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

Casting call.

Alfred otm

He's not going to run, but his people have created a feedback loop. If he runs, he's even dumber than I thought.

i figure it's good for biden's ego for him to think that people want him to run, and it would be a big blow if he actually were to run and see how thin his "support" really is. so he has no reason to actually run.

Trump and Carson are tied. This is so awesome.

I think that graph from 538 definitely shows that people still love to go to the circus. Trump has attracted a lot of attention from people who do not care and are probably not even likely to vote.

I mean the idea that Trump or Carson could win the nomination - this is so amazing. It's amazing. It's incredible.

Trump and Carson are tied.

which poll? the poll DJP linked to above shows trump way above everybody (including Carson) in NV and SC

and are probably not even likely to vote.

exactly. they'd have to stumble over the corn liquor jugs in front of the bed.

Trump has attracted a lot of attention from people who do not care and are probably not even likely to vote.

Since our elected officials are basically the public entertainment branch of industry it is a given that a proven entertainer is doing well. Look at Reagan.

"Who's vice president, Jerry Lewis?"

http://www.giantfreakinrobot.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Hoap.jpg

In case people wanted a concise version of why I said what I did upthread

http://usuncut.com/politics/6-reasons-bernie-sanders-actually-owned-the-debate-despite-what-pundits-claim/

some of those stats seem more convincing than others - as pointed out, web-based voluntary polling isn't much of a measure of anything (aside from the enthusiasm of the kind of people who like to take voluntary polls on the web, I guess) - - - but things like the focus group entry are much more interesting:

When the mainstream media polled focus groups to ask who won the debate, group participants overwhelmingly chose Bernie Sanders. CNN selected a group of undecided voters in Nevada; conservative messaging guru Frank Lutz picked a focus group of Democratic voters in Florida; Fusion picked out a focus group of millennial voters from Miami. And in each instance, focus groups thought Bernie Sanders won the debate. Luntz’ participants described Sanders as “strong,” “smart,” and “for the people,” with nearly all participants picking him as their favorite. Fusion’s focus group picked Sanders 8-3.

obv. focus groups are bullshit too, so what's interesting here is that CNN put together the one, and then ignored the results AFAICT. like why even spend the money then?

because they're an outlier

or turned out to be an outlier

also lol @ Luntz

that piece is sad jjj, sorry - just poorly sourced, openly biased, cherrypicked, etc.

HuffPo article takes a similar tack:

This is why the focus groups of actual voters on CNN, Fox, and elsewhere declared Sanders the winner of the debate, not Clinton. Actual voters are not looking for conformity to a conventional standard, however appealing it may appear. Actual voters want the real thing, not the appearance of it. Sanders' authenticity was unmistakable.

the problem is there is absolutely no statistical, historical evidence to back up that voters ever "want the real thing" when it has come down to elections. Voters DO vote according to "superficial standards", they overwhelmingly respond (and vote for) candidates that are "friendly and personable", "at times tough and aggressive" and "confident and in command of her facts" (ok maybe less so on the facts thing, generally speaking). This analysis is pure wishful thinking about the electorate, backed up by poorly sourced internet polls and focus groups - neither of which have ever been reliable indicators of anything when it comes to elections.

yeah the left engages in this kind of stuff all the time: THIS TIME the people will win, because the people are on our side! people really want progressive change!

there's a guy around here, john nichols (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Nichols_%28journalist%29) who routinely writes editorials, etc. about how this or that poll or election shows that people really want /x/ and then blithely (?) ignores all the elections that have gone the wrong way in this state in the last five years.

it's a weird pollyanna phenomenon by people who should know better. it's insulting to the intelligence, or to mine, anyway.

i mean i guess a modicum of self-delusion is necessary to maintain any kind of optimism or desire to keep struggling, or just to inoculate against despair. but the whole cherry-picking of polls and focus groups and election results reminds me of the excesses of literary interpretation where if /x/ doesn't mean /x/ then it can just as easily mean /y/ if your interpretation is willful and clever enough.

you guys are overanalyzing this. If it's true Sanders emerged the best, it's cuz, once again, it's fucking October 2015 and more people had not seen Bernie Sanders than HAD seen Bernie Sanders, and this old dude waving his arms and hitting awkward but honest points about income inequality made sense. Again, we're more used to Sanders than the average TV watcher.

joe biden is the poochie of the 2016 itchy and scratchy dems

yeah the left engages in this kind of stuff all the time: THIS TIME the people will win, because the people are on our side! people really want progressive change!

I guess alot of people buying into bernie are the people too young to remember obama was this guy and didnt get to see what a crock of shit his campaign promises ended up being.

