a clown car full of millionaires: the 2016 presidential primary thread

dude, no need for the compilation of Wiki facts. In 2008 a candidate whose voting record and convictions weren't much different from HRC except for not being in the Senate when the Iraq War needed authorization got the nomination despite being black and socialist and Kenyan for millions of people who probably ended up voting for him anyway. We're already dealing with a primary season in which Trump's leading and a self-professed socialist leads in some polls. It's September 2015. Lots of shit can happen that can fuck with your condescension.

Have you met Gabbneb's condescension before?

When symmetry required DLC talking points, yes.

Did you actually read what I wrote? It was highly relevant that he was from middle-American Illinois and shares the most predominant ethnic heritage in America (if only because we make such fine distinctions as to the British isles, from which Appalachians don't acknowledge they hail). Or did you think it was because he was "black and socialist and Kenyan" that in 2008 he won neighboring Indiana (only because of the third-party candidate, as in NC, but still), came within 2/10 of a percent in neighboring Missouri, and pushed nearly the entire mountain west leftward, losing Montana by less than 1/2 a percent? That would seem to prove my point that a half-African-American has broader appeal than someone from a more minoritarian white-ethnic heritage like mine, with the substantial number of Democrats who would not vote for him because of his race outweighed by the number of additional African-Americans who turned out on his behalf, as they did in a greater percentage than whites in 2012.

If you want to call marshaling actual evidence and actually answering your question with substance condescending, so be it, but the condescension is actually found in your response.

"We're already dealing with a primary season in which Trump's leading and a self-professed socialist leads in some polls."

plurality candidates, and one only in two small states, one of which is adjacent to the one he represents and arguably both of whose democratic primary/caucus electorates are dominated by the left.

It's pretty close to a Tuomas.

if only because we make such fine distinctions as to the British isles, from which Appalachians don't acknowledge they hail

Which is obviously why they call themselves "Scots-Irish."

about time someone took on the unions and restored prosperity to this nation

http://news.yahoo.com/ap-exclusive-gops-walker-proposes-vast-union-restrictions-040129104--finance.html

I like that Charles Pierce has been flagellating himself in his new articles for thinking scott walker was a dangerous threat. Dude is a fucking clown.

shares the most predominant ethnic heritage in America

German-American?

How Bespectacled Doofus Rick Perry Fooled Every Dumb Pundit In America

so, rattling around in the low single digits for too long now, scott walker decides to take his union busting act to the federal level? hey! remember me? remember that union thing? what's up! god this guy is so bad at this shit.

i love all the "what happened to scott walker?" pieces. the answer is: he did this one thing once and was never particularly smart or interesting or likeable!

^^^ I feel like this describes everyone currently running for the Republican nomination

(except maybe Kasich, who strikes me as someone I would tolerate a lot more if he wasn't actually a governor)

Scott Walker's selling point: "Look! I've won three elections! I do the Kochs' bidding!"

Jeb Bush's selling point: "Look! I can sleep with my eyes open!"

Rick Perry's selling point: "Look! Ants!

Do Ben Carson!!!

DANGER WILL ROBINSON

Ben Caron: "Look! I've done brain surgery on myself!"

Can we make him the president of brain surgery because I think he's doing his best for his country there.

Or maybe the president of an herbal tea company.

walker's stumbling is one of the most welcome political turns i can remember. he really looked like he was poised - appealed to tea partiers, evangelicals, and the establishment gop, won three races in a state that hadn't gone republican in a presidential election since 1984, had done ALOT of footwork in iowa (that his support has eroded there almost completely has to be freaking his staff out) - and then his support collapsed and unlike w/ rick perry, who filled a similar role (though the tea party was never crazy about perry) - legit conservative alternative to the squishy 'moderate' favorite - walker doesn't have the repeated oops moments or moderate position on immigration to explain the collapse. it's like republicans decided you can either be dull or an asshole (carson, trump) but you can't be both. curious what his numbers are like in wisconsin - has he cratered like jindal? it'd be nice if so. i can remember obama going to wisconsin a little while back and basically giving a speech pointing out how much of a mistake they'd made electing walker and he did it by comparing them nonfavorably to minnesota, which is some brutal 'this man knew his turf' shit. hillary has focused on him also (for now at least), to the extent she's ran against any candidate it's been walker.

