You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 04, 2016, 12:24:27 AM

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: In your honest opinion, who do you think has the best chance of becoming POTUS?  (Read 26392 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ebb

Cruz is apparently making a play to stay relevant.  Looks like he's hoping to keep his delegates so he can play power broker.

You mean Rubio here, not Cruz.

Offline 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
I'll admit, I have been wondering what happens to a candidate's delegates when they drop out...

Offline Beguile's Mistress

  • Time flies like an arrow ~ Fruit flies like a banana ~ Elliquiy's Fair-E Godmother
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2009
  • Location: Faeleacanvald ~ The Steeler Nation ~ Home of Lord Stanley's Cup 2016 ~ She won't stay throwed! ~ 48\22-5\1\11-5\7
  • Gender: Female
  • Perpetual Notion Machine ~ 'What if...?'
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
I believe that Trump, Cruz and Kasich could all receive nominations at the national convention and a round of balloting would be held to choose a final candidate.  Should none of them receive a majority of the total number of delegates permitted to vote in the first round all bets are off.  Any candidate who holds pledges from his state delegates can follow up with an endorsement of another candidate and ask those pledged to him to switch their support.  At that point delegates are free to vote their conscience and I can see the party selecting one person to back and working the arena to get the needed delegate votes.  Some state governing of delegates may come into play here but I'm not familiar with each state's policies.

This has been a topic of discussion on news programs all over network and cable television analysis.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2016, 03:07:53 PM by Beguile's Mistress »

Online TheGlyphstone

Oh, and to continue the glorious soap opera that is the GOP nomination race:

Trump Fired Back at Cruz's Wife

Offline Mithlomwen

  • ~ E's resident kilt inspector ~ ~ Atropos ~
  • Goddess
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2008
  • Location: Somewhere between the dark and the light...
  • Gender: Female
  • ~ Thunder only happens when it's raining.... ~
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Oh, and to continue the glorious soap opera that is the GOP nomination race:

....but wait!  There's more! 

Trump Reverses Position on Punishing Women Who Get Banned Abortions. 

His original statement went thusly:

Quote
The controversial statement was made during a taping of a town hall held by MSNBC, a portion of which was released by the cable network ahead of the full town hall, which will air tonight.

In the clip of the town hall exchange, Trump is pressed repeatedly by host Chris Matthews if he thinks there should be "some form of punishment," and Trump finally says: "For the woman? ... Yeah."

Offline Cassandra LeMay

For example, what do you think of Bernie now arguing that the superdelegates should support him even if he doesn't have the pledged delegate or popular vote lead?  Does that sound like he's flipping his position around to gain an advantage?  That he's playing the political game?  Do you agree with his new approach?
What you call "playing the political game" I would call "a tactical maneuver". If you want to win a contest sometimes you have to change your approach along the way. Convincing voters that the superdelegates who have expressed support for Clinton might not matter all that much strikes me as a solid tactic to motivate voters who might otherwise not bother to vote as they somehow see Clinton as the inevitable winner, based on how many supers have come out for her.

What matters to me is primarily why a candidate wants to win, what it is they hope to achieve by winning. That doesn't mean I think everything is fair in primaries or presidential elections. Personal attacks, inciting violence, advocating policies that are clearly against national or international law are hardly something I'd ignore, or excuse as legitimate tactics.

But when it comes to the Sanders vs. Clinton contest I see Sanders' goals as desireable and something worth fighting for. As long as that fight doesn't lead to blows below the belt line, as long as the fight remains civil and fair, let him act like a politician, because that is what he is - a politician. As for Clinton, I just don't know what she stands for. My impression is that she wants to win primarily to win, not to turn that win into something worthwhile. It's something I see in the list of phrases most often used by the candidates on Politifact. Clinton may use strong, short phrases like "I have", "we will", "I do", but where are the issues? That's what I see Sanders talking about, hammering home every time and that is what I belief is important in a candidate - a focus on the issues. (And no, I did not form my opinion of Sanders based on just that chart. I linked to it because it nicely illustrates my point, nothing more.)

Okay, this post has run a bit longer now than I intended, but I perhaps it will be helpful to explain where at least some Sanders support comes from.

Now onward  to the most recent Trump shenanigans:

I am not surprised. Except perhaps by how much he "corrected" his position and how quickly it happened. His usual modus operandi seems to be to double down when faced with any critique.

But the whole GOP field  is anti-abortion. It's pretty much at the core of the party. They'd like nothing better than to see Roe v Wade overturned. Talk about possible punishment has no follow from that base idea. That's how laws usually work - declaring something illegal usually includes sanctions for those how engage in said illegal behaviour. It might not be something that many GOP candidates like to talk about, but the moment you outlaw abortions you'll have to define some punishments for those who do it. Trump may be the only one willing to shoot his big mouth of about it right now, but I find it difficult to believe that he's the only one in the GOP field - or the Republican party as a whole - who harbours such sentiments.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2016, 02:05:23 AM by Cassandra LeMay »

Online summoner2183

I am no US citozen...  but if what i heard about Bernie Sanders is true, then he has my vote.

Offline Cycle

Convincing voters that the superdelegates who have expressed support for Clinton might not matter all that much strikes me as a solid tactic to motivate voters who might otherwise not bother to vote as they somehow see Clinton as the inevitable winner, based on how many supers have come out for her.

I think you misunderstand what Sanders just did.  He pulled a 180, going from (previously) superdelegates should support the will of the voters to (now) superdelegates should vote for me despite the will of the voters.

But when it comes to the Sanders vs. Clinton contest I see Sanders' goals as desireable and something worth fighting for. As for Clinton, I just don't know what she stands for.

Well, this source is a pretty good start to find out where the candidates stand on numerous issues and how those views may have evolved over time:

Sanders
Clinton
Cruz
Trump

Edit:  And here are their voting records in Congress.

Sanders
Clinton
Cruz
« Last Edit: March 31, 2016, 10:11:52 AM by Cycle »

Offline Beguile's Mistress

  • Time flies like an arrow ~ Fruit flies like a banana ~ Elliquiy's Fair-E Godmother
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2009
  • Location: Faeleacanvald ~ The Steeler Nation ~ Home of Lord Stanley's Cup 2016 ~ She won't stay throwed! ~ 48\22-5\1\11-5\7
  • Gender: Female
  • Perpetual Notion Machine ~ 'What if...?'
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
I believe that Trump, Cruz and Kasich could all receive nominations at the national convention and a round of balloting would be held to choose a final candidate.  Should none of them receive a majority of the total number of delegates permitted to vote in the first round all bets are off.  Any candidate who holds pledges from his state delegates can follow up with an endorsement of another candidate and ask those pledged to him to switch their support.  At that point delegates are free to vote their conscience and I can see the party selecting one person to back and working the arena to get the needed delegate votes.  Some state governing of delegates may come into play here but I'm not familiar with each state's policies.

This has been a topic of discussion on news programs all over network and cable television analysis.

According to this article the rules for the 2016 Republication National Convention have not been set and should be discussed in July when the RNC meets.

Offline Cycle

I was wondering when someone would do something like this...  XD



Offline elone

I think you misunderstand what Sanders just did.  He pulled a 180, going from (previously) superdelegates should support the will of the voters to (now) superdelegates should vote for me despite the will of the voters.

The problem with superdelegates is that they do not support the will of the voters. The have gone disproportionately to Clinton, even in states that Bernie has won. Under those circumstances, and knowing that those delegates can change their minds if they choose to, Bernie simply believes that the momentum change in the race is reason for them to change their minds. Why is he not allowed to try to win? He is playing within the rules. Most importantly, so what?

New York superdelagates have already said they will go with Clinton even if she loses the primary.

(from New York Daily News, March 29)
In spite of Sanders winning 15 states including some by an 80%-20% margin over 94% of the 498 superdelegates have said they are backing Clinton.

Clinton has 469 superdelegate votes, compared to just 29 for Sanders.

Sounds fair to me.  ???
« Last Edit: April 01, 2016, 06:56:37 AM by elone »

Offline Cycle

Why is he not allowed to try to win? He is playing within the rules. Most importantly, so what?

Bernie flip flops to gain a political edge.  So we see that to him, the ends justifies the means.  Guess what this proves about Bernie?

My issue with Bernie is that I see him portraying himself as something he is not:  a truth-telling, above-the-dirt activist who hasn't and won't ever play the game.  He's a politician.  And a darn savvy one.  He knows how the play the game and has been actively doing it--and rather well, actually.

You want to support Bernie for his policies, great.  But arguing how "genuine" he is or how he's some kind of "above it all candidate" is bunk.  He's after power.  Like the rest of them.

