You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 09, 2016, 03:21:37 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates [Poll updated!]  (Read 40786 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Lustful Bride

  • "Logic is for Squares."
  • Lady
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Gender: Female
  • This is some personal text. There are many like it, but this one is mine!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #825 on: March 01, 2016, 10:11:13 PM »
To be honest...the more I think about it, the more that I cant decide who to give my vote to. I'm only 21 but I feel so damn jaded about our leaders. I cant help but look at each and everyone and think they would all sell out the country for a penny. They would kill their own mothers for an extra vote.

Ugh. I almost envy people who still think one party is good and the other one is bad, as if it were ever that simple. I guess I'm gonna be a last minute voter the next chance I get. :/ This shouldn't be so hard but it feels like carrying an anvil to me. Shit I almost feel embarrassed that I haven't decided yet.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2016, 10:15:17 PM by Lustful Bride »

Online ReijiTabibito

  • Gatecrasher
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2009
  • Location: Titanian Autonomous University, Gate Studies Dept.
  • Gender: Male
  • There cannot be another Fall.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #826 on: March 01, 2016, 10:26:44 PM »
This is, of course, the whole point, LB.  Thirty plus years of identity politics has divided America up into various groups seeking their own self-interested goals, goals which can and do stand opposite that of other groups.  A BBC video clip described America as being more like neighboring tribes now than back in...I think the example they used was from the mid-70s.  The country is becoming increasingly polarized, increasingly oppositional, increasingly cynical.

Why?  Because quite simply, people are easier to control that way.  Whether it's through promises or threats, it's a lot easier to get people to go your way if you do this.  Key one example - segregation.  LBJ said after signing the CRA and VRA that the Democratic Party would lose the South for a generation (and probably more, now) when he did this.  Why?  Because the South were largely interested in only one thing - continuing segregation.  What the political sphere has done today - on both sides - is divide people up with series of carrots and sticks, which it uses to either convince people to vote for them, or not to vote for the other guy.

Online Lustful Bride

  • "Logic is for Squares."
  • Lady
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Gender: Female
  • This is some personal text. There are many like it, but this one is mine!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #827 on: March 01, 2016, 10:34:39 PM »
This is, of course, the whole point, LB.  Thirty plus years of identity politics has divided America up into various groups seeking their own self-interested goals, goals which can and do stand opposite that of other groups.  A BBC video clip described America as being more like neighboring tribes now than back in...I think the example they used was from the mid-70s.  The country is becoming increasingly polarized, increasingly oppositional, increasingly cynical.

Why?  Because quite simply, people are easier to control that way.  Whether it's through promises or threats, it's a lot easier to get people to go your way if you do this.  Key one example - segregation.  LBJ said after signing the CRA and VRA that the Democratic Party would lose the South for a generation (and probably more, now) when he did this.  Why?  Because the South were largely interested in only one thing - continuing segregation.  What the political sphere has done today - on both sides - is divide people up with series of carrots and sticks, which it uses to either convince people to vote for them, or not to vote for the other guy.

That's the most sense ive seen anyone make in a long time.

Online Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #828 on: March 01, 2016, 10:45:22 PM »
Oklahoma, Colorado, Vermont and Minnesota!  Yeah!

Online ReijiTabibito

  • Gatecrasher
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2009
  • Location: Titanian Autonomous University, Gate Studies Dept.
  • Gender: Male
  • There cannot be another Fall.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #829 on: March 01, 2016, 10:47:23 PM »
Sanders got Colorado?  Good.  538's been saying he really needed to win there in order to have a chance at going on.  VT is obvious, and it's nice to know he can carry a Southern state or two, as well.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2016, 10:48:38 PM by ReijiTabibito »

Online Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #830 on: March 01, 2016, 11:05:45 PM »
Sanders got Colorado?  Good.  538's been saying he really needed to win there in order to have a chance at going on.  VT is obvious, and it's nice to know he can carry a Southern state or two, as well.
That's the word on the wires.  58-41 with 1% 'Undecided'

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/primaries/CO

Considering Minnesota's experience with Walker, I'm not overly surprised there either.