hillary busy primarily shooting herself in the foot

In late August, Walker's Wisconsin approval rating: 39 percent.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/ca/cf/9f/cacf9f86392afeac7d83fdd2291b53af.jpg

Scott Walker is still an evil motherfucker, regardless of whether or not he's inept. There's still a lot of distance between now and next November. I'll feel a bit better once he's dropped out of the race.

I'll feel a bit better once he's dropped out of the race. an airplane

has hillary had any substantial gaffes? the email thing has hurt her but most of that is the result of bored media determined to have some scandal to cover and some kind of drama in the democratic primary (cf biden rumors). the democratic campaign feels like it hasn't really started, not just in comparison to 2008 but to 2004 even. minimizing the number of debates has been a mistake i think.

how dare you suggest Debbie Wasserman-Schulz makes mistakes

Walker was the most frightening but I never thought he'd be the nominee.

Speaking of Debbie!

A senior state Democratic Party official likened the national party chairwoman’s tenure to a “full-fledged dictatorship,” amplifying growing unease among some top Democrats about party leaders’ efforts to restrict the number of candidate debates during the presidential primaries.

Deb Kozikowski, vice chairwoman of the Massachusetts Democratic Party, said the chief of the Democratic National Committee, US Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, had done a disservice to grass-roots volunteers by allowing Republicans to dominate the airwaves for the last month.

“How do I tell these really dedicated Democrats who work really hard from top to bottom that debates for our presidential candidates are restricted, and they’re there watching all these Republicans get all this air time?” she said. “I think about the folks at the grass roots who work day in day out, no money no glory, because they believe in democracy with a small ‘d’ and the Democratic Party with a large ‘D,’ getting bombarded with all these Republican candidates.”

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2015/09/11/top-mass-democrat-compares-dnc-dictatorship/fbfonfjnDLQzhh3G2TdJvJ/story.html

her habit of hanging out with the Diaz-Balarts and Ros-Lehtinen down here adduces the truth of party collusion.

I'm not really clear on why his numbers have tanked, unless there are really that many primary voters who were shocked/distressed by his multiple answers to various questions in the last month or so

xp

if bernie was smart and a hellraiser (not yet convinced on either myself) he'd be challenging hillary to a debate at every opportunity. it'd be somewhat unfair, i don't think the limits on debates was done at her behest (it's not like the debates is where obama emerged and surpassed her, if anything they helped her more than him), more the doings of a proactive minion, but that wouldn't matter, she'd still look like she was ducking him and that the establishment was trying to fix the race. that he hasn't gone after her and she hasn't gone after him really makes me wonder if he's been promised a cabinet post. i guess it could be they agreed to keep it clean and he's dumb enough to actually do it and she's smart enough to know attacking him isn't necessary and would have some blowback.

shakey the walker collapse actually starts a while back (pre trump even) though it's just now apparent that for whatever reason he's fucked.

i dunno, i think bernie may actually be sincere in his position that he wants to get his message out there and that "going after" hillary actually works against that. not that NOT going after hillary has led the media to aggressively cover his policy positions and avoid horse-race coverage, far from it. but it would be kinda interesting to see a candidate actually stick to a "i'm not going negative" strategy, the whole way through. just a bunch of speeches about issues and things. nice change of pace. i would also believe it if it turned out his people had run the numbers and determined that actually the people who like him like him in part because he does have the feel of someone who's running for something, and that it would diminish him or make him more "ordinary" in their eyes if he started "slinging mud" or "going on the offensive."

but it would be kinda interesting to see a candidate actually stick to a "i'm not going negative" strategy

Bill Bradley

the biggest question is the german-american vote. now that obama isn't running, where will they turn???

