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 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 76

Thread: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

  1. #51
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,932
    Blog Entries
    25

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    If you don't think Hillary can stir up the base, you're greatly underestimating her. But the base of either party simply isn't enough in a presidential election, as the GOP simply doesn't seem to get. Hillary's greatest advantage...is the GOP's insistence on doing whatever it takes to piss off the minorities in its eternal quest to stir up its increasingly way-far-to-the-right-of-Goldwater base. As long as your politicians keep playing the "I'm-more-conservative-than-the-other-guy" circular firing squad game, the Dems will hold the White House.
    You are correct, neither party has the base to win elections by themselves and haven’t since 1975 when 51% of the electorate identified themselves as Democrats immediately after the Watergate scandal and Nixon’s resignation. Yet in 1976 Ford came real close to winning the presidency. Reagan won in 1980 when 45% of the electorate identified themselves as Democrats and only 25% as Republicans.

    So who the candidates are is more important than the size of the base when it comes to presidential elections. Also whom the voters are mad at or happy with. In 2008 the voters were just plain tired of Republican rule, Obama won 53% to 46% over McCain, a 7 point margin. Yet party affiliation was 36-25% Per Pew Research a margin of 11 points in favor of the Democrats. In 2012 the numbers were 32-24% Democratic advantage with Obama winning reelection by a 51-47 margin.

    Section 9: Trends in Party Affiliation | Pew Research Center for the People and the Press

    Today I do not have figures from Pew, but I do Gallup and as of 9 November 2014 Gallup places party affiliation at 28% each for the Republicans and Democrats. My point is your demographics are included in these numbers, they take the entire electorate and break them down by party. I think that is a much simpler way.

    As for Hillary or Warren or whomever, any Democrat will be very hard to beat. This is because of the Electoral College. Obama beat Romney by 4 points in the popular vote, but by 62-38 margin in the Electoral College. Unless Obama fatigue sets in big time like Bush fatigue did between 2006-08, regardless of whom the Democrats run they start out with a 247-191 trustworthy states advantage in the Electoral College. But that can change based on whom the candidates are and on whether Obama fatigues lasts another two years and how the economy is doing.
    Last edited by Perotista; 11-28-14 at 10:30 PM.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  2. #52
    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 Perotista View Post
    You are correct, neither party has the base to win elections by themselves and haven’t since 1975 when 51% of the electorate identified themselves as Democrats immediately after the Watergate scandal and Nixon’s resignation. Yet in 1976 Ford came real close to winning the presidency. Reagan won in 1980 when 45% of the electorate identified themselves as Democrats and only 25% as Republicans.

    So who the candidates are is more important than the size of the base when it comes to presidential elections. Also whom the voters are mad at or happy with. In 2008 the voters were just plain tired of Republican rule, Obama won 53% to 46% over McCain, a 7 point margin. Yet party affiliation was 36-25% Per Pew Research a margin of 11 points. In 2012 the numbers were 32-24% Democratic advantage with Obama winning reelection by a 51-47 margin.

    Section 9: Trends in Party Affiliation | Pew Research Center for the People and the Press

    Today I do not have figures from Pew, but I do Gallup and as of 9 November 2014 Gallup places party affiliation at 28% each for the Republicans and Democrats. My point is your demographics are included in these numbers, they take the entire electorate and break them down by party. I think that is a much simpler way.

    As for Hillary or Warren or whomever, any Democrat will be very hard to beat. This is because of the Electoral College. Obama beat Romney by 4 points in the popular vote, but by 62-38 margin in the Electoral College. Unless Obama fatigue sets in big time like Bush fatigue did between 2006-08, regardless of whom the Democrats run they start out with a 247-191 trustworthy states advantage in the Electoral College. But that can change based on whom the candidates are and on whether Obama fatigues lasts another two years and how the economy is doing.
    Have you ever thought of political analysis as a career? Just a random question.

  3. #53
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,932
    Blog Entries
    25

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    Have you ever thought of political analysis as a career? Just a random question.
    No, politics and election prediction has been my hobby since I first watched the 1956 Democratic and Republican conventions on TV. My career has been military all my life. 20 years active, another 26 as a Department of the Army Civilian. I would never change that.

    The bottom line is politics is fun, it is entertainment for me. I would have that no other way either.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  4. #54
    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 Perotista View Post
    No, politics and election prediction has been my hobby since I first watched the 1956 Democratic and Republican conventions on TV. My career has been military all my life. 20 years active, another 26 as a Department of the Army Civilian. I would never change that.

    The bottom line is politics is fun, it is entertainment for me. I would have that no other way either.
    Fair enough. Just thought I'd ask because you're pretty damn good at it. Not to blow smoke up your ass, but I love seeing your posts because they give me a clear, accurate, and nonpartisan analysis of the race or event in question.

  5. #55
    Sage
    polgara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,347

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    Fair enough. Just thought I'd ask because you're pretty damn good at it. Not to blow smoke up your ass, but I love seeing your posts because they give me a clear, accurate, and nonpartisan analysis of the race or event in question.
    Greetings, TeleKat.

    He's been our "go-to" guy for a long time, and we appreciate him, cause it's a lot of work, although he says it's his hobby! It would give me a major headache! Since he doesn't care either way, he is as unbiased as one can get! Thanks for giving him the kudos he deserves!