Online ReijiTabibito

  • Gatecrasher
  • Lord
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2009
  • Location: Titanian Autonomous University, Gate Studies Dept.
  • Gender: Male
  • There cannot be another Fall.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 2
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #831 on: March 01, 2016, 11:13:51 PM »
Mm.  On the other side of the aisle, Trump won half the states, and Rubio managed to win in MN and take second place in VA.  Cruz' only clear victory which was in Texas, everywhere else he 'won,' either Trump or Rubio were dogging him by a handful of delegates or less.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/432175/ted-cruz-marco-rubio-drop-out

Really, Ted?  I think YOU should be the one dropping out.

(You weren't even born here...Canadian. :P)

Online Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #832 on: March 01, 2016, 11:27:02 PM »
I'm just amused that he quoted JFK and FDR in his 'victory' speech. 

Offline consortium11

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #833 on: March 02, 2016, 04:21:22 AM »
Super Tuesday basically went as expected.

That means the front-runners Clinton and Trump dominated their races but neither was quite able to score the knockout blow they needed to essentially guarantee their candidacy. Sanders, Rubio and Cruz all performed well enough that they each had some successes to point to (hell, even Kasich can mention his close second in Vermont) but none really performed above expectations or was able to grab a huge amount of momentum for their campaigns.

Cruz's victories do establish him as the clear second to Trump and he's started to use the "anyone but Trump" message in his campaign in an attempt to draw in more supporters but the basic issue he faces with doing so is that he's hardly a consensus candidate himself; prior to Trump getting taken seriously he was the anti-establishment, "rebel" choice. Beyond that he also suffers from the fact his natural constituency; evangelicals who don't think Trump is conservative enough (or even conservative at all) become less and less important as the primaries move away from the south. When planning out his campaign Cruz most likely saw strong early performances and a dominant Super Tuesday as a way to insert himself as front runner and therefore get a boost in later states where you'd have expected him to struggle. Clearly that hasn't happened. If Rubio were in his position then you'd think he stands a better chance of supplanting Trump... but he's not, and while the win in Minnesota and strong finish in Virginia keep him in the race they don't give him much momentum. A huge amount now rests on Florida; anything but a win there and Rubio likely drops out. Kaisch basically has Ohio and a prayer to hold out for, while Carson remains the irrelevance he's been since the contest got serious.

On the Democratic side Sanders did enough that his decision to stay in the race doesn't look like a vanity project but there's a big difference between doing enough to legitimately stay in the race and doing enough to actually win it. To stand a chance Sanders always needed to wildly exceed expectations and outside of the very first race in Iowa he hasn't managed to. You'd expect his results to generally trend upwards in the coming races but with Clinton already so far ahead and with even an upward trend not guaranteeing victory his always unlikely chance of becoming the candidate just got less likely.

There's a stick or twist question for both front runners now and we saw elements of that in their victory speeches. Both spoke more about the Presidential election and their likely opposition in that then about their primary rivals, with Clinton in particular almost completely ignoring Sanders. If you've got the nomination sewn up then that's not a bad tactic; you can attempt to define the national conversation early and you don't run the risk of alienating or insulting supporters that you'll need come November... but if you take your eye off the ball too much it can be a mistake. If you act as if the primaries are over then your supporters may well do the same... and that means they're less likely to actually vote or campaign for you... while if your opposition are still throwing bombs at you and you simply ignore them then there's a chance one falls at your feet an explodes.

Offline Cycle

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #834 on: March 02, 2016, 07:57:51 AM »
Super Tuesday results so far:

State   Winner   Runner up
Ala. (41)   Clinton 78%   Sanders 19%
Ark. (25)   Clinton 66%   Sanders 30%
Colo. (57)   Sanders 59%   Clinton 40%
Ga. (89)   Clinton 71%   Sanders 28%
Mass. (88)   Clinton 50%   Sanders 49%
Minn. (66)   Sanders 62%   Clinton 38%
Okla. (36)   Sanders 52%   Clinton 42%
Tenn. (62)   Clinton 66%   Sanders 32%
Tex. (170)   Clinton 65%   Sanders 33%
Va. (10)   Clinton 64%   Sanders 35%
Vt. (93)   Sanders 86%   Clinton 14%

Total delegates 2,382 to win, 859 in play yesterday

Clinton   1,001   (+453)   42% of total needed
Sanders   371   (+284)   16% of total needed