So...who's starting to think Kasich has a shot? He's up to like 3 percent in the polls, which in this environment means he's ahead of Walker et al. and is gaining on Bush and Cruz, though he's of course nowhere near Carson/Trump territory. If he can outlast some of the other politician candidates, I think he's got a reasonable chance of rallying the party establishment behind him.

has hillary had any substantial gaffes? the email thing has hurt her but most of that is the result of bored media determined to have some scandal to cover and some kind of drama in the democratic primary (cf biden rumors)

Yeah, if I were Hillary I wouldn't be too worried right here. I don't think anyone really cares that much about the email thing. It's still hard to imagine a scenario in which she doesn't win the nomination, and Democratic voters are going to rally around her when the time comes.

the email thing is the most boring scandal of all time

also, at the risk of being ageist i think it's also a scandal that makes absolutely no sense to a lot of people. like my mom and dad will never have any clue whatsoever what a server is or how emails can be on different servers and ...just the whole thing. it all gets boiled down to "she lied about a computer thing" to them. it's just a shitty scandal

This may be preaching to the choir a bit but I thought Yglesias really nails the weird lens that the media (still) views political campaigns through:

http://www.vox.com/2015/9/14/9300871/jeb-bush-tax-plan

at the risk of being ageist i think it's also a scandal that makes absolutely no sense to a lot of people. like my mom and dad will never have any clue whatsoever what a server is or how emails can be on different servers and ...just the whole thing.

Honestly, I have the feeling it makes no sense to a lot of the reporters covering it, who are as ignorant about technology as they are about...well, pretty much everything else. But they know that if a Clinton did it, it must be bad somehow. Even though Colin Powell, who they all fellate in their dreams at night, especially the men, did pretty much the exact same thing.

btw my deceased Catholic parents wd've gotten the ammo out vs Trump after the 'have my little cracker' comment

So...who's starting to think Kasich has a shot? He's up to like 3 percent in the polls, which in this environment means he's ahead of Walker et al. and is gaining on Bush and Cruz, though he's of course nowhere near Carson/Trump territory. If he can outlast some of the other politician candidates, I think he's got a reasonable chance of rallying the party establishment behind him.

― the top man in the language department (誤訳侮辱), Monday, September 14, 2015 9:19 PM Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yeah this is kinda plausible, like if it becomes clear that he's exciting people and jeb's not, he has the right 'feel' for an 'establishment' candidate. question is how he'll do on that 'exciting people' point - suspect he's vulnerable to some "he's not a REAL conservative!" type stuff depending which voting blocs are paying attention to what. certainly he makes more sense as a presidential nominee than most of the clowns.

kasich's about as exciting as jimmy carter post-76

the thing is he really, really looks like an establishment republican. like the exact type of white guy that looks 'presidential' in these circles, where romney looked like a mannequin with dark secrets and jeb looks like he should be the assistant manager at a food court establishment. depending how aggressive he plays the campaign i could see him as a lot of people's go-to pick for veep, in any case.

never forgot coming home drunk one Saturday night in the early '00s, turning on FOX, and seeing Jon Kasich, who looked tired and as if he'd eaten more Taco Bell than I

the email thing is the most boring scandal of all time

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/001381997/Palin20Frowning_xlarge.jpeg

i would also believe it if it turned out his people had run the numbers and determined that actually the people who like him like him in part because he does have the feel of someone who's running for something, and that it would diminish him or make him more "ordinary" in their eyes if he started "slinging mud" or "going on the offensive."

I don't think Sanders needs to go after Clinton. He needs to get his message out and build support, like he was doing at Liberty University in a remarkably heartening speech / q + a session earlier today. I think the reason the Clinton team hasn't gone after him yet is that they're not sure how, and are aware that there will be some blowback. I think it's much smarter for Sanders to make Clinton attack him out of her own weakness.