POTUS 2016 General Election Discussion Thread

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by tarcone

And you may be right.

But I think the buyers think they got a raw deal the last 8 years.

Look at our economy 8 years ago and look at it today. What exactly did people want that didn't happen?

[cuervo72]

Maybe they should try to flip Congress then?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Why in goodness' name would they not do everything in their power to bar protesters and others trying to ruin the show?

If Microsoft is holding a launch event for the new Xbox, should they open up the stage to a bunch of Sony fanboys?

Pretty much this.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

The conventions are made for TV events in which the parties try to make the case for why their candidates should be elected.

Why in goodness' name would they not do everything in their power to bar protesters and others trying to ruin the show?

If Microsoft is holding a launch event for the new Xbox, should they open up the stage to a bunch of Sony fanboys?

Yeah, this goes for both sides. I don't know why people think the conventions are some kind of place to have protests and huge debates inside. It's supposed to be a celebration for the nominee and the platform going into the election. If people want to do all that stuff outside the convention, go for it. But why would the party that is paying for the convention want a bunch of jagoffs screaming and yelling inside?

[JonInMiddleGA]

I'd have thought the DNC was staffed by even bigger idiots if they didn't take any reasonable precaution to manage their own event ... but maybe that's part of the whole criticize-the-other-side-when-they-do-it thing.

Maybe a lot of people actually hope the opposition IS that stupid, and get frustrated when they aren't?

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Maybe a lot of people actually hope the opposition IS that stupid, and get frustrated when they aren't?

I think that's part of it. Like in sports, it's always more fun when your opponent does something stupid than when your team does something awesome.

On a related note, this Saints' fan misses Mike Smith coaching the Falcons.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I'd have thought the DNC was staffed by even bigger idiots if they didn't take any reasonable precaution to manage their own event ... but maybe that's part of the whole criticize-the-other-side-when-they-do-it thing.

Maybe a lot of people actually hope the opposition IS that stupid, and get frustrated when they aren't?

The DNC is staffed by idiots. I think it just comes with the political territory. If you have talent, why the fuck would you work in politics?

[SirFozzie]

It sounds like the problem tonight is that they accidentally seated a small amount of troublemakers near the TV network mics. Still, what a bunch of maroons.

Fake edit: Hah! I accidentally wrote "sedated a small amount of troublemakers" I blame the muscle relaxers for tommorrow's "Take 4" attempt at Oral Surgery :P

[tarcone]

I dont like the xbox, sony comparison. Im not buying a product. Im electing my representative and I want my voice heard.

Are they afraid of riots? Are they afraid someone might have a point about the platform that isnt self serving to the candidate?

This country has a constitutional right to protest. Yet here are the elitists on both sides spitting on the constitution.

Yes, I went there.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by tarcone

This country has a constitutional right to protest. Yet here are the elitists on both sides spitting on the constitution.

Yes, I went there.

Not at a private event at a private facility.

[larrymcg421]

Awesome. Bernie and Hillary came together to create a college education plan that has less than zero percent of ever getting passed. It's the right political move if that's what it took to get his support, but the Bernie people sure are going to be pissed about that in 4 years.

[RainMaker]

Who are these people who go to conventions and are brought to tears by politicians speaking?

[wustin]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Who are these people who go to conventions and are brought to tears by politicians speaking?

far left millenials

[RainMaker]

Did you just learn the word millennial today and trying to work it in as much as you can?

[MrBug708]

It's going to be awkward when Hilary's standing ovation lasts 5 minutes less than Bernie's.

[EagleFan]

These conventions keep highlighting exactly why we need to get rid of the two party system. How many times do we hear about doing things "for the party?" It is supposed to be FOR THE PEOPLE!

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Who are these people who go to conventions and are brought to tears by politicians speaking?

*not a real person, performance may or may not be based on actual humans living or dead

[Butter]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

These conventions keep highlighting exactly why we need to get rid of the two party system. How many times do we hear about doing things "for the party?" It is supposed to be FOR THE PEOPLE!

You must've watched about 4 minutes of the convention if that was your takeaway. Maybe you can get a job at some right-wing site with those scorching hot taeks.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Who are these people who go to conventions and are brought to tears by politicians speaking?

Was wondering that myself. Why are you crying? This isn't like some transformational sermon. This is a clumsy bridge-building speech by Bernie flippin' Sanders, who is not really a Democrat.

The idiots they interviewed on the floor during the PBS coverage who are for Sanders who said "I'm not sure what I'm going to do in the fall"... well, let's just say I'm starting to come around to JiMGa's way of thinking on their respective usefulness.

[Butter]

I will say my favorite sign of the night was a Bernie supporter that had altered the STRONGER TOGETHER sign by blacking out strategic letters until it said STOP HER.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by wustin

Also they were taking away Bernie signs threatening to revoke credentials.

I guess they missed 99% of them?

