|
|
Post by dupersuper on Sept 3, 2015 19:55:21 GMT -5
Investigation underway after mass baptism at Georgia high school. It'd be great if it turned out to be a water balloon fight... |
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,872
|
Post by shaxper on Sept 4, 2015 8:32:38 GMT -5
I think Sanders could win.
Really, I do.
I think he has an excellent chance of clinching the primaries. Polls are already showing this.
I agree that, under normal circumstances, the socialism thing would prevent him from winning a general election, but unless the Republicans run Jeb Bush, their candidate will be an extremist, and liberals and ethnic minorities (if it isn't Cruz) will vote in droves for the guy who isn't him.
Let's be clear -- if anyone other than Bush gets the Republican nomination, the election will be about whether you're for those extremist views or against them. Who the Democratic candidate is will be very secondary.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2015 11:00:29 GMT -5
I dunno, shax. Is there a bigger go-to shibboleth in American politics than "socialist," presumably made even more toxic when the target has embraced the label? In contrast, "reactionary," "racist," "redneck" & the like have no traction whatsoever in the over-arching scheme of things, I suppose up to & including "idiot." Hell, among the, shall we say, less thoughtful element of the electorate (i.e. the clear majority down in this part of the country) they're pretty much self-applied as a source of pride. I see & hear it every damned day, more or less, though not surprisingly it's gotten better now that I've started unfollowing FB friends wholesale.
(Well, except I guess for "idiot." But even then, when a candidate is a demonstrable example of a halfwit, he gets "elected" [with the connivance of a criminally controlled Supreme Court the first time around, of course] twice. Apparently, part of the voter irrationale was that the guy would make a nice beer-drinking partner, or some such insanity. And people wonder why I want no more to do with the electoral process than I do with the operations of the slaughterhouse floor.)
Then again, there's every good chance that my natural cynicism, while near-lifelong (I remember writing a letter to a great-aunt back in '76 explaining why I wouldn't bother to register to vote if I were old enough to* ... as it happens, I didn't turn 18 till the year after that*), has been badly exacerbated by spending the last 14 years exiled in one of the most hateful, backwards voting bases in this unfortunate nation. (Not that Arkansas is any better these days, god help me.) If anything, back during the run-up to the 2008 campaign I would've said that being nonwhite was been an even bigger obstacle, & obviously I couldn't have been more wrong.
Not that it would matter a whit, of course, unless President Sanders' election was somehow accompanied by a flood of progressive victories in the state elections for the Senate & House. Though at least it would feel good for a fleeting few weeks or maybe even months, which in my admittedly jaded perception is what Obama's 2008 triumph amounted to.
*And, yes, I did vote in the first presidential election I was eligible to participate in. Voted for Carter for re-election, as well as my state's young first-term governor, Bill Clinton. Both lost. That showed me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Sept 4, 2015 11:22:29 GMT -5
In the ten national elections I've voted in, I've voted for the winning candidate exactly thrice.
1976 - Ford (R)
1980 - Anderson (I)
1984 - Mondale (D)
1988 - Dukakis (D)
1992 - Clinton (D)
1996 - Nader (I)
2000 - Gore (D)
2004 - Kerry (D)
2008 - Obama (D)
2012 - Obama (D)
I'm reasonably confident I'll be voting for the winner next year. I'm rooting for Sanders but can live with Clinton or Biden.
Cei-U!
I summon the hanging chad!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2015 11:34:29 GMT -5
As for me, Carter didn't win in 1980, Monica Moorhead didn't win in '96 & Nader didn't win in 2000. I can't remember who I voted for in '92 -- it was a vote against the future imbecile president's father -- but it might well have been Clinton. (I think I voted for Jerry Brown in the primary.)
