If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Obama didn't consider it politically expedient to be pro-gay marriage until four years ago, but that Ted Cruz, he's a Nazi.
Ted Cruz and Obama diverge politically on a bit more than gay marriage. Anyone with an modicum of sense doesn't believe he's a Nazi. It's not like I was calling him Hitllery- I just said he was on the far-right wing on the national republican party.
You can replace "Nazi" with "boogeyman". I assumed it was clear from context the label was meant rhetorically.
I guess it's not clear- what was your point? That Obama changed his position on gay marriage so Cruz is moderate? I'm not being flip, I really don't understand what you are getting at.
I guess it's not clear- what was your point? That Obama changed his position on gay marriage so Cruz is moderate? I'm not being flip, I really don't understand what you are getting at.
I'm saying it's hard to put that particular position in the far right pile considering how recently Obama held it.
So aside from voters not showing up or chickening out, I wonder how much of Trumps loss in Iowa could be blamed on his lack of infrastructure. He spent very little in Iowa, which is fine if he did it because it's Iowa. I'm suspicious, however, that since he's self-funding he's trying not to spend any money, so I'd like to know what he's doing in NH. Because by default I want to dock his predicted performance at least half of what he underperformed in Iowa, which is like four percentage points.
Re: Rubio, he's a bit hard to read, partly on purpose. I thought he was against abortion exemptions, but retracing the debate transcript, what he did was refuse to endorse any position on exemptions. I think he was trying to be all things to all people. Then there's the fact that he got elected with help from the tea party, but fell out with them over immigration. I read him as a straight republican - neither center leaning nor far right. The chart above makes feel like I'm not too far off.
Regarding Kasich, do you think he's indicative of how Reagan wouldn't survive in the current GOP? He was a Reagan republican in the 80s congress and is a social and fiscal conservative while maintaining some heart and a grasp of reality.
Not really. there is quite a spectrum. While most if not all say they disagree with the way the Supreme Court went about it, Bush, Kasich, and Graham were all pretty much of the mind to leave it alone and get on with things. Rand Paul thinks the Government should get out a marriage all together and it should be based on contracts between individuals gay or straight. Trump and Carson have made incoherent ramblings on the subject, but I wouldn't say they are representative of the National Republican Party anyway.
Rubio has said that the ruling does not constitute settled law and that he would appoint Supreme Court justices to overturn it. Cruz also believes it's not settled law, calls for civil disobedience to oppose it, still promotes a constitutional amendment defining marriage as being between one man and one woman, and speaks of the struggle against gay rights in terms of war.
There is definitely a scale, and Cruz and Rubio are on the far right of it.
So aside from voters not showing up or chickening out, I wonder how much of Trumps loss in Iowa could be blamed on his lack of infrastructure. He spent very little in Iowa, which is fine if he did it because it's Iowa. I'm suspicious, however, that since he's self-funding he's trying not to spend any money, so I'd like to know what he's doing in NH. Because by default I want to dock his predicted performance at least half of what he underperformed in Iowa, which is like four percentage points.
Re: Rubio, he's a bit hard to read, partly on purpose. I thought he was against abortion exemptions, but retracing the debate transcript, what he did was refuse to endorse any position on exemptions. I think he was trying to be all things to all people. Then there's the fact that he got elected with help from the tea party, but fell out with them over immigration. I read him as a straight republican - neither center leaning nor far right. The chart above makes feel like I'm not too far off.
Regarding Kasich, do you think he's indicative of how Reagan wouldn't survive in the current GOP? He was a Reagan republican in the 80s congress and is a social and fiscal conservative while maintaining some heart and a grasp of reality.
Romney did okay. I think Kaisich's problem is he's a nobody.
They do, and that was my point. Even the Right moves, over time, they're simply more cautious. Sometimes that's good, sometimes it's bad, but generally it serves to counter erratic movements from the Left.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Romney did okay. I think Kaisich's problem is he's a nobody.
Ignoring the wailing and gnashing of teeth. Perry, Cain, and Gingrich all had leads before the electorate essentially gave up. And if you listen to some on the right, he lost because he was not conservative enough.
Kasichs problem isn't just that he's nobody. It's that he serves a heaping dose of reality to the electorate without regards to their wants or emotions.
Also his name, Kasich, doesn't roll off the tongue. That matters more than anyone wants to admit.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Also his name, Kasich, doesn't roll off the tongue. That matters more than anyone wants to admit.
I stopped believing in things like that ever since Barack "Hussein" Obama got elected. If America can elect a black man with a foreign sounding name and the middle name of a recently deposed dictator, Kasich is not a problem.