  6. #56
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,932
    Blog Entries
    25

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by TeleKat View Post
    Fair enough. Just thought I'd ask because you're pretty damn good at it. Not to blow smoke up your ass, but I love seeing your posts because they give me a clear, accurate, and nonpartisan analysis of the race or event in question.
    I try. Being once an election is over I compare my results to the professionals like Nate Silver, Charlie Cook, Larry Sabato, Rothenberg and others. I did pretty good, missing only North Carolina and Kansas. The wave was a bit bigger than I thought. I also came real close in the House, I predicted a pick up of 9 Republican seats, they picked up 13. Not bad.

    I posted all my predictions on my blog and I made an early start for 2016. That is just a SWAG. But thanks for the kind words.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  7. #57
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,150

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    And the key is in your last seven words - "Dark horses do well for the Democrats." I don't ever remember the GOP having a dark horse candidate win a presidential election. Ever.

    And I don't think you have any realistic hopes of one on the horizon, either, thanks to the increasing polarization of the parties. Liberals by their very nature are more likely to listen to someone they've never heard of, even if that person looks and sounds differently, and even if they've got a funny name. Conservatives, OTOH, are less likely to do so, but are more likely to pay more attention to someone more familiar to them.

    I know that may sound offensive to you, but it's not meant to be offensive...and both ways certainly have their advantages and disadvantages. But the above is why dark horse candidates do well for the Dems...and not so much for the GOP.
    Um... I think there's been some kind of miscommunication here. Because I wasn't arguing for a GOP dark horse. I was arguing for Warren.

  8. #58
    Haters gon' hate
    MarineTpartier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    01-04-16 @ 04:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,586
    Blog Entries
    8

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    If you don't think Hillary can stir up the base, you're greatly underestimating her. But the base of either party simply isn't enough in a presidential election, as the GOP simply doesn't seem to get. Hillary's greatest advantage...is the GOP's insistence on doing whatever it takes to piss off the minorities in its eternal quest to stir up its increasingly way-far-to-the-right-of-Goldwater base. As long as your politicians keep playing the "I'm-more-conservative-than-the-other-guy" circular firing squad game, the Dems will hold the White House.
    She has never shown she can stir anything up other than controversy. She's just not an exciting candidate. No one ever "gets a thrill up their leg" about Hillary Clinton.

    Not debating "my politicians" as you like to call them. This thread is about the Democratic Party. I have stuck to the topic of the thread and will continue to. That you decided to, for some unknown reason, make comments that have nothing to do with the topic makes no sense to me. You really brought no relevant point to the debate. Have a nice day.
    “Mr. Speaker, I once again find myself compelled to vote against the annual budget resolution for a very simple reason: it makes government bigger.” ― Ron Paul
    Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty. – Thomas Jefferson

  9. #59
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,690

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by SmokeAndMirrors View Post
    Well, they both are, in a way. Neither are appealing, on issues, to the average person, certainly.
    Bases are always in second place to prudence. Only in retrospect do the bases rally to their leader. They forget about the internal dissent from the time period. The rest of the time, the base is in a perpetual state of displeasure. Washington, Lincoln, Teddy, FDR, Kennedy, and Reagan all went through it and all rehabilitated to fantasy true believer status.

    This lead me to believe that bases need bones to be fed while being directed straight to the center.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  10. #60
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,690

    Re: 2016 Democratic Presidential Primary

    Quote Originally Posted by SmokeAndMirrors View Post
    The Republicans don't have the same base they did back in the day. Their base these days is, firstly, reactionaries, and secondly, the politically ambivalent who are just tired of Dems never getting anything done on any metric, liberal or otherwise.
    Back in the day is when, exactly? I can't think of a time in the past 70 years where that was really different (at the very least, from the perspective of liberals).

    The political Democrats today are literally conservatives. All they ever do -- because since they've shirked the idea of supporting liberal policy, it's all they can do -- is try to keep things the way they are. That is a type of moderate conservatism (in action, if not necessarily in root cause).
    Democrats are more moderate than in the past, which may make them seem more conservative. They also are more Hamiltonian than Republicans, which may come off as more conservative. That being said, I'd not exactly consider Democrats all that conservative under many definitions of the word. I do agree they have been influenced by the Reagan years, but I would temper that with a reminder of both the loss of the Blue Dog democrats as well as the Truman democrats.


    The plan of "appealing to the moderates" hasn't worked, because the fact is, we still have a lot of liberals in this country. And the Democrats are losing more of them every election by continuing to be nothing but moderate conservatives, and gaining a few more moderates hasn't made up for losing so many liberals.

    We don't have a liberal major party. We have conservatives and reactionaries.
    I thought it worked quite well for Democrats. While Republicans were disorganized and increasingly outwardly populist, Democrats were capitalizing on the idea that they were the "sane" party-which also meant being less ideologically driven (despite Tea Party protests to the contrary).

    Some of this is merely the result of traditional ebbs and flows in electoral victories ( Americans growing tired of one party being in power for too long), but some of it was successful strategy at appealing to the moderates.

    Die-hards won't get you there. It's falling into the same trap many Republicans have been falling into over the past decade.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

Page 6 of 8 FirstFirst ... 45678 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
  •