Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NYT: Tied, Rasmussen: Trump +7

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Daemon of Decay
    replied
    Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
    And that differs how from today???
    I haven't heard either major candidate discussing flaws in the Electoral College, for example.

    The current scenario seems to be far more "people vs establishment" while that was, to my flawed memory, more akin to a disagreement within the establishment on points of order.

    Jefferson and his Republican party swept to a landslide victory from the White House through congress. It literally was a sea change election. The voters played a role in it... it wasn't just arcane internecene political maneuvering.
    I thought that the resolution took congressional action after, what, a few dozen locked votes internally?

    I'd argue (again, from my flawed memory) the 1800 revolution had as its biggest outcome some fundamental changes in how the mechanics of government and presidential elections were resolved, making it more about the internal processes of government and not a revolution by "the people" against "the establishment" - more like "the establishment" against "the establishment".

    Leave a comment:


  • The Doctor
    replied
    Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
    Forgive me, but wasn't that more a conflict within the government bureaucracy and the politicians themselves surrounding flawed electoral mechanics?
    And that differs how from today???

    Jefferson's Republican party swept to a landslide victory from the White House through congress. It literally was a sea change election. The voters played a role in it... it wasn't just arcane internecene political maneuvering.
    Last edited by The Doctor; 14 Jul 16, 15:46.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daemon of Decay
    replied
    Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
    I think the "Revolution of 1800" might be a good historical analogy.
    Forgive me, but wasn't that more a conflict within the government bureaucracy and the politicians themselves surrounding flawed electoral mechanics?

    Leave a comment:


  • Daemon of Decay
    replied
    Originally posted by Gorque View Post
    How would this pan out? The extremes from both would form separate party's while the the elites would coalesce into a centrist party and continue with 'business as usual' i.e. trying to do nothing.
    Naw, the two major parties wouldn't combine since they are already centrist status quo parties and have no reason to merge due to a few minor social differences. It makes people think their choice has more impact than it really does.

    After all, Americans just want business as usual. Otherwise they wouldn't be voting for the same two parties who have led business as usual for centuries. The only people who may differ are those who have fooled themselves into thinking the candidates in this election offer real "hope and change".

    Now somebody voting for the CPUSA - that's an American who wants some real change!

    Leave a comment:


  • The Doctor
    replied
    Originally posted by Gorque View Post
    How would this pan out? The extremes from both would form separate party's while the the elites would coalesce into a centrist party and continue with 'business as usual' i.e. trying to do nothing.
    I think the "Revolution of 1800" might be a good historical analogy.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Doctor
    replied
    Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
    And I really couldn't be happier. I get one heck of an electoral show and the promise of a more politically disjointed American nation. That's a win-win.

    Now all we need is both parties to implode and it would really be my figurative birthday.
    We, as a nation, probably need a fair bit more of political tear-down before any meaningful healing can begin.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gorque
    replied
    Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
    Now all we need is both parties to implode and it would really be my figurative birthday.
    How would this pan out? The extremes from both would form separate party's while the the elites would coalesce into a centrist party and continue with 'business as usual' i.e. trying to do nothing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daemon of Decay
    replied
    Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
    This will not likely be a "healing" election.
    And I really couldn't be happier. I get one heck of an electoral show and the promise of a more politically disjointed American nation. That's a win-win.

    Now all we need is both parties to implode and it would really be my figurative birthday.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Doctor
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    If the protests, violence, and general social malaise continues in high gear, like it is at the moment, advantage Trump. People will blame it on the current administration and party in power... They always do.

    So, Obama in "Community organizer" (aka agitator) mode will just cripple Hillary's election chances.
    Trump could follow Nixon's 1968 law and order pathway to a very divisive victory.

    This will not likely be a "healing" election.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    If the protests, violence, and general social malaise continues in high gear, like it is at the moment, advantage Trump. People will blame it on the current administration and party in power... They always do.

    So, Obama in "Community organizer" (aka agitator) mode will just cripple Hillary's election chances.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gorque
    replied
    Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
    One thing that is almost a certainty, is that the winner will get less than 50% of the popular vote.
    True. There'll be some bleed-off to the 3rd party from those disaffected by the nominees.

    While Trump is a master of self-inflicted wounds, he is the only candidate with some upside potential. He could become a better candidate and improve his poll numbers. Her Hagness' ceiling is about 48%.
    I'm not enamored of the Hildebeest myself, but at the moment, to me she is the lesser of two pi$$-poor choices.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Doctor
    replied
    Originally posted by Gorque View Post
    This early, anything is possible, including the highly probable self-inflicted wounds by Trump. It should be an interesting and entertaining few weeks.
    One thing that is almost a certainty, is that the winner will get less than 50% of the popular vote.

    While Trump is a master of self-inflicted wounds, he is the only candidate with some upside potential. He could become a better candidate and improve his poll numbers. Her Hagness' ceiling is about 48%.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gorque
    replied
    Originally posted by The Doctor View Post
    The polling of just the past few days, has moved Trump from a 3:1 underdog to nearly a 3:2 underdog in the "polls plus" forecast. It even gives him a narrow lead in Ohio.

    The Clinton collapse is just beginning. That said, she could very easily eke out a narrow electoral victory with leas than 44% of the popular vote.
    This early, anything is possible, including the highly probable self-inflicted wounds by Trump. It should be an interesting and entertaining few weeks.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Doctor
    replied
    Originally posted by Gorque View Post
    My take away from reading Nate Silver's article is that individuals (you) shouldn't place too much emphasis on individual polls nor should they dismiss outliers either, but should instead take a wait and see attitude.
    The polling of just the past few days, has moved Trump from a 3:1 underdog to nearly a 3:2 underdog in the "polls plus" forecast. It even gives him a narrow lead in Ohio.

    The Clinton collapse is just beginning. That said, she could very easily eke out a narrow electoral victory with leas than 44% of the popular vote.
    Attached Files
    Last edited by The Doctor; 14 Jul 16, 12:27.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gorque
    replied
    My take away from reading Nate Silver's article is that individuals (you) shouldn't place too much emphasis on individual polls nor should they dismiss outliers either, but should instead take a wait and see attitude.

    Ordinarily, this is the point at which I’d urge a little patience. There’s been a lot of news over the past two weeks — the conclusion to the FBI’s investigation into Clinton’s emails and the Dallas shootings of police officers, in particular — and it would be nice to see how the polls settled in after a couple of slow weeks on the campaign trail. However, we’re entering a period of rapidly moving political news. Bernie Sanders endorsed Clinton only Tuesday. Trump is expected to name his VP later this week. And then we’ll have the party conventions. The prospects definitely look better for Trump than they did a week or two ago, but the landscape also looks blurrier, and it may not be until mid-August that we have a chance to catch our breath.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X