General Primary Discussion Thread

To quote Greg House, "Everybody lies." What matters is what they lie about and how much they tell the truth, and how accurate they are in their statements.

Heh, why Nevada polls are bad

Part of it is tough in general (an '08 poll got Romney vs McCain off by 33 points), but additionally:

Nevadans are also notoriously hard to pin down for a survey. Many work night shifts, thanks to the state’s thriving hotel and gaming industry, meaning that they aren’t home to answer the phone in the evening, when polling calls are typically placed. That makes a particular difference on the Democratic side of things. “If you’re only polling at night, you’re missing a fair share of electorate that’s works in the casino and entertainment industry that’s highly unionized, that’s very Democratic,” Mellman said.

So, a huge portion of the democrats in the state* are hard to poll because they're working at the casinos 🙂

*A state that is almost entirely two cities, Vegas and Reno.

So that's why the pollsters are kinda shrugging and going, "I dunno, coinflip?".

And on the Republican side in South Carolina-

Want a narrative in SC? There's a poll for that

We’ve been inundated with polls: South Carolina polls, Nevada polls, national polls, general election polls. In fact, there are so many polls that you can tell yourself pretty much any story you like about the Republican presidential primary. Is Ted Cruz surging? There’s a poll for that. Is Cruz stalling out? There’s a poll for that too. Have you heard about the poll showing a Ben Carson comeback? OK, I made that one up. But earlier this week, you could find a poll with John Kasich in second place in South Carolina, even though he was polling at about 2 percent there earlier this month.

Ton more information in the article on how each candidate is likely to do and their high performance/low performance numbers.

For a change, I find the Republican race less exciting this time. Unlike the previous ones where the outcomes were pretty much as predicted on the Dem side (close race, Sanders win), Nevada is a big question mark. Meanwhile, after two Republican races, I don't think a big upset is too likely. Trump, Cruz, Rubio is where my prediction is.

Who do you think would fare better in the general election; Trump or Cruz?

Originally posted by |King Joker|
Who do you think would fare better in the general election; Trump or Cruz?

Lemme think about that. Trump is strongly disliked by hispanics, has some ability to reach out a bit more, but also some parts of the party don't support him.

Cruz doesn't have a specific demographic that hates him as much, but a larger part of his party frankly loathes him, and most demographics outside the party dislike him, though the evangelican, tea party, and highly conservative side of the party like his fanaticism. And he's not able to draw on anyone outside the Republicans for sure.

Writing it out, it does seem like Trump's in the better position. Even though he's a total outsider, he may have more party support than an actual senator, and his working class outreach is at least a potential means of going on the attack attack. Cruz would have to rely entirely on conservative turnout.

At this point, I'm thinking it will come down to Trump and Rubio competing for the position, and Trump will probably punk him like Christie did and thus win the nomination.

Originally posted by |King Joker|
Who do you think would fare better in the general election; Trump or Cruz?

While Trump has always said some silly thing imo Cruz only really appeals the ultra conservatives. At least with Trump you can kind of say maybe he is just doing it for show. Cruz on the hand is exactly what he says he is and I think that will turn more of the moderate crowd away from him.

Originally posted by Q99
To quote Greg House, "Everybody lies." What matters is what they lie about and how much they tell the truth, and how accurate they are in their statements.

What matters is if they lie at all and then spout stupid shit like "I don't believe I've ever lied".

You don't get to use the "all politicians lie" excuse when you have someone going "wha, I never lied!".

Go watch the 13 minute video on youtube of her lies. These are not lies of the nature of "Hilary says her favorite color is blue, but then later on says it is green" or mundane stuff like that.

Narrow victory for Clinton in Nevada.

Jeb Bush just dropped out of the race. Will be interesting to see where his supporters go.

Ah Jeb you shall be missed

Originally posted by Surtur
What matters is if they lie at all and then spout stupid shit like "I don't believe I've ever lied".

You don't get to use the "all politicians lie" excuse when you have someone going "wha, I never lied!".

Go watch the 13 minute video on youtube of her lies. These are not lies of the nature of "Hilary says her favorite color is blue, but then later on says it is green" or mundane stuff like that.

The thing is still, as I am wont to tell whenever this comes up... I go to factcheck sites and sites that check her quotes over time, I see she's accurate the wide majority of the time, and that she generally has stayed consistent on most issues or moved in acceptable directions.

You really could make a video like that with just about anyone in the race. A large factor of the length is simply Hillary has been involved the longest.

Though most of them, granted, are not going to draw attention to it by saying they never lie, which is a dumb thing to say, but it doesn't actually make things any more or less important.

Personally, I am iffy with Bernie because he promises a lot of stuff that I don't see a way for him to actually get, and over-promising is something politicians need to be careful of too. Even if he believes in that stuff, if he doesn't actually have a route other than 'hope congress switches parties *and* the Democratic side becomes more socialist,' then those are things I am even more concerned about because that has large practical effects on what happens.

That's what I care about, how someone has shown they will do in the job and whether they'll carry through where it matters, not the same video posted yet-again to get the same response.

And... the videos you could make with the Republican candidates ^^ So much of the outsider outrage is, after all, the people feel the party's been lying to them about significant stuff they care about. I'm still glad honesty-wise, I'm not on that side of the fence.