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Bernies revolution was a farce. Otherwise, he would continue on with it. 74 years old with little left in life to accomplish and he shows no stones. He bitched for a year about the system being rigged. Finds out its true and rolls over and will endorse HRC.

What a puss.

Just saw a post on FB about this. A video of Tucker Carlson on Fox News saying he was "disappointed" in Bernie. Tucker Carlson. Right. I'm sure he really believes that, and doesn't just want to dissuade Bernie supporters from voting for Clinton.

[Thomkal]

Originally Posted by EagleFan

These conventions keep highlighting exactly why we need to get rid of the two party system. How many times do we hear about doing things "for the party?" It is supposed to be FOR THE PEOPLE!

You do realize of course that these conventions were organized and run by party leaders? Of course there is going to be a lot of cheering for the party.

[miked]

I'm not sure why all these blue-collar, hard-working people think Donald Trump will be their voice and speaks for them. He has literally spent his entire life/career bullying and taking advantage of them to make himself richer. I guess all that matters is that he's an "outsider" (of course he really isn't as he has been lobbying and rubbing elbows with politicians his entire career).

If only Hillary did not suck so much...

[larrymcg421]

Today's polls...

First result is Clinton-Trump. Second result includes Johnson and Stein.

CNN: Trump +3, Trump +5
CBS: Trump +1, Trump +1
Economist: Clinton +5, Clinton +2
LA Times: Trump +5
NBC: Clinton +1, Trump +2

State Polls...

GA (WSB-TV): Trump +2
NV (Rasmussen): Trump +5
OH (PPP): Tie, Trump +3

[molson]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

I trust those betting real money over flawed polls:

Odds Checker

But hey - if you actually believe those polls are accurate (and not manipulated by the media to make the race seem closer and more exciting than it is), then now's the time to bet the farm. Trump giving good 7/4 odds.

You could have gotten Trump at 30-1 when he announced his candidacy (even though he was immediately leading in the polls). I think there is this hopeful denial factor that has kept his odds relatively low, but he's overachieved all the way through.

And Clinton is very vulnerable and unpopular. I'd say 7/4 sounds about right, that puts Trump at about 36% to win, that's about where he is at Predicit. Those are not very long odds. This is Donald Trump for god's sake, and this could actually happen

[AENeuman]

The trustworthiness factor is confusing to me. On its own it does not seem that important, which is why,I guess, the next president will generally be considered untrustworthy. Becoming/Being president and being a good person seems so impossible, it may as well be considered an impediment.

[albionmoonlight]

I think that the betting markets are not too efficient. I trust the polls more.

The money invested is too low. People's personal views of who they want to win are too strong.

Based on the polls, it makes logical sense to pick up some Trump shares and sell some Hillary shares at the current price. But I imagine that a lot of Hillary supporters are not going to do that simply because it would feel wrong.

And, if after the DNC, Hillary has a stable 5-7 point lead, I don't think that you are going to see lots of Trump folks dumping shares and buying Hillary.

[Ben E Lou]

Don't know if this has been posted here, but it made me chuckle.

[Dutch]

I guess mine will probably be similar just from Establishment back to the outsider...

Rubio 2016!!!! Ok, fine, Trump, I guess.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

I trust those betting real money over flawed polls:

Odds Checker

But hey - if you actually believe those polls are accurate (and not manipulated by the media to make the race seem closer and more exciting than it is), then now's the time to bet the farm. Trump giving good 7/4 odds.

It's meaningless this far out, but I trust those polls just like I trust that Clinton will be back to a ~5 point lead when the Dems get their convention bounce. Country's too polarized (and Hilary too polarizing a candidate) to be more than a 5 point race in November, and the odds 538 has been giving all along in the 20-35% range for a Trump win seem about right. I hate the media, but they don't need to manipulate anything here.

[larrymcg421]

Yeah I think media manipulation is a bit tinfoil hat wishful thinking. I mean they could still make it a close race with Hillary on top, if that was their goal.

The betting markets are where they are because many people with Clinton shares are either: 1) playing the long game and still expect her to win and/or 2) expect the DNC bounce to push things in their favor. In other words, not everyone participating in the betting markets are betting on the reality of now, they're betting on where things will be in the future.

Nate Silver himself said that if the election were held today, Trump would win, but he still has Hillary favored. That doesn't mean he thinks the polls are wrong. He just thinks they will change.

[Ben E Lou]

If you enjoy watching Bernie bros melt down, the #SelloutBernie hashtag is a good place to start...

On Point on Twitter: "Well it's definite, Hillary has put Bernie's testicles in her lock box, will he every get them back? #selloutbernie"

RGoGoGo on Twitter: "@bpolitics @BretBaier after @BernieSanders rolled over id be pissed at him. #SelloutBernie https://t.co/WMvPziKzyy"

★ Thomas Pasieka on Twitter: "Wonder how much the Clintons paid Sanders to say the words he uttered. #selloutBernie"

[Izulde]

I'm rolling my eyes at that hashtag. Yes, it's disappointing to see him wave the white flag, but at least he forced concessions in the platform to make it more progressive. The problem with that (and hence why I'm not all that enthusiastic) is that IMO it's lip service and upon election, Hillary will go right back to doing Hill things.

