2016 Presidential Horse Race

[wizards8507]

I heard in passing that Clinton was beating Rubio currently in Florida, can anyone confirm?

As of June 17, she's beating every Republican in Florida, though Rubio is the closest at 47-44.

 

[GoIrish41]

I heard in passing that Clinton was beating Rubio currently in Florida, can anyone confirm?

Clnton up in all polls, but closing some of the gap as Clinton's rough patch pushes her numbers down a bit.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Rubio vs. Clinton

 

[mgriff]

I heard in passing that Clinton was beating Rubio currently in Florida, can anyone confirm?

Here's the source, you lazy bum. 2016 Presidential Swing State Polls Poll - June 17, 2015 - Clinton, Rubio Close In Florid | Quinnipiac University Connecticut

 

[ACamp1900]

Here's the source, you lazy bum. 2016 Presidential Swing State Polls Poll - June 17, 2015 - Clinton, Rubio Close In Florid | Quinnipiac University Connecticut

I have my lap dogs find my sources for me.... see.


Thanks G.

 

[phgreek]

Am I reading that correctly? That Clinton has a 40+ point lead on the rest of the democratic field in pretty much every swing state?

So... she's running practically unopposed then...


I have always been an ardant supporter of ALWAYS voting. "Don't complain if you didn't vote" and whatnot... If it is a Clinton/Bush race, then I honestly don't even care who wins. I wont waste my time even thinking about it.

Yep...Jeb or Hills / gun or poison / thumb screw or rack...

This is awful.

I'll vote...I can't vote for Hills...just no way I could live with that. But its more a vote against Hills than for Jeb.

 

[mgriff]

I have my lap dogs find my sources for me.... see.


Thanks G.

No shit. You ask and all the minions move to satisfy your desire. I wanted to give it to you so I could tell you how lazy and worthless you are. Either way, you've got some sources.

It's pretty interesting that HilDog is leading. I guess since we've had a minority POTUS, we have to elect a woman now.

 

[connor_in]

‘How is this not racist?’ WaPo gives airtime to blatant bigotry about Bobby Jindal | Twitchy


Waiting for the outrage...

 

[EddytoNow]

No shit. You ask and all the minions move to satisfy your desire. I wanted to give it to you so I could tell you how lazy and worthless you are. Either way, you've got some sources.

It's pretty interesting that HilDog is leading. I guess since we've had a minority POTUS, we have to elect a woman now.

Hillary being even at this point is a good thing for her. She has been under contant attack, and she still polls fairly even with all her prospective openents. Her negatives are all well-known. There's nothing else to trash her with. She's at her low point right now. Her numbers will only rise from this point on.

Wait until a Republican nominee has been chosen. He or she will then undergo all the media scrutiny that Hillary has already faced. Once her Republican opponent faces the same scrutiny that she has faced, her numbers will rise and her opponent's numbers will fall. Voters will choose Hillary as the lesser of two evils. Nationally, little is known of Rubio, Walker, or Kasich. As their record is revealed, their numbers will fall. Bush? Do we really want another Iraq war? Christie? He's a hothead like John McCain. Do we really want him making impulsive decisions on when to use our military? Cruz? Grandstander with no substance beyond attack politics. Fiorina? Ran her company into the ground. Rand Paul would be the only serious national candidate on the Republican side. The only problem is he won't win the nomination. He's too much of a wildcard for the big money folks. He also tends to reveal too much of his real thinking, and this can make moderates think twice before voting for him. Huckabee? Not a serious candidate to anyone outside the religious right. Trump? I'm not sure the Republicans could even vote for him. Perry? Foot in mouth disease.

The 2016 election will be decided upon Hillary's ability to get Obama's coalition of voters to show up and cast ballots on election day. Once these voters have a clear picture of her opponent, they will show up. Not so much with enthusiasm for Hillary, but out of fear of what the Republicans would do with control of all three branches of the federal government.

If a relatively moderate Mitt Romney couldn't win the election, does anyone really think the country is going to elect one of these Republican candidates? Wait until they undergo some scrutiny by the media.

 

[Wild Bill]

Hillary being even at this point is a good thing for her. She has been under contant attack, and she still polls fairly even with all her prospective openents. Her negatives are all well-known. There's nothing else to trash her with. She's at her low point right now. Her numbers will only rise from this point on.

She'll hit her low point if/when the feds dig into the Clinton Foundation.