I stopped believing in things like that ever since Barack "Hussein" Obama got elected. If America can elect a black man with a foreign sounding name and the middle name of a recently deposed dictator, Kasich is not a problem.
His lack of eyebrows might be, though.
You may want to rethink your position here. The Captain has a spreadsheet after all.
"Obama" is easy to say and remember. I wasn't talking about the content of the name, just the way it sounds. Several years ago we had a county commission primary, one guy was named Ogle (very common here) and another named Kaczmarczyk (I believe that's right, not 100% sure), both guys were almost carbon copies of each other, if anything Kaczmarczyk was the better candidate; more affable and less baggage, and he spent 2-3x more on his campaign. It essentially came down to people recognizing and being comfortable with a name (Ogle), many admitted this after the fact, and he won by 10-12%.
For many "President Kasich" doesn't sound right, it's silly (like some people going apeshit over "Hussein", which they did) but that doesn't mean it isn't a factor.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
I have to say, this might one of the best gifs I've seen in a long time. Not only for the humor, but its pretty damn seamless.
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
Liberals and conservatives are necessary. Without the former there would be little growth, and without the latter society would be reactionary and unbalanced. Not many liberals were for gay marriage just 12 years ago, including the Clintons, Obama, and 90% of Democratic legislators. Same goes for pot legalization and a host of other issues. If you plucked a moderate Repub out of our time and plunked him/her into the 1970s, they'd be a fairly radical Dem.
I suppose if you measure it by social tolerance, sure. But that's a tough line to fight because they have no legal recourse on the issues. interracial marriage, sodomy, gay marriage, they can't fight it, so of course they've accepted them. Meanwhile, thanks to the success of abortion laws, they're moving further right on that than they were 20 years ago.
What other issues come to mind making today's conservatives yesterdays liberals?
Evolution and climate change come to mind as two subjects where they've regressed.
The thing is, he doesn't have to do all that well with the Latino votes to flip the states I think he flips - FL, NV, NM, CO. I got to those four by going to the Fivethirtyeight simulator and pulling the slider for the latino vote to 50-50 - not unreasonable, I think.
I think it is. I think getting a latino won't meaningfully flip the vote, it will merely enthuse those within the base. Much like how more blacks came out for Obama. But unlike blacks, hispanics don't have nearly the numbers to have as meaningful a statistical effect. If there's one positive thing to say about the GOP abandoning all pretense at appealing to minorities, it's that the white bloc is still large enough that a swing of a few percentage points can change an election. If Trump or someone else can get them to the polls on the outrage card, it might just work.
Also, a lot of people seem to overlook that Cruz and Rubio are Cuban which seems to be the outlier bloc of the hispanic vote. And one that is shrinking.
Didn't see the Republican debate, but the narrative I'm seeing is Christie put his boot in Rubio's eye.
It was Christie at his best. He completely deconstructed Rubio, then called him out while just casually leaning on the podium with amused look on his face. Rubio even fired back with some legit points, but Christie kept at it and flustered him. It was a bizarre watch when he kept repeating the line like a malfunctioning robot on a 60s tv show.
I think it is. I think getting a latino won't meaningfully flip the vote, it will merely enthuse those within the base. Much like how more blacks came out for Obama. But unlike blacks, hispanics don't have nearly the numbers to have as meaningful a statistical effect. If there's one positive thing to say about the GOP abandoning all pretense at appealing to minorities, it's that the white bloc is still large enough that a swing of a few percentage points can change an election. If Trump or someone else can get them to the polls on the outrage card, it might just work.
Also, a lot of people seem to overlook that Cruz and Rubio are Cuban which seems to be the outlier bloc of the hispanic vote. And one that is shrinking.
It is all math at this point, and of course reducing a big group of people into just "latino" is an oversimplification. Rubio should bring in his home state of Florida, and that alone makes him an electable candidate. It doesn't take too much pulling on sliders (raise white turnout a notch to compensate for not having Romney anymore, drop black turnout a bit to compensate for not having Obama, give GOP a smaller boost among Latinos) to make the EC map come out convincingly red (one can also easily get a result where the GOP picks up OH, FL, VA and 50% of the popular vote but only 266 EC votes, which would probably cause a riot if it happened).
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
I have to say, this might one of the best gifs I've seen in a long time. Not only for the humor, but its pretty damn seamless.
I suppose if you measure it by social tolerance, sure. But that's a tough line to fight because they have no legal recourse on the issues. interracial marriage, sodomy, gay marriage, they can't fight it, so of course they've accepted them. Meanwhile, thanks to the success of abortion laws, they're moving further right on that than they were 20 years ago.
