View Poll Results: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary (Choose as many as you like)

Voters
22. You may not vote on this poll
  • Clinton

    8 36.36%
  • Warren

    10 45.45%
  • Webb

    13 59.09%
  • Sanders

    9 40.91%
  • Biden

    4 18.18%
  • O'Malley

    4 18.18%
  • Cuomo

    4 18.18%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 76

Thread: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Monica Lewinski's ex boyfriends wife.

  2. #12
    Advisor Tothian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    New Jersey, United States
    Last Seen
    06-10-17 @ 04:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    553

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    Webb has the best chance of winning a general election-for the primary that might hurt him since he won't appeal to the extremists-especially the anti male vote that hates his pro gun pro military credentials

    warren is too extreme, Cuomo too "ethnic" and biden is a moron.
    Hildabeast is too old and has even too much baggage for a Jerry Springer dating show
    Agreed. Plus, Jim Webb is a Marine Veteran. I think he was in the Vietnam War if I remember correctly.

    I'm not a Democrat but I did vote in this - I voted every option except for Hillary. If it were a single choice, I'd vote for Jim Webb.

  3. #13
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    01-19-18 @ 07:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,215

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    Nah. Clinton has the star power, Clinton has the money, and Clinton has the contacts. To continue my analogy to the 2012 Republican primaries, Clinton is the Mitt Romney of the 2016 primary. She's favored to win by those with the power and the money to make it happen.
    Yeah, but the thing about the 2012 Republican primary is that practically EVERYONE except Romney was legitimately bat**** insane. The only exception was Huntsman, who just didn't appeal to the mood of the party and never said anything memorable.

    Romney wasn't favored by anyone. The Republicans were dying for someone viable to come out of the woodwork who could kill off Romney. Fox attacked him mercilessly, right up until the moment he won the primary. And if there had been anyone even moderately sane or quotable, Romney would have gone down in a hurry. There just wasn't. Romney only got the nomination because no one else was even passably acceptable. The GOP lineup of 2012 was a complete joke.

    If anyone who is passably acceptable steps up, Clinton (assuming she runs) will go down in flames, just like she did in 2008. She's the Democrats' version of Romney. And the Dems have even more motivation to try to whack her off, because unlike the GOP, Dems won't band together for a candidate they don't like for the sake of the party, and they know that. Too much of the potential Dem voting block is centrists or independents.

    On top of that, Clinton would run into the same problem in 2016 that McCain ran into in 2008, being of the same age at the time: is she too old? She'd be in her mid-70's by the end of her first term, and that concerns some people when it comes to appointing someone to the most stressful job in the world, known to triple the speed at which people age.

    And she has a third disadvantage: the dynasty notion, which is even more detested by Dems than it is by Reps. I doubt a third Bush has a flying chance in hell. A second Clinton certainly doesn't unless there is literally no one else.

    I don't think Clinton is as viable as people seem to think she is. The combination of her dynasty reputation, her age, her Romney-esque status in the party, and Democrat's reluctance to vote as a block, makes her very vulnerable indeed.

    I think it's possible Warren could come flying out of the woodwork again. She certainly appeals to a neglected block of the party, as Democrats seem to be trying to ride closer and closer to center-right, rather than sticking to their supposed affiliation.

    I also find it ironic that at least half the people who voted for Webb aren't even lefties and would probably never vote for him anyway. That tells me that Webb, in reality, has no shot in hell. Apparently his appeal is to people who would never even vote for him.

  4. #14
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    My list top 3.
    1.)Bernie Sanders
    2.)Elizabeth Warren
    3.)Joe Biden


  5. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ask the NSA
    Last Seen
    07-24-16 @ 01:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    5,849
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Excellent analysis as usual, I would like to add my two cents though.

    Quote Originally Posted by SmokeAndMirrors View Post
    Yeah, but the thing about the 2012 Republican primary is that practically EVERYONE except Romney was legitimately bat**** insane. The only exception was Huntsman, who just didn't appeal to the mood of the party and never said anything memorable.
    I thought Ron Paul was pretty ok. Disagreeable on a few issues for sure, but overall a decent candidate. He likely would have gotten quite a few crossover votes because he was strong on the liberal issues where Obama was lacking(civil liberties, marijuana legalization, foreign policy, etc).

    Romney wasn't favored by anyone. The Republicans were dying for someone viable to come out of the woodwork who could kill off Romney. Fox attacked him mercilessly, right up until the moment he won the primary.
    Uhh, it was pretty obvious that he was favored.

    If anyone who is passably acceptable steps up, Clinton (assuming she runs) will go down in flames, just like she did in 2008.
    I'm not sure I'm convinced of that. I sure hope you're right, but I think Clinton has the money and the contacts to make it happen.

    And the Dems have even more motivation to try to whack her off, because unlike the GOP, Dems won't band together for a candidate they don't like for the sake of the party, and they know that. Too much of the potential Dem voting block is centrists or independents.
    Good point, however Hillary polls rather well with centrists and independents. It's the hard-lefties that she has trouble appealing to.

    On top of that, Clinton would run into the same problem in 2016 that McCain ran into in 2008, being of the same age at the time: is she too old? She'd be in her mid-70's by the end of her first term, and that concerns some people when it comes to appointing someone to the most stressful job in the world, known to triple the speed at which people age.
    The same was thought of Ronald Reagan but he won and was later re-elected.

    And she has a third disadvantage: the dynasty notion, which is even more detested by Dems than it is by Reps. I doubt a third Bush has a flying chance in hell. A second Clinton certainly doesn't unless there is literally no one else.
    The dynasty notion might hurt her and Bush in the general, but I don't think it will hurt either in the primary. Bill Clinton was and still is rather popular among the Democratic base. Not sure why, seeing as he and his wife both had a huge part to play in the passing of DOMA...but hey, it's party politics.

