General Primary Discussion Thread

Originally posted by ArtificialGlory
So anyway, my dear American friends, you've got quite the choice ahead of you: Hillary is ghastly, Trump is a monster, Sanders is a naive socialist, Cruz is likely a sociopath, and Rubio is a schmuck. I wish you luck.

Hillary's someone who's good at the job who's prone to scandals-that-don't-actually-affect-that-much. Sanders... yea, he his naive (his Fed plan? So silly), but has some good ideas in there. I don't know if Cruz is a sociopath but he does seem to inspire hatred in 90% of the people he meets, which is impressive.

Also, Rubio's out.

How is she good at her job? And what job was she good at? Trump has outperformed her at in something he has never done before. So he is better then her at everything.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/16/upshot/measuring-donald-trumps-mammoth-advantage-in-free-media.html

Oh here is $52 billion the media gave him for free

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2016/03/15/the-medias-2b-gift-to-trump/

How did this happen, cause he is smarter then everyone who has ever run a presidential campaign. The billionaire who could afford his own campaign has gotten 10-20x (depends on how much you think he is worth) times over his net worth in free media.

Utah poll by a major Utah newspaper is reporting the Democrat

The Mormons may be Republican, one of the most Red states even, but they're very establishment Republican and very much not into Trump who does not appear presidential to them.

And, well, they obviously like Romney. Attacking Romney a lot may be causing significant Mormon backlash.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
How is she good at her job?

Performed well as a senator, voting and sponsoring good bills, and being fairly effective at getting them through (her bills-per-year average is several above Sanders, who's not bad at the job himself). Improved our international relations as Secretary of State and improving the internal efficiency of the department. Etc. etc., yadda yadda.

Now, to be sure, you may not like those policies or think being friendly to other countries rather than intimidating them isn't a good thing, but the fact remains she does have a track record of accomplishing tasks before her, and a lot of experience at politics.

It is possible to dislike someone and still admit they are skilled at things. Heck, first Republican debate, some of the GOP candidates even noted that if it comes to a contest of resumes, Hillary Clinton's got it.

I mean, Ted Cruz is horrible in a lot of ways, but he's still got impressive skills to climb as high as he has and get as far as he has- passing up more heavily backed people like Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio due to his superior political maneuver and being possibly the only Republican candidate with a Trump strategy (namely, 'draft' behind him for awhile and help use his presence to take out opposition before finally clashing with Trump once the establishment was out of options so they'd have to chose between him and the outsider). I can admit that, because strongly disliking someone doesn't mean I discount what they do.

Trump has outperformed her at in something he has never done before.

If you're referring to performance in primaries, not there. Heck, this is his second time he planned a run, giving up the '12 one quickly.

If you're referring to actually performing a political job, he's yet to have one.

If you're only referring to the media end, since when is getting attention in the media something he's never done before?

How did this happen, cause he is smarter then everyone who has ever run a presidential campaign. The billionaire who could afford his own campaign has gotten 10-20x (depends on how much you think he is worth) times over his net worth in free media.

Because he's really good at media manipulation- which, btw, is something he's done before. He's had multiple TV shows, after all, and built a brand. It's a skill quite helpful in a campaign, and while multiple candidates are reasonably good at it, it is hard to argue that Trump is anything but the best in this cycle.

But media control and doing the job of president are two very different things.

Originally posted by Q99
*Watches someone make stuff up about Obama*

It is pretty impressive how much people make up their own image of someone that's largely unconnected to what they actually do.

It's ok to believe that disadvantaged racist groups need help, but it's not so ok to either stop them from getting help, or wanting to give the same advantage to groups without the same level of problems. Because, well, they don't have the same level of problems. But note, Obama can and does do programs that help white poor people and such- you know, things like the ACA, some of the measures in the stimulus, etc..

It's the idea that helping out people who need it more (due in no small part to stuff done in the past, but where the effects visibly remain, and where current unequal treatment without a doubt exists in statistically very noticeable amounts- A white convict and a black non-con gets hired at about the same rate, while two non-cons have the white person at about a 30% advantage in being hired for the same jobs) is 'unfair,' which is pretty silly.

It's especially silly to feel threatened that other people will be getting more equal treatment and opportunity. Fairness is not being anti-you, people being brought up in level is not the same as pushing others down.

It's downright bad to respond to attempts to help people by saying the one doing the helping is against everyone else and is calling everyone else racist. Which, by the way, he is not, that's just something you like to project on him.

I live in this country, in a diverse city (which, btw, is pretty great). People being treated fairly does have an effect on where I live.

White convicts are more likely to have a higher education and not have committed a violent crime, per capita. . Why can't you mention this? Why can't you mention the qualifications?

Originally posted by Q99
Utah poll by a major Utah newspaper is reporting the Democrat

The Mormons may be Republican, one of the most Red states even, but they're very establishment Republican and very much not into Trump who does not appear presidential to them.

And, well, they obviously like Romney. Attacking Romney a lot may be causing significant Mormon backlash.

Performed well as a senator, voting and sponsoring good bills, and being fairly effective at getting them through (her bills-per-year average is several above Sanders, who's not bad at the job himself). Improved our international relations as Secretary of State and improving the internal efficiency of the department. Etc. etc., yadda yadda.

Now, to be sure, you may not like those policies or think being friendly to other countries rather than intimidating them isn't a good thing, but the fact remains she does have a track record of accomplishing tasks before her, and a lot of experience at politics.

It is possible to dislike someone and still admit they are skilled at things. Heck, first Republican debate, some of the GOP candidates even noted that if it comes to a contest of resumes, Hillary Clinton's got it.