What other issues come to mind making today's conservatives yesterdays liberals?
Evolution and climate change come to mind as two subjects where they've regressed.
I don't believe they would "regress" on social tolerance, what would be the evidence for that assertion? And I can't find where any social conservative has ever been gung-ho over climate change ("global warming" has been around a while), and evangelicals have always fought against evolution. How have they "regressed"? From what I've seen, conservatives will eventually come to accept logical changes in society, it simply takes more time. While that may not be fast enough for many on the Left, oftentimes trying to brute-force a conservative to change will simply backfire on you and make them set their heels.
So while you may not get their open support, more often than not you will receive their somewhat grudging tolerance. My first wife was black, and while I know some people in our community disapproved, we didn't actually encounter violent opposition to our marriage until we visited her family in New Jersey. That's a far cry from the South of the 1950s and 60s.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
I suppose I should get my predictions in before exit polls start tainting my purity.
NH
1.Trump underperformed polls by at least 4 points
2. Kasich barely. 2-4 are within 3 points of each other
3. Rubio didn't sink fast enough
4. Bush
5. Cruz
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Hillary lost every demographic group except seniors and incomes of $200,000+.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Sad that so many Democrats think taking others hard earned money instead of knowing how to make your OWN MONEY is a good idea. I guess the union school teachers have wasted our time with the poorly prepared young kids who also think socialism will work, and lack the morals and character to realize its wrong.
Sad that so many Democrats think taking others hard earned money instead of knowing how to make your OWN MONEY is a good idea. I guess the union school teachers have wasted our time with the poorly prepared young kids who also think socialism will work, and lack the morals and character to realize its wrong.
Capitalists: "Wealth is created"
Socialists: "Wealth is taken"
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
I suppose I should get my predictions in before exit polls start tainting my purity.
NH
1.Trump underperformed polls by at least 4 points
2. Kasich barely. 2-4 are within 3 points of each other
3. Rubio didn't sink fast enough
4. Bush
5. Cruz
Punditry time!
1. Was the right pick but Trump over performed polls.
2. Right pick but Kasich was a clear second. More on this later.
3. I was wrong. Rubio did have enough time to collapse
4. Was Bush but Cruz snuck by this morning.
So what happens from here? Previously I mentioned that since 80 the eventual nominee finished 1 or 2 in NH. This year we have some strange circumstances so I'm going riff the off it. Word is Kasich was the beneficiary of Rubios misfortune, so his finish is somewhat tainted. Meanwhile evangelical Cruz still managed a 3rd place finish. Rubio might recover but I'm not convinced he has the time. So I think it's down to Trump or Cruz. Trump has to convince me he's willing to fund properly and Cruz that his Iowa win wasn't just a steal from Carson.
Clinton's called in a lot of favors to suppress polling results in SC.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
538 had interesting article contrasting how while in previous states Bernie's strength was the lack of racial diversity, in the upcoming ones their economic weakness may be a factor instead. Adds a new dimension to the discussion of the democratic candidate's strengths and weaknesses within electoral populations.
Another narrow one for Clinton, in the South no less. Sanders is still looking good.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Nevada is "South"? "Southwest" perhaps. But "South"?
OAW
It's non-Northeast or Northwest, where Sanders' supposed "strongholds" exist. At any rate, he still did much better than the polls indicated, once again indicating that they're worthless this year.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Actually the spread was about 1% bigger than the recent polls said, which is still pretty close, but I guess the counting may not have been done when you posted that? There has been a massive move in recent weeks, though, that much is clear. Which is what the pundits told us, honestly, that primary voters outside Iowa and NH didn't start thinking about this until the last few weeks.
Trump continues to amaze me. I don't get why people keep voting for the guy. Are the other candidates that unlikable? I thought Cruz would outperform SC.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
Where? I was seeing 58 Clinton, 42 Sanders all week.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Fair enough. I don't support Silver and rarely go there.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
Trump continues to amaze me. I don't get why people keep voting for the guy. Are the other candidates that unlikable? I thought Cruz would outperform SC.
Typical low information voters? These first primaries also open primaries and Trump grabbed some of that vote. We'll see how he does in the closed primary states.
Trump has a core following. The rest were split between at one time>10 candidates. Hopefully with Bush dropping out, as Kaisich and Carson should do, those voters should get behind Cruz or Rubio. Trump is not on the radar for the "second choice" list of those voters. Despite Trump's claim he could shoot someone and not lose votes, he will cross the line and p ss off voters.
(
Last edited by Chongo; Feb 21, 2016 at 03:46 PM.
)
Top