Ok, so, small but clear-cut Hillary win in Nevada, beating the polls even with 5.2% where I'm looking (with maybe more coming in?), larger Trump win in South Carolina. Jeb dropping out Rubio is almost certainly going to become a bigger threat.

Interesting night, with the Jeb thing having the longest term consequences.

Delegate wise, Hillary is looking to pick up 18 and 20 delegates, Bernie could get between 15 and 17. Interesting thing- last time Hillary won the state but Barack got more delegates because he did better in the rural areas. It doesn't look like that's the case this time though.

South Carolina is a lot more complicated. There's 50 total. The winner gets 29. Then whoever gets the most in each of 7 districts gets 3 per district- So Trump, bare minimum, has 29, but he could have as many as 50.

The Republican states sometimes have more unusual rules like that.

I honestly can't believe how Rubio is still getting substantial votes after that Christie moment in that one debate. If a candidate had a robotic malfunction akin to Rubio's I couldn't fathom supporting them (nor anyone I know IRL supporting them).

Carson dropping out is pretty inevitable, right? When he does, I wonder if Kasich will get more support (maybe from the Bush supporters as well?).

Originally posted by |King Joker|
I honestly can't believe how Rubio is still getting substantial votes after that Christie moment in that one debate. If a candidate had a robotic malfunction akin to Rubio's I couldn't fathom supporting them (nor anyone I know IRL supporting them).

I think it's just, the establishment is out of options. Jeb didn't break through, and neither did Kasich (Kasich did well in NH, but not by such a margin that it'd imply national strength).

I was surprised by that too, but endorsements by establishment figures has countered the perceived down-momentum of his weak NH debate and primary performance.

It is impressive how 'a string of third place or worse wins totally counts as a victory' is being considered momentum ^^

Oh, here's something interesting- A lot of the remaining proportional states are big with evangelicans/Cruz voters, a lot of the remaining winner take all ones are not.

So, delegate math says that with Trump doing this well in South Carolina, it'll be a Trump v Rubio matchup even though Cruz has beaten Rubio in every state so far.

Carson dropping out is pretty inevitable, right? When he does, I wonder if Kasich will get more support (maybe from the Bush supporters as well?).

Inevitable, but after the stunt Cruz pulled in Iowa, he's probably holding on out of spite- a lot of his people, Evangelicals, would go to Cruz first. Some are likely to also go to Trump for the outsider candidate reason.

That, and he's so out of the knowledge cycle on politics that it's hard to say if Ben realizes how unlikely a rebound is, or if he does but is staying out of ego, or what. Hardest candidate to read since he's not a politician, even less than Trump.

I actually want Trump to win the nomination. I'd prefer a president Clinton or Sanders, but if we end up with a Republican, better it be Trump. Trump's not a real conservative, which makes him better than Rubio and Cruz.

Farewell Jeb Bush. Your brother was a stupid piece of warmongering shit, but he wasn't as stupid as the current crop of candidates.

Oh hey, remember the Iowa coin flips?

Nevada using playing cards.

Though it looks like it split one each. Bernie and Hillary

Originally posted by Lucius
I actually want Trump to win the nomination. I'd prefer a president Clinton or Sanders, but if we end up with a Republican, better it be Trump. Trump's not a real conservative, which makes him better than Rubio and Cruz.

Farewell Jeb Bush. Your brother was a stupid piece of warmongering shit, but he wasn't as stupid as the current crop of candidates.

And this is the type of person that makes up the party that claims to be "Open Minded and Tolerant" Ladies and Germs.

Hypocrites to the core.

Btw, a large part of why Hillary is doing so much better in endorsements-

Article

Hillary Clinton has raised $26 million for the Democratic National Committee and state Democratic parties so far this campaign. And Sanders? $1,000.

That’s no typo. Clinton is doing more to boost the party’s 2016 prospects than Sanders by the proportion of 26,000 to 1. (Or greater: That $1,000 “raised” by Sanders was technically provided by the DNC to open a joint fundraising account.)

This is the source of the panic that Sanders causes the much-maligned Democratic elites. It’s not about ideology; it comes from a fear that having Sanders as a nominee will decimate progressive candidates down the ballot — and leave Republicans in control of the House, and state capitals, for another decade or two.

While Sanders talks about a political revolution which would presumably involve progressives sweeping congress, he isn't doing nearly as much in funding them and helping them get in. Heck, ironically, if they did sweep in it'd be on Hillary's support.

So a lot of other progressive candidates are naturally going for the person supporting their allies and looking like they'll help in the house, senate, and governor races more, even if they might otherwise like Bernie.

Originally posted by Q99
Btw, a large part of why Hillary is doing so much better in endorsements-

Article

While Sanders talks about a political revolution which would presumably involve progressives sweeping congress, he isn't doing nearly as much in funding them and helping them get in. Heck, ironically, if they did sweep in it'd be on Hillary's support.

So a lot of other progressive candidates are naturally going for the person supporting their allies and looking like they'll help in the house, senate, and governor races more, even if they might otherwise like Bernie.

You could of just said "she's doing better because she is raising tons of cash" and saved yourself some trouble.

Frankly I don't care if she raises a trillion dollars, I don't want her anywhere near the White House unless it's on a guided tour.

This is why in some ways it makes me utterly sick. It's really never just about who could do a good job versus who couldn't. It's the almighty f*cking dollar and shockingly when it comes to the almighty buck you have a Clinton coming out on top.

I think a lot of people also just think that she would do the best job...