    I think it's possible Warren could come flying out of the woodwork again. She certainly appeals to a neglected block of the party, as Democrats seem to be trying to ride closer and closer to center-right, rather than sticking to their supposed affiliation.
    Possibly.

    I also find it ironic that at least half the people who voted for Webb aren't even lefties and would probably never vote for him anyway. That tells me that Webb, in reality, has no shot in hell. Apparently his appeal is to people who would never even vote for him.
    Meh, I wouldn't really discredit him based on who votes for him on an internet poll. If anything that shows he could have quite a bit of appeal in swing states. He could easily collect crossover votes while still appealing to the disenfranchised base in his party due to his strong stance against income inequality. Also, as I pointed out earlier in the thread, he could definitely pull the left-leaning libertarians like myself that usually vote Green or Libertarian.

    I think he has a decent shot.

  6. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ask the NSA
    Last Seen
    07-24-16 @ 01:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    5,849
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    My list top 3.
    1.)Bernie Sanders
    2.)Elizabeth Warren
    3.)Joe Biden
    Joe Biden?

  7. #17
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    Joe Biden?
    Biden keeps it real.


  8. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Ask the NSA
    Last Seen
    07-24-16 @ 01:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    5,849
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    Biden keeps it real.
    I'm rather skeptical about putting anyone from the Obama administration at the helm of the Democratic ticket. For multiple reasons.

  9. #19
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    Biden keeps it real.
    I can't think of a better politician with foot and mouth disease than Biden - I agree - he'd be funniest President in perhaps, all of US history.
    I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on whats being proposed here, hed agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute. - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  10. #20
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    01-19-18 @ 07:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,215

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Yeah, you're actual fun to argue with!

    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    Excellent analysis as usual, I would like to add my two cents though.

    I thought Ron Paul was pretty ok. Disagreeable on a few issues for sure, but overall a decent candidate. He likely would have gotten quite a few crossover votes because he was strong on the liberal issues where Obama was lacking(civil liberties, marijuana legalization, foreign policy, etc).
    He had much more appeal to libertarians and, weirdly, a certain segment of lefties, than he ever did to the main GOP base. The GOP basically ignored him, including their long arm in the media, Fox. He never had a chance.

    Uhh, it was pretty obvious that he was favored.
    Not really. He just wasn't actively crazy, and he was prettier than Huntsman. That was all he had going for him. And Republicans did lots and lots of moaning about him until it was inevitable that he'd win due to lack of viable opponents, at which point they did what Democrats won't, and rallied.

    I'm not sure I'm convinced of that. I sure hope you're right, but I think Clinton has the money and the contacts to make it happen.

    Good point, however Hillary polls rather well with centrists and independents. It's the hard-lefties that she has trouble appealing to.
    If she loses the whole Dem base -- which she will -- it doesn't matter.

    Here's something I don't think people realize: liberalism is NOT unpopular. What's unpopular is Democrats. Nothing proves that more than the recent midterms (stay with me here). When it came to the actual ballots, people voted overwhelmingly for liberal policies, even while they were also voting for conservative politicians. When it came to candidates, they weren't voting on issues. They were voting on dissatisfaction with Congress, which happened to be Dem-led, so that translated into anti-Dem votes. That doesn't mean they're pro-conservative. They obviously aren't. Look how they voted on the issues.

    And perhaps part of the reason Dems are having such a hard time winning anything is because they keep REJECTING liberalism. Liberalism is popular. People want liberal reform. But the Democrats just keep moving further and further right, cutting off their own voting base for the sake of pandering to the Republican noise machine that keeps calling them commies for absolutely no reason. I mean, what have the Dems done lately that's even left of center, let alone communist?

    The Dems are hurting themselves by refusing to field liberal candidates.

    The same was thought of Ronald Reagan but he won and was later re-elected.
    Yeah, and now everyone knows that he developed Alzheimer's while he was a seated president. People won't be quick to make that mistake again.

    The dynasty notion might hurt her and Bush in the general, but I don't think it will hurt either in the primary. Bill Clinton was and still is rather popular among the Democratic base. Not sure why, seeing as he and his wife both had a huge part to play in the passing of DOMA...but hey, it's party politics.
    Hillary has struggled in popularity since she first came on the scene. Bill's good will hasn't extended to her in the past, and there's no reason to believe it will now. What do you want to bet that if she gets the nomination, we'll be hearing that "baking cookies" comment on repeat from every GOP commercial for 6 months straight?

    Meh, I wouldn't really discredit him based on who votes for him on an internet poll. If anything that shows he could have quite a bit of appeal in swing states. He could easily collect crossover votes while still appealing to the disenfranchised base in his party due to his strong stance against income inequality. Also, as I pointed out earlier in the thread, he could definitely pull the left-leaning libertarians like myself that usually vote Green or Libertarian.

    I think he has a decent shot.
    Maybe, if he's populist enough. But I think it's a bad move, if for no other reason than putting him up is an obvious play to appear more center-right, even if he really isn't. And for reasons I explained above, I think that continuing to try to play the center-right is suicide for the Democratic party.

    Ultimately, when it comes to discussing what's a viable strategy, we both have to keep in mind that most of the American public won't vote like you, or like me, for that matter. So what we think is a good idea isn't necessarily what will win.

    Personally, I think the Dems should play liberal. However, I don't think my kind of liberal could ever win. It will be a platform-based liberal, not a progressive, or a left-libertarian.

Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •