US General Election 2016

Social media and donations seem to suggest that I was in the minority in thinking that Hillary did better than Bernie, which is something I'm more than happy to be "wrong" about.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/sanders-raises-1-3-million-off-debate-performance/

The way I look at this is that the average Twitter and Facebook user is young and more adept to social media. Hence there's going to be a lot of buzz about their candidate of choice. The old fogies aren't going to be hash tagging the night away, but they're more than likely to have a higher turnout during the primary. Clinton attracts older voters and middle aged people, plus there's the demographic that's just going to vote for Clinton no matter what ("it's her turn" "I want a woman president" etc.)

Bernie really lost me when he failed to introduce himself properly last night. We've heard his tired slogans hundreds of times, plus his ideas are far too unrealistic and quixotic (kind of a Ron Paul for the Democratic party). It's pretty clear Clinton is going to be the nominee.

I don't have a dog in this fight anymore. I might vote for Trump if he's on the ballot next year, but if he's not I'll probably stay home.

I think you're right about social media being too skewed, but I'm not sure about donations. That might be skewed young but I think they're probably less so.

I've said for a long time that I think Hillary will get the nomination, and I still don't think Sanders is going to be able to put together a large enough coalition to stop her, but one mediocre debate performance isn't the end of the line. I think his ultimate goal has to have been to change the conversation within the party more than winning the actual nomination, given what a long shot that is, and he's still making progress on that front.

Is the Trump vote just a protest one? I try not to blindly vote straight-ticket but generally Democratic candidates are closer to my views and even if it's a lesser of two evils question, I think the Presidency is important enough (especially with several Supreme Court seats likely to open up in the next four years) to be worth voting.

I think it's a protest/anti establishment/populist/curiosity vote. That is if he's on the ballot. I'm not going to caucus for him, though. I wasn't a big fan when he started to fall more in line with what the far right wants in terms of gun control arms planned parenthood. It would have been nice to see him retain a centrist view on those issues. It's like he needed to gauge the base before writing out his policy proposals. *cough* Hillary *cough*

I'd really like to see something done about the border and immigration, and he's the only one who seems to be concerned about it at the moment. I thought his tax proposal went a little loose for those on the top end, but the cut on all income tax for those making under 25000 was good to see. He promised to go after "the hedge fund guys" and while I hope he will, I don't expect him to.

i almost want him to win because it would be so entertaining.

He would be so entertaining I'm almost willing to overlook what the rest of the world will think of us for electing him.

http://www.270towin.com/same-since-electoral-maps/

‘Same Since’ Electoral Maps
States that have voted for the same party in consecutive elections

The country has become more politically polarized in recent years, with most states voting either Democrat or Republican in presidential elections regardless of who is running. Only 117 of the 538 electoral votes have flipped between parties in the last four presidential elections.

The maps below show the evolution of this single-party consistency since 1964. Select any of them to view a larger interactive version for that year that can be used as a starting point for your own 2016 presidential election forecast.

A very clear analysis of the way the Republican run house works right now.

http://www.vox.com/2015/10/26/9612570/house-gop-strategy?ref=yfp

The core of what Ryan will have to do as speaker will mirror Boehner:

"Like Boehner before him, he's set himself up to be a patsy for the Timids' own dysfunctional timidity. Here's how things are going to go:

- During a caucus discussion of a must-pass vote, the Fire-eaters will propose doing something crazy.

-The Timids will complain about it off-the-record to Politico reporters, but publicly line up behind the demand.

-Ryan, acceding to the stated wishes of his conference, will line up behind the demand even though neither he nor anyone else thinks it makes any sense.

- Obama will refuse to cave.

- After a bunch of posturing, the Timids will signal privately to Ryan that they wouldn't mind seeing a clean version of the must-pass bill brought to the floor.

- Ryan will bring a clean version of the must-pass bill to the floor where a coalition of Democrats and Pragmatists will pass it over the real objections of the Fire-eaters and the fake objections of the Timids.

- Conservatives will go crazy over why their leaders have betrayed them again.