Third time wasn't the charm, but so far fourth time has been when it comes to helping, however minuscule the impact of my participation, validate a system I regard as corrupt beyond redemption. Who knows? As indicated elsewhere, I might feel somewhat differently if I weren't surrounded by hopeless reactionaries, though I doubt it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2015 13:46:44 GMT -5
I think Sanders could win. Really, I do. I think he has an excellent chance of clinching the primaries. Polls are already showing this. I agree that, under normal circumstances, the socialism thing would prevent him from winning a general election, but unless the Republicans run Jeb Bush, their candidate will be an extremist, and liberals and ethnic minorities (if it isn't Cruz) will vote in droves for the guy who isn't him. Let's be clear -- if anyone other than Bush gets the Republican nomination, the election will be about whether you're for those extremist views or against them. Who the Democratic candidate is will be very secondary. Even if the Republicans run a Latino candidate, he's not getting any major endorsements from Latino groups. The only thing it could possibly do is alienate their racist voters, which is not an insignificant demographic. |
|
|
|
Post by Rob Allen on Sept 4, 2015 14:34:36 GMT -5
In the ten national elections I've voted in, I've voted for the winning candidate exactly thrice. 1976 - Ford (R) 1980 - Anderson (I) 1984 - Mondale (D) 1988 - Dukakis (D) 1992 - Clinton (D)1996 - Nader (I) 2000 - Gore (D) 2004 - Kerry (D) 2008 - Obama (D)
2012 - Obama (D)I'm reasonably confident I'll be voting for the winner next year. I'm rooting for Sanders but can live with Clinton or Biden. Cei-U! I summon the hanging chad! That's my score also - three out of ten. 1976 - Carter (D)1980 - Carter (D) (after campaigning for Anderson, I chickened out) 1984 - Mondale (D) 1988 - Dukakis (D) 1992 - Marrou (L) (my a-pox-on-both-their-houses period) 1996 - Browne (L) 2000 - Gore (D) 2004 - Kerry (D) 2008 - Obama (D)
2012 - Obama (D) |
|
|
|
Post by Ish Kabbible on Sept 4, 2015 15:55:02 GMT -5
My political efforts began as a teen working for the George McGovern campaign. Its been downhill since then
|
|
|
|
Post by wildfire2099 on Sept 4, 2015 18:52:56 GMT -5
My political efforts began as a teen working for the George McGovern campaign. Its been downhill since then I met George McGovern not too far before he died at a conference for work... he was an extremely nice man. I've had a pretty good track record for picking winners in the national election, but not in the primary.. though I'm not sure how well that panned out. |
|
|
|
Post by the4thpip on Sept 5, 2015 2:21:19 GMT -5
Former obvious front runner Jeb Bush's campaign is doing so badly, he now comes in third even in the Florida primary poll:
|
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Sept 5, 2015 8:21:11 GMT -5
I dunno, shax. Is there a bigger go-to shibboleth in American politics than "socialist," presumably made even more toxic when the target has embraced the label? In contrast, "reactionary," "racist," "redneck" & the like have no traction whatsoever in the over-arching scheme of things, I suppose up to & including "idiot." Hell, among the, shall we say, less thoughtful element of the electorate (i.e. the clear majority down in this part of the country) they're pretty much self-applied as a source of pride. I see & hear it every damned day, more or less, though not surprisingly it's gotten better now that I've started unfollowing FB friends wholesale. (Well, except I guess for "idiot." But even then, when a candidate is a demonstrable example of a halfwit, he gets "elected" [with the connivance of a criminally controlled Supreme Court the first time around, of course] twice. Apparently, part of the voter irrationale was that the guy would make a nice beer-drinking partner, or some such insanity. And people wonder why I want no more to do with the electoral process than I do with the operations of the slaughterhouse floor.) Then again, there's every good chance that my natural cynicism, while near-lifelong (I remember writing a letter to a great-aunt back in '76 explaining why I wouldn't bother to register to vote if I were old enough to* ... as it happens, I didn't turn 18 till the year after that*), has been badly exacerbated by spending the last 14 years exiled in one of the most hateful, backwards voting bases in this unfortunate nation. (Not that Arkansas is any better these days, god help me.) If anything, back during the run-up to the 2008 campaign I would've said that being nonwhite was been an even bigger obstacle, & obviously I couldn't have been more wrong. Not that it would matter a whit, of course, unless