 

[DillonHall]

Hillary being even at this point is a good thing for her. She has been under contant attack, and she still polls fairly even with all her prospective openents. Her negatives are all well-known. There's nothing else to trash her with. She's at her low point right now. Her numbers will only rise from this point on.

Wait until a Republican nominee has been chosen. He or she will then undergo all the media scrutiny that Hillary has already faced. Once her Republican opponent faces the same scrutiny that she has faced, her numbers will rise and her opponent's numbers will fall. Voters will choose Hillary as the lesser of two evils. Nationally, little is known of Rubio, Walker, or Kasich. As their record is revealed, their numbers will fall. Bush? Do we really want another Iraq war? Christie? He's a hothead like John McCain. Do we really want him making impulsive decisions on when to use our military? Cruz? Grandstander with no substance beyond attack politics. Fiorina? Ran her company into the ground. Rand Paul would be the only serious national candidate on the Republican side. The only problem is he won't win the nomination. He's too much of a wildcard for the big money folks. He also tends to reveal too much of his real thinking, and this can make moderates think twice before voting for him. Huckabee? Not a serious candidate to anyone outside the religious right. Trump? I'm not sure the Republicans could even vote for him. Perry? Foot in mouth disease.

The 2016 election will be decided upon Hillary's ability to get Obama's coalition of voters to show up and cast ballots on election day. Once these voters have a clear picture of her opponent, they will show up. Not so much with enthusiasm for Hillary, but out of fear of what the Republicans would do with control of all three branches of the federal government.

If a relatively moderate Mitt Romney couldn't win the election, does anyone really think the country is going to elect one of these Republican candidates? Wait until they undergo some scrutiny by the media.

I think that a significant number of voters have not paid much attention yet. The polling results still reflect mainly name recognition instead of each candidate's merits.

 

[Rack Em]

My guess is Rubio. Rand polls poorly in Florida.

That assumes Rubio would accept.

 

[GATTACA!]

Jesus mgriff that sig is out of control. It's 3x the size of your posts

 

[NDgradstudent]

The 2016 election will be decided upon Hillary's ability to get Obama's coalition of voters to show up and cast ballots on election day. Once these voters have a clear picture of her opponent, they will show up. Not so much with enthusiasm for Hillary, but out of fear of what the Republicans would do with control of all three branches of the federal government.

If a relatively moderate Mitt Romney couldn't win the election, does anyone really think the country is going to elect one of these Republican candidates? Wait until they undergo some scrutiny by the media.

These days, the Democratic coalition is united by its contempt for the 'typical' American person. Blacks, Mexicans, gays, Jews, single women, atheists, etc., do not have that much in common except this resentment. It is a coalition of the fringes.

As long as the Democrats keep importing poor Mexicans/Central Americans, they enlarge their permanent voting bloc that both depends upon handouts and will not bite the hand that feeds them. This is what Labour did in the UK, and it has worked.

 

[mgriff]

Jesus mgriff that sig is out of control. It's 3x the size of your posts

Size, baby.

I've thought about resizing it, but now I feel like I'd be less of a man if I made it smaller.

 

[Ultimate Penn St. Hater]

These days, the Democratic coalition is united by its contempt for the 'typical' American person. Blacks, Mexicans, gays, Jews, single women, atheists, etc., do not have that much in common except this resentment. It is a coalition of the fringes.

As long as the Democrats keep importing poor Mexicans/Central Americans, they enlarge their permanent voting bloc that both depends upon handouts and will not bite the hand that feeds them. This is what Labour did in the UK, and it has worked.[/QUOTE

As long as the wealthy keep getting government handouts, they will remain in the Republicans' pocket.

 

[pkt77242]

These days, the Democratic coalition is united by its contempt for the 'typical' American person. Blacks, Mexicans, gays, Jews, single women, atheists, etc., do not have that much in common except this resentment. It is a coalition of the fringes.

As long as the Democrats keep importing poor Mexicans/Central Americans, they enlarge their permanent voting bloc that both depends upon handouts and will not bite the hand that feeds them. This is what Labour did in the UK, and it has worked.

So all minorities vote Democrat because they are resentful of the white male? Wow!

 

[GoIrish41]

These days, the Democratic coalition is united by its contempt for the 'typical' American person. Blacks, Mexicans, gays, Jews, single women, atheists, etc., do not have that much in common except this resentment. It is a coalition of the fringes.