State   Winner   Runner up
Alaska (28)   Cruz 36%   Trump 33%
Ala. (30)   Trump 43%   Cruz 21%
Ark. (28)   Trump 33%   Cruz 30%
Ga. (61)   Trump 39%   Rubio 24%
Mass. (42)   Trump 49%   Kasich 18%
Minn. (32)   Rubio 37%   Cruz 29%
Okla. (37)   Cruz 34%   Trump 28%
Tenn. (44)   Trump 39%   Cruz 25%
Texas (77)   Cruz 44%   Trump 27%
Va. (49)   Trump 35%   Rubio 32%
Vt.  (12)   Trump 33%   Kasich 30%

Total delegates 1,237 to win, 595 in play yesterday

Trump   285   (+203)   23% of total needed
Cruz   161   (+144)   13% of total needed
Rubio   87   (+71)   6% of total needed



The one that surprised me the most was Massachusetts.

Offline ThePrince

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #835 on: March 02, 2016, 09:09:37 AM »
We are now looking at either a Trump nomination or a brokered convention.

Online Lustful Bride

  • "Logic is for Squares."
  • Lady
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2014
  • Gender: Female
  • This is some personal text. There are many like it, but this one is mine!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #836 on: March 02, 2016, 09:26:24 AM »
So its looking to me like the only options will be either Hillary or Trump.......

Welp looks like the Simpsons predicted the future again.

Spoiler: Click to Show/Hide

Offline Cycle

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #837 on: March 02, 2016, 09:27:59 AM »
This shouldn't be so hard but it feels like carrying an anvil to me. Shit I almost feel embarrassed that I haven't decided yet.

I don't think you're alone in this.  It isn't uncommon to feel like all of the candidates are lying through their teeth.  My suggestion is to ignore the rally and "victory" speeches.  Everything they say there is useless--and worse, specifically intended to induce, mislead, and manipulate. 

Listen instead when they're being interviewed in "hostile" settings (i.e., when the interviewer is specifically trying to get them to spill something).  Give some weight to the debates IF the candidate actually answers the question instead of regurgitating a canned talking point.  Ignore the fluffy sound bites:  e.g., we need to build a wall, we need a political revolution, we need to make America whole again.  Those are useless too.  Use Google to research articles digging into their past.  New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Real Clear Politics, 538, The Atlantic are all generally good, less biased sources.  Ignore the talking heads on MSNBC, FOX, and CNN except for entertainment.

Voting isn't easy.  But then again, most things in life worth doing are not.

Good luck, LB!

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #838 on: March 02, 2016, 09:38:50 AM »
Just heard a seasoned journalist making the blooper: "Hillary Trump has lots of experience..." on the BBC. ^_ ^

Offline ThePrince

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #839 on: March 02, 2016, 10:33:02 AM »
My favorite slip up was Berine Sandwiches.

Online Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #840 on: March 02, 2016, 10:37:39 AM »
My favorite slip up was Berine Sandwiches.

And the puns that followed.

Offline Cycle

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #841 on: March 02, 2016, 10:57:21 AM »


Ya gotta love Colbert!

Offline consortium11

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #842 on: March 03, 2016, 05:39:55 AM »
Things appear to be getting more serious in the Clinton email story:

Quote
The Justice Department has granted immunity to a former State Department staffer, who worked on Hillary Clinton’s private email server, as part of a criminal investigation into the possible mishandling of classified information, according to a senior law enforcement official.

A relatively low-level former staffer getting immunity as a political move seems highly unlikely... it strikes me as being more logical to think they've bargained their testimony in exchange for immunity (noting that they had previously pleaded the fifth when questioned on the topic).

The Clinton email story has been quietly bubbling away for a year now, with the basics being that Clinton had a private email server which she also did official business on when Secretary of State. There's two aspects of that. The first is purely political; by doing things on a private server Clinton would have been able to avoid freedom of information requests for the data. The second has legal implications; there are federal laws relating to the recordkeeping and transfer of governmental information, notably with regards to confidentiality, and by using a private server Clinton may well have broken them. The most serious question is this; did Clinton send and receive top secret documents on a private, insecure server?

With so many "scandals" about Clinton having come up over the years and most having been little more than political opportunism by her opponents, the general view on this up till now has been that it's a storm in a tea cup but it's starting to appear that it actually may have legs, especially when you consider that David Petraeus plead guilty to similar offenses (even though the FBI considered that the Justice Department handled him with kid gloves) not so very long ago. It's certainly something worth paying attention to.