Offline Ryven

  • Keeper of Cowthulhu | Pure Awesomenesity
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Location: The farthest reaches of your dreams
  • Gender: Male
  • The night's pleasure follows in my footsteps
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
You want to support Bernie for his policies, great.  But arguing how "genuine" he is or how he's some kind of "above it all candidate" is bunk.  He's after power.  Like the rest of them.


The office of president confers power, so anyone running for president is after power by this logic.  If, by your train of thought, anyone after power is insincere then anyone running for president is insincere.  Just an observation.

Offline Cycle

If, by your train of thought, anyone after power is insincere then anyone running for president is insincere.  Just an observation.

Not what I said.  Read it again.

Offline Ryven

  • Keeper of Cowthulhu | Pure Awesomenesity
  • Knight
  • Addict
  • *
  • Join Date: Nov 2008
  • Location: The farthest reaches of your dreams
  • Gender: Male
  • The night's pleasure follows in my footsteps
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Not what I said.  Read it again.

I did.

Offline Avis habilis

Hey, remember this?

If I may, I think that the discussion focusing on Bernie might be better for the Discussion of Dialogue forum. 

I believe the OP meant for this thread to have a more diverse discussion regarding all of the candidates, not focusing one.

Take the specific debate on Sanders elsewhere or don't, but don't continue it here.

Offline 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
I think you misunderstand what Sanders just did.  He pulled a 180, going from (previously) superdelegates should support the will of the voters to (now) superdelegates should vote for me despite the will of the voters.

Three questions I feel to ask in response to this.

One: If a system is corrupt and stacked against you, then is it okay to manipulate that system in order to achieve victory so you can clean it up?

Two: What would the totals look like if the Democrats actually did the sensible thing and handled their primaries like Republicans?

Three: Why are superdelegates even a thing?  A lot of criticism seems to indicate that they actually short-circuit the democratic process.

Offline Kythia

  • Noooo-one Fights like Kythia no-one bites like Kythia
  • Dame
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Gender: Female
  • No one chain smokes Marlboro lights like Kythia
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Three: Why are superdelegates even a thing?  A lot of criticism seems to indicate that they actually short-circuit the democratic process.

Consortium actually answered this in the other thread.  In short, it's to dilute out geographical clusterings that can affect the nomination process (or that's the logic)

Offline Merah

Hey, remember this?

Take the specific debate on Sanders elsewhere or don't, but don't continue it here.

We had a place to talk about this but it got locked, so now we're all here... I'm still confused why the other (main) presidential thread discussing the election was closed instead of this one.

Offline Kythia

  • Noooo-one Fights like Kythia no-one bites like Kythia
  • Dame
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Gender: Female
  • No one chain smokes Marlboro lights like Kythia
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
We had a place to talk about this but it got locked, so now we're all here... I'm still confused why the other (main) presidential thread discussing the election was closed instead of this one.

+1

Offline Cassandra LeMay

We had a place to talk about this but it got locked, so now we're all here... I'm still confused why the other (main) presidential thread discussing the election was closed instead of this one.
Mostly because of the old thread having gotten pretty long at about 40 pages. Blythe mentioned that in the closing post of the other thread.

Offline Mithlomwen

  • ~ E's resident kilt inspector ~ ~ Atropos ~
  • Goddess
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2008
  • Location: Somewhere between the dark and the light...
  • Gender: Female
  • ~ Thunder only happens when it's raining.... ~
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
We had a place to talk about this but it got locked, so now we're all here...

Here ya go:  https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=246895.0
« Last Edit: April 02, 2016, 08:52:10 AM by Mithlomwen »

Offline 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
Does anyone know what the deal was with the North Dakota Republican primary?  Word on fivethirtyeight was that there was a primary on April 1, but that 'North Dakota [would] not hold a presidential preference vote.'

Do North Dakotans not get a say, or do they hold a preference vote on some other date?  How do they determine who (if anyone) gets the 28 delegates?

Offline Beguile's Mistress

  • Time flies like an arrow ~ Fruit flies like a banana ~ Elliquiy's Fair-E Godmother
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2009
  • Location: Faeleacanvald ~ The Steeler Nation ~ Home of Lord Stanley's Cup 2016 ~ She won't stay throwed! ~ 48\22-5\1\11-5\7
  • Gender: Female
  • Perpetual Notion Machine ~ 'What if...?'
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3

Offline 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
Okay - so they basically show up in Cleveland and make their decision there.