I mean, Ted Cruz is horrible in a lot of ways, but he's still got impressive skills to climb as high as he has and get as far as he has- passing up more heavily backed people like Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio due to his superior political maneuver and being possibly the only Republican candidate with a Trump strategy (namely, 'draft' behind him for awhile and help use his presence to take out opposition before finally clashing with Trump once the establishment was out of options so they'd have to chose between him and the outsider). I can admit that, because strongly disliking someone doesn't mean I discount what they do.

If you're referring to performance in primaries, not there. Heck, this is his second time he planned a run, giving up the '12 one quickly.

If you're referring to actually performing a political job, he's yet to have one.

If you're only referring to the media end, since when is getting attention in the media something he's never done before?

Because he's really good at media manipulation- which, btw, is something he's done before. He's had multiple TV shows, after all, and built a brand. It's a skill quite helpful in a campaign, and while multiple candidates are reasonably good at it, it is hard to argue that Trump is anything but the best in this cycle.

But media control and doing the job of president are two very different things.

Oh so your still hanging on to his "planning on running in 12."

You have some serious PTSD from that I see

As far performing a political job, I guess you are unaware that this is the year of the outsiders, meaning PEOPLE DONT WANT A Politician IN OFFICE.

Politics have ruined this country, and you a deaf and blind fool if you think otherwise.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
As far performing a political job, I guess you are unaware that this is the year of the outsiders, meaning PEOPLE DONT WANT A Politician IN OFFICE.

Based on what? The performance of so-called anti-establishment candidates who cannot even win a majority of their own parties?

Two words: Voter fraud.

And that was fast and anticlimactic on the Democrat side: Arizona's been called for Hillary, looking to be a big margin, likely cancelling out any gains Bernie might've gotten from the other two states.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Oh so your still hanging on to his "planning on running in 12."

You have some serious PTSD from that I see

I think Trump might.

As far performing a political job, I guess you are unaware that this is the year of the outsiders, meaning PEOPLE DONT WANT A Politician IN OFFICE.

Politics have ruined this country, and you a deaf and blind fool if you think otherwise.

Republican politicians, sure. But Obama cut unemployment in half, presided over a recovery from a hit as big as the great depression in a fraction of the time as that recovery, and brought extended health care for tens of millions at less than the expected cost. Not to mention helping on gay rights and making the country more free in that area.

The Republicans clearly want outsiders because your guys have, well, not been doing their jobs well. In any respect- they haven't been running the country, nor have them managed to stop everything like they promised to do (though not for lack of trying).

The Democrats? When we've actually managed to get stuff past your guys, they've managed to keep the country running and done a fair amount of stuff that worked as planned (to approximately no surprise on my part, as two states already had UHC, both quite successfully).

Oh, and Trump also won in Arizona.

Trump is on the edge of whether or not he'll win automatically or be at a contested convention, so this is really important stuff.

I must say, both frontrunners made a rather boring time of it, getting the states called for them so soon after results begin.

Harry Enten on the results: "So basically, this night had no surprises in it. The delegate projections are what they were."

Bernie seems to have two fairly large margins in the works, canceled out by a single good margin in a large state so we aren't sure who'll have more delegates but it'll be close.

Cruz did well where expected, Trump did well where expected.

I do hope this is true.

Bernie Sanders Is Currently Winning the Democratic Primary Race, and I’ll Prove It to You

Nobody cares how well a politician does at the ballot box when he or she is running for an office unopposed. What matters is how a politician performs in contested primaries and general elections, as when it really matters — like it will, for instance, this November — you can be certain of a contested election.

With that said, let’s make an important observation: Bernie Sanders has tied or beaten Hillary Clinton in a majority of the actively contested votes this election season.

You doubt it? Okay, let me explain. -snip

Source HuffPuff

Messed up the source and can't edit, here it is:

Source

5 years ago I probably would have fought for Bernie, but seriously? He ain't gonna win.

As for Cruz, it looks like he'll win more than Trump as the race continues. People are starting to side with pro trump anti trump now it's basically a two horse race.

I imagine Trump will get the most votes but fall short of the nominee depending on where California swings.

Yeah, the odds are stacked against him, I read somewhere that he has to take the lion's share in California and New York , which he might do in California, but NY is probably Clinton's arena.

Many predictions do have Trump falling short of the 1237 by just 50 points or less.

We'll see, ideally (for me), it's Sanders Vs Trump and Sanders takes it, or Sanders Vs Kasich Vs Trump cos it turned out to be contested and Trump threw a tantrum and ran independent.

I'm sure The Donald will win the nominee, but would have to make one hell of a convention speech.

Clinton is for sure the nominee for the democrats.

It looks totally open and unpredictable to me, though.

Originally posted by It's xyz!
I'm sure The Donald will win the nominee, but would have to make one hell of a convention speech.

Clinton is for sure the nominee for the democrats.

It looks totally open and unpredictable to me, though.

The polls show otherwise.

Originally posted by |King Joker|
The polls show otherwise.

Originally posted by Stigma
I agree except for the unpredictability part. I have a feeling Trump will decimate Hillary in the general election.

Some states will just never go for Trump.

California, Most if not all of New England, Illinois, etc.

Then you have a lot of swing states.

It's still open.

Also, don't underestimate the power of the media, news, entertainment and basic liberal cowards. It's one thing to win the primaries, the public is a different thing entirely.

Originally posted by It's xyz!
Trump will wipe the floor with Hilary, but he still has to win over the voters.

Some states will just never go for Trump.

California, Most if not all of New England, Illinois, etc.

Then you have a lot of swing states.

It's still open.