This is how Boehner did things, and for all his hemming and hawing Ryan hasn't actually done anything to change the dynamics that pushed Boehner in this direction."

I hope he doesn't get his "family time."

And now the Senate is giving Ted Cruz the silent treatment.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/ted-cruz-senate-rebuke-planned-parenthood-214183?ref=yfp

Another beautiful analysis of the source of Republican dysfunction:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2015/10/25/republicans-reap-what-they-sow/BVP8zcaaoX9ZikI5db8ZLI/story.html?ref=yfp

"On the campaign trail, party regulars are alarmed that half the nation’s likely Republican voters — or at least, the half who talk to pollsters — prefer a president without a lick of government experience. "

"But really, why should any of these sober-minded veterans be surprised? After 35 years of Republicans relentlessly bashing government, voters have been well taught to mistrust politicians and demean public service."

TRUMP 2016!!!!!!

the establishment.

GOP debate tonight. Didn't know about it until about 15 minutes ago. Think I'll pass tonight, though. Kind of tired.

Those so inclined to watch it can do so here: http://www.hulkusc.com/watch-cnbc-live-stream/

It will start about 1 hour and 15 minutes after the time of this post.

I was working during the debate (again) so I've just been reading about it. Doesn't sound like anything too exciting happened that would shake up the current trajectories of the various candidates. Trump plateaued or slightly declining, Carson getting the most attention, Fiorina dropping off the radar, Rubio the emerging establishment favorite, and Bush in slow-motion disintegration.

Complaints about the moderation are unsurprising to me given that it's CNBC. Anyone else remember the feud between Jim Cramer and Jon Stewart? I still laugh whenever I see his book "Get Rich Carefully" at work.

This doesn't concern the general election, but close enough to avoid starting another thread.

I don't quite understand the subtleties of how John Boehner's resignation helped the new budget to pass. It seems that if he had worked hard to pass it, he would have been voted out of the speakership...but how does pre-emptively resigning help him get the needed votes?

If I read it right from afar its more to do with the new guy coming into replace him.
If they vote this through then its not left to clean up, lets the new guy start the fight from a clean slate.
I read it that he insisted on it as part of the terms for agreeing to stand for Speaker- the republicans backed him for speaker but had to let Boehner finish business and not have it hanging over new guy whose name I cant remembers head when he starts (clearly he wasn't going to take the job at all under those conditions)

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/258774-carson-dont-televise-gop-debates

best 3 minutes i've spent in a long time

Thats worryingly hypnotic after a while!!    

I showed it to my chinese friend and she laughed herself sick.

Yikes...

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/nov/05/ben-carson-egyptian-pyramids-were-grain-stores-not-pharoahs-tombs

just

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/ben-carson-shattering-stereotype-about-brain-surgeons-being-smart

See this is the problem with taking stuff literally in ancient old texts- you end looking a right tit, and a left one too.

I mean its not like the OT isnt prone to nicking stuff that's important and people know and incorporating it into its stories (they have famous cities named after people who haven't been born yet let alone had the city named after them yet!) so if they thought they could get away with it you can be sure if Joseph had the pyramids built to put grain in the Bible would be sure to say so, a lot. It doesn't for the very good reason that even when it was written they couldn't pull that one off and expect folk to buy it.

*cringe*

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/listen-ben-carsons-rap-ad-aimed-african-american/story?id=34988082

The lineup for the next GOP debate on November 10 has been announced.

http://www.foxbusiness.com/industries/2015/11/05/fox-business-networkwsj-gop-candidate-debate-lineup-announced/

Main event (average of at least 2.5% in four most recent national polls):
- Trump
- Carson
- Rubio
- Cruz
- Bush
- Fiorina
- Kasich
- Paul

Kids table (average of at least 1% in four most recent national polls):
- Christie
- Huckabee
- Jindal
- Santorum

Pataki, Graham, and Gilmore failed to qualify for either debate. IMO it's good that the field is beginning to clear; hopefully the next few debates will continue this process.