to the Democratic party, which basically killed it. What other young congressmen does he support? Where is the alignment with this progressive caucus? ETA: sorry, was thinking of another thing. That isn't a socialist organization at all. It certainly doesn't share his views on campaign reforms, wall Street reform or healthcare. Where is that group? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnionAhaiReborn Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 1 minute ago, Kalbear said: Yep. And then he switched to the Democratic party, which basically killed it. What other young congressmen does he support? Where is the alignment with this progressive caucus? What are you talking about? It still exists and has grown into the single largest caucus of House Democrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 Interestingly, alot of this stuff makes Sanders overlap alot with your kind of stereotypical third-party run. The lofty ideals, the insurgent campaign based on revolutionary rhetoric and the lack of support from other parts of the government and political sphere that is brushed off because voting for said candidate will make it all work out. It's kinda interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 Sorry, you're right, OAR. Was thinking of something else. That said - again - they don't share his policy views at all. They certainly aren't campaigning for them like that. Heck, most of them have endorsed Hillary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnionAhaiReborn Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 3 minutes ago, Kalbear said: Sorry, you're right, OAR. Was thinking of something else. That said - again - they don't share his policy views at all. They certainly aren't campaigning for them like that. Heck, most of them have endorsed Hillary. The two current co-chairs, Grijalva and Ellison, have endorsed Sanders. Here's Grijalva: “I couldn’t sit on the sidelines and wait for the tea leaves to be read better,” Mr. Grijalva said in an interview. “The positions he has taken and the values he holds are ones I share.” I don't know where you're pulling this idea that they don't share his policy views from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted February 22, 2016 Share Posted February 22, 2016 And the rest? I believe all but 7 have endorsed hillary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.