How it impacts on the campaign itself is difficult to predict. Things are still in motion right now and it may all amount to nothing in the end. Even if it does amount to something, are the authorities going to arrest the front runner of a political party (who may even be the candidate by the point anything happens) in a Presidential election year? And will people care? As mentioned above there have been so many "scandals" relating to Clinton that I can imagine a good number of people basically getting a "boy who cried wolf" complex towards it. And while the Republicans will obviously attack over it, will Bernie? He already came out publicly in the first debate and said he was sick and tired of hearing about Clinton's emails and to change that position now would look like (and be presented as) a desperate man clutching at straws and reverting to negative campaign tactics.


Offline elone

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #843 on: March 03, 2016, 09:53:11 AM »
Super Tuesday results so far:


Total delegates 2,382 to win, 859 in play yesterday

Clinton   1,001   (+453)   42% of total needed
Sanders   371   (+284)   16% of total needed




Of course this includes the superdelegates, Democratic party officials who are jumping on the Clinton bandwagon. They can also change their minds if Bernie were to surge. Note that in Colorado, Bernie won overwhelmingly but all but 2 of the 19 superdelegates went for Clinton. Democracy at work.

Actual delegate count without the "supers" (according to VOX)

Clinton - 577  - 24.2% of those needed to nominate
Sanders - 394  -  16.5% of those needed to nominate
« Last Edit: March 03, 2016, 09:56:55 AM by elone »

Offline Cycle

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #844 on: March 03, 2016, 10:08:38 AM »
Of course this includes the superdelegates

Of course it does, since those are the rules.  And that was just a snapshot of the numbers at the time I made the post.  The numbers now are (source):

Clinton   1052  (44% of total needed)
Sanders   427  (18% of total needed)

I don't see how the "superdelegates should yield to the will of the people" (an argument advanced by the Sander's campaign) helps him.  Clinton is winning the pledged delegate count too.  So under this argument, Sanders should have 0 superdelegates making Clinton's lead even greater.

Offline elone

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #845 on: March 03, 2016, 10:17:35 AM »
If Clinton wins pledged delegates so be it, but having superdelegates (rules or not) possibly overturn things is more party crap that the people are trying to get rid of in this election cycle for both parties.

So far, the primaries have been in Clinton strongholds primarily. If she can win outside the south, which is a real possibility, then she goes on. However, if Bernie starts winning most of the states, then maybe the superdelegates will switch, as they are not committed.

Hopefully, Hillary gets indicted or her speeches leak and we will be done with this exercise.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2016, 10:19:03 AM by elone »

Offline ThePrince

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #846 on: March 03, 2016, 10:29:12 AM »
Super delegates are there to prevent a brokered convention. If the party nominates a candidate that doesn't have national party voter support than they risk losing important down ticket elections and loose more power and control in Washington.

Case in point the Republican Party. Where currently they are faced with nominating a openly racist/fascist candidate or a brokered convention and nominating a candidate that the voters didn't even vote on.

Online Cassandra LeMay

Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #847 on: March 03, 2016, 12:59:38 PM »
Looks like Carson is about to drop out. Not that it will make much of a difference that I can see.

Online Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #848 on: March 03, 2016, 01:26:26 PM »
If Clinton wins pledged delegates so be it, but having superdelegates (rules or not) possibly overturn things is more party crap that the people are trying to get rid of in this election cycle for both parties.

Hillary was 'winning' the superdelegate count back in 2008 when she was up against Obama for the Democratic nomination.  Right now, both candidates have exactly one virtually guaranteed superdelegate.  Bernie's is guaranteed because he's not going to vote against himself.  Hillary's is guaranteed because she can make hers sleep on the couch.

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Big Thread For the USA 2016 Presidential Candidates
« Reply #849 on: March 03, 2016, 01:33:33 PM »
 Mitt Romney has dismissed Trump as unbalanced, a misogynist and a con artist. I'm just watching Trump speaking live in Maine on the tv and he hit back saying Romney was a "horribly failed candidate" and a "choke artist".

The guy is a clown, or at least he's making a very good impersonation of one.  ::)