[larrymcg421]

If anyone says anything that the Berniebros disagree with, they must have been paid to do so because there is only one right opinion to have and everyone else is a sellout corporate fascist.

[Thomkal]

Was watching the roll-call right now, and MSNBC and CNN are giving it full coverage. Fox? split screen of the roll-call with the volume down so the hosts could talk to some adviser/former Clinton worker about Uber and how the Democrats are trying to make it harder for it to be used.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

If anyone says anything that the Berniebros disagree with, they must have been paid to do so because there is only one right opinion to have and everyone else is a sellout corporate fascist.

A couple times I got engaged in a debate with BernieBro's, and they literally refused to believe that Hillary got more votes in the primary. Obviously DWS was biased (although really, there was nothing in the email leak besides a grown man using the word peeps that wasn't well known and discussed in the Dem Primary thread here) and the system was set up to potentially steal a close election, but they wouldn't accept the indisputable fact that Hillary got more votes.

I'm used to accusations of media bias, but even the right wingnuts don't have the audacity to question the actual vote totals that CNN/NYT/WaPo/Google/Wikipedia etc report. Though I guess that makes their belief in the more far fetched parts of their economic platform easier to understand.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Thomkal

Was watching the roll-call right now, and MSNBC and CNN are giving it full coverage. Fox? split screen of the roll-call with the volume down so the hosts could talk to some adviser/former Clinton worker about Uber and how the Democrats are trying to make it harder for it to be used.

Sounds like the right programming decision from their end. What percentage of likely Fox viewers want to watch that roll call? (I mean, even past the question of what percentage of people anywhere want to watch a roll call.) If you want a station who at least tries not to openly cheer for one side, watch PBS.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

A couple times I got engaged in a debate with BernieBro's, and they literally refused to believe that Hillary got more votes in the primary. Obviously DWS was biased (although really, there was nothing in the email leak besides a grown man using the word peeps that wasn't well known and discussed in the Dem Primary thread here) and the system was set up to potentially steal a close election, but they wouldn't accept the indisputable fact that Hillary got more votes.

I'm used to accusations of media bias, but even the right wingnuts don't have the audacity to question the actual vote totals that CNN/NYT/WaPo/Google/Wikipedia etc report. Though I guess that makes their belief in the more far fetched parts of their economic platform easier to understand.

But exit polls!

[Ben E Lou]

Howard Dean won the convention.

[Dutch]

Bill Clinton did a great job. I missed the Howard Dean reference. Did he show up and everybody hollered?

[Dutch]

Just saw it in my news feed, disregard. lol.

[MrBug708]

I wonder how hard the poor intern was laughed at, when he schedule Bill to speak for 20 minutes

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Don't know if this has been posted here, but it made me chuckle.

Yeah, someone shared that to me on FB a couple weeks ago (when Sanders first came out in support of HRC), and I shared it as well. Hilarious.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Izulde

I'm rolling my eyes at that hashtag. Yes, it's disappointing to see him wave the white flag, but at least he forced concessions in the platform to make it more progressive. The problem with that (and hence why I'm not all that enthusiastic) is that IMO it's lip service and upon election, Hillary will go right back to doing Hill things.

...IMO it's lip service and upon election, Hillary will go right back to doing Hill things.

This might as well be her epitaph. This simple statement encapsulates everything that is wrong with her.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

...IMO it's lip service and upon election, Hillary will go right back to doing Hill things.

This might as well be her epitaph. This simple statement encapsulates everything that is wrong with her.

What public office has she won other than her senate seat? And did she break a lot of promises after she won it?

[JPhillips]

Of course Hillary will disappoint. Bernie would, too. They all disappoint.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

I wonder how hard the poor intern was laughed at, when he schedule Bill to speak for 20 minutes

Well I guess there was a reason that there was no headlining speaker scheduled after him. They gave him the space of (at least) two speakers. Though he did a phenomenal job with all that time. Man, Bill's still got it.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Izulde

I'm rolling my eyes at that hashtag. Yes, it's disappointing to see him wave the white flag, but at least he forced concessions in the platform to make it more progressive. The problem with that (and hence why I'm not all that enthusiastic) is that IMO it's lip service and upon election, Hillary will go right back to doing Hill things.

Generally speaking, for everyone aside from the Bernie fans, Hill things are definitely left of center, and to some (you know, everyone to the right of Kasich), they are 'far left'.

[Butter]

I thought he was a little rambly with the "early" part of their life. I get it, he's trying to humanize her. But there's no way everybody stuck with that part.

Overall, I quite enjoyed it, but then again I'm not their target audience.