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2015/10/Jeb-Bush-SEC-Logo-640x480.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CPSc0NbU8AATxc2.jpg

https://www.seccountry.com/sec-news/presidential-candidate-asked-to-modify-logo-that-resembles-sec-emblem

the diff is, aside from his commitments to guns, Likudism and the US War Machine, Sanders believes in the good stuff he talks about.

(also the part about he'll never be president)

xp

"The Bear. You talking about Bear Bryant?"

No, the other SEC coach named after a bear.

http://i.imgur.com/9xGX2aD.png

the diff is, aside from his commitments to guns, Likudism and the US War Machine, Sanders believes in the good stuff he talks about.

(also the part about he'll never be president)

xp

― skateboards are the new combover (Dr Morbius)

that's right, you're a movie critic. You believe in good acting as much as I do.

my favorite films of late have reality rather than acting, eg Ventura in the last Pedro Costa dream

uh huh

also i am an EX-critic

I just looked Sanders up on Wikipedia and obviously that's an incomplete picture but I found exactly one piece of legislation with his name on it, from 10 years ago, and it passed the House but was dumped during negotiations with the Senate. So aside from giving good speeches and occasionally voting the right way, what has this guy exactly done to get himself appointed the Great Left-Wing Savior?

talks a good game

(i said the same for years)

I just looked Sanders up on Wikipedia and obviously that's an incomplete picture but I found exactly one piece of legislation with his name on it, from 10 years ago, and it passed the House but was dumped during negotiations with the Senate. So aside from giving good speeches and occasionally voting the right way, what has this guy exactly done to get himself appointed the Great Left-Wing Savior?
--the top man in the language department (誤訳侮辱)

He's largely responsible for greatest reform of vets' health care in decades

i know ilx doesn't really care about defense policy or foreign policy but this was a nice write up- foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/all-the-things-the-democratic-candidates-got-wrong-on-d-1736418989?utm_source=recirculation&utm_medium=recirculation&utm_campaign=wednesdayPM

Focusing on the, uh, focus groups is missing the point. Of course undecided voters by and large aren't going to go for Hillary. If they were going to go for Hillary, they'd already be with her. It's not like they're unfamiliar with her. So the question was who else they were going to go for. Obviously Sanders was the best non-Hillary on the stage. Ergo, Sanders was the winner among the undecideds, and he will gain more support. But so will she, including from some of those who had been waiting for Biden, and she was already well ahead, by nearly two to one. This is academic.

If large media organizations want to get focus groups to push a particular narrative, they can pack with certain segmentations that are likely to get behind that narrative. When the demographic segmentation doesn't do what you expect, it's significant and worth further analysis.

"what has this guy exactly done to get himself appointed the Great Left-Wing Savior?"

Not be Hilary Clinton in a year where Hilary Clinton is the only serious Democratic candidate (and talk a very good game).

"This is academic."

Top 5-10 school talk.

Mario Cuomo got further the same way, but his oratory was prettier

Further in a presidential primary?

well, considering BS hasn't been IN ONE YET... but i meant being gov of a large state for a dozen years.

I assume this was linked earlier? BS saying Putin "has regrets" is amusing. Putin is not a guy to regret shit about shit.

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/all-the-things-the-democratic-candidates-got-wrong-on-d-1736418989

btw i still think there's a 5% chance Sanders is working for Clinton.

He's declared his candidacy. Pretty sure that's farther than Cuomo got.

i mean actual governing, not a plush toy for libs to play with for 9 months

also fuck the presidency

btw i still think there's a 5% chance Sanders is working for Clinton.
--skateboards are the new combover (Dr Morbius)

Ah yes, the sheepdog theory. I must admit I raised an eyebrow when he absolved her of the emails

"I'm sick of hearing that Snowden is working for the damn Russians"

I raised an eyebrow when he absolved her of the emails

This fits his self-image as a serious, issues-oriented candidate, who refuses to be sidetracked into trivialities. It also shows off his poorly developed instincts for winning a national campaign.

Ah yes, the sheepdog theory. I must admit I raised an eyebrow when he absolved her of the emails

the thing is, i actually think this was premature. sure, it's being used as political capital by the GOP, and sure, it's probably been overblown, but it does connect with a larger problem w/ the clintons, and that's their obsessive concern with secrecy and closing ranks--consummate insider behavior. i think sanders could have simultaneously indicated that the concerns were somewhat overblown but suggest that it did point to larger concerns about a clinton presidency.

i can't help but imagine clinton and her circle are totally contemptuous of sanders. i can't imagine they think he's the slightest threat.