As long as the Democrats keep importing poor Mexicans/Central Americans, they enlarge their permanent voting bloc that both depends upon handouts and will not bite the hand that feeds them. This is what Labour did in the UK, and it has worked.

This is absolute bullshit. I am not black, Mexican, gay, Jewish, single, female or athirst, but I am a Democrat. Why? Because of ignorance like this ridiculous post. Perhaps the fact that the republicans have adopted a victim mentality in which their very survival is at risk from all of these "others" on the fringes is the reason that they will not see the White House anytime soon. You cannot continue alienating everyone else while not keeping up with the birth rate of those people who hate your policies and your politics. Eventually that coalition will become the majority and you and I will be the minorities. when that happens I hope that the coalition does not lump us altogether and treat us with the sort of dismissive contempt and ignorance that you have put on display here. Your side is losing because we live in a country of people who have the ability to show ignorance the door when they have had enough.

 

[EddytoNow]

These days, the Democratic coalition is united by its contempt for the 'typical' American person. Blacks, Mexicans, gays, Jews, single women, atheists, etc., do not have that much in common except this resentment. It is a coalition of the fringes.

As long as the Democrats keep importing poor Mexicans/Central Americans, they enlarge their permanent voting bloc that both depends upon handouts and will not bite the hand that feeds them. This is what Labour did in the UK, and it has worked.

So let me see if I understand you correctly. Blacks, Mexican-Americans, Gays, Jews, Single Women, Atheists, etc. do not fit your definition of "typical American" persons? What about Native Americans? Are they American enough to fall under your definition of what qualifies as a typical American? And really? You don't consider single-women to be typical Americans? There are probably more single and divorced women in this country than there are married women.

It's that attitude that drives these voters to the Democratic Party in droves. Until the Republican Party views diverse Americans as just as American as your so-called "typical Americans", the voters will continue to flock to the party that welcomes them with open arms, and not to the party that views them as some sort of lesser American or in some cases not worthy of being an American at all.

 

[Buster Bluth]

These days, the Democratic coalition is united by its contempt for the 'typical' American person. Blacks, Mexicans, gays, Jews, single women, atheists, etc., do not have that much in common except this resentment. It is a coalition of the fringes.

As long as the Democrats keep importing poor Mexicans/Central Americans, they enlarge their permanent voting bloc that both depends upon handouts and will not bite the hand that feeds them. This is what Labour did in the UK, and it has worked.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

These days, the Democratic coalition is united by its contempt for the 'typical' American person. Blacks, Mexicans, gays, Jews, single women, atheists, etc., do not have that much in common except this resentment. It is a coalition of the fringes.

As long as the Democrats keep importing poor Mexicans/Central Americans, they enlarge their permanent voting bloc that both depends upon handouts and will not bite the hand that feeds them. This is what Labour did in the UK, and it has worked.

Man. Like 190 of your 195 posts are just straight out of Infowars.

Also... "Blacks, Mexicans, gays, Jews, single women, atheists" are all typical Americans.

 

[Cackalacky]

 

[DillonHall]

These days, the Democratic coalition is united by its contempt for the 'typical' American person. Blacks, Mexicans, gays, Jews, single women, atheists, etc., do not have that much in common except this resentment. It is a coalition of the fringes.

As long as the Democrats keep importing poor Mexicans/Central Americans, they enlarge their permanent voting bloc that both depends upon handouts and will not bite the hand that feeds them. This is what Labour did in the UK, and it has worked.

You're an embarrassment to the GOP

 

[mgriff]

 

[NDgradstudent]

Strikingly, nobody seems to have read the Telegraph article I linked to. In it, a Labour apparatchik openly acknowledges that Labour saw mass immigration as a way to destroy its political opponents by importing people who they knew would not vote Tory. This is just reality, but I wouldn't expect Democrats posting here to acknowledge it- after all, it helps their party!

As long as the wealthy keep getting government handouts, they will remain in the Republicans' pocket.

That's true to a certain extent, although it varies greatly by region. The wealthy parts of Manhattan are not GOP bastions. Of course, the wealthy also support open borders, because it means cheap waiters and nannies, depresses wages, etc. This is the main reason the GOP will not confront the issue frankly.

This is absolute bullshit. I am not black, Mexican, gay, Jewish, single, female or athirst