President Sanders' election was somehow accompanied by a flood of progressive victories in the state elections for the Senate & House. Though at least it would feel good for a fleeting few weeks or maybe even months, which in my admittedly jaded perception is what Obama's 2008 triumph amounted to. *And, yes, I did vote in the first presidential election I was eligible to participate in. Voted for Carter for re-election, as well as my state's young first-term governor, Bill Clinton. Both lost. That showed me. Eh, the "redneck" "bible thumper" vote alone doesn't win you the big house as the states where they hold majority have like two votes each. McCain won just about every state in the south and the midwest but still lost to Obama. To be President you need to win New York, New England, California and Florida and if you don't have something approaching a moderate stance you aren't getting those votes. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2015 10:49:15 GMT -5
I dunno, shax. Is there a bigger go-to shibboleth in American politics than "socialist," presumably made even more toxic when the target has embraced the label? In contrast, "reactionary," "racist," "redneck" & the like have no traction whatsoever in the over-arching scheme of things, I suppose up to & including "idiot." Hell, among the, shall we say, less thoughtful element of the electorate (i.e. the clear majority down in this part of the country) they're pretty much self-applied as a source of pride. I see & hear it every damned day, more or less, though not surprisingly it's gotten better now that I've started unfollowing FB friends wholesale. (Well, except I guess for "idiot." But even then, when a candidate is a demonstrable example of a halfwit, he gets "elected" [with the connivance of a criminally controlled Supreme Court the first time around, of course] twice. Apparently, part of the voter irrationale was that the guy would make a nice beer-drinking partner, or some such insanity. And people wonder why I want no more to do with the electoral process than I do with the operations of the slaughterhouse floor.) Then again, there's every good chance that my natural cynicism, while near-lifelong (I remember writing a letter to a great-aunt back in '76 explaining why I wouldn't bother to register to vote if I were old enough to* ... as it happens, I didn't turn 18 till the year after that*), has been badly exacerbated by spending the last 14 years exiled in one of the most hateful, backwards voting bases in this unfortunate nation. (Not that Arkansas is any better these days, god help me.) If anything, back during the run-up to the 2008 campaign I would've said that being nonwhite was been an even bigger obstacle, & obviously I couldn't have been more wrong. Not that it would matter a whit, of course, unless President Sanders' election was somehow accompanied by a flood of progressive victories in the state elections for the Senate & House. Though at least it would feel good for a fleeting few weeks or maybe even months, which in my admittedly jaded perception is what Obama's 2008 triumph amounted to. *And, yes, I did vote in the first presidential election I was eligible to participate in. Voted for Carter for re-election, as well as my state's young first-term governor, Bill Clinton. Both lost. That showed me. That would be much more of a comfort than it is if 2000 hadn't happened. Granted, outright fraud & criminal manipulation at the highest levels were necessary to elevate the losing candidate to the White House, but if it happened once it could happen again ... not to mention the fact that the final results were close enough to permit the entire felonious enterprise to succeed in the first place. I didn't pay a whole lot of attention to that brazen swindle at the time because my personal life was in smoldering ruins, but in retrospect I think a lot of us are walking around with almost the equivalent of PTSD as a result. |
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Sept 5, 2015 10:56:23 GMT -5
"Communist" is still a bigger red flag (no pun intended) for Joe Sixpack and Nancy Nascar than "socialist" (though I suspect Joe and Nancy don't know--or care--that there's a difference).
Cei-U!
I summon the American public's impatience with details!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2015 11:18:30 GMT -5
No doubt ... though my sense of the noun is that any time it's used, it's pretty much understood that the accuser is being over the top. It's the right-wing equivalent of "fascist," which in turn is, I guess, politespeak for "Nazi."
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 5, 2015 11:42:04 GMT -5
Of course, in states akin to this one "communist"="owns fewer than 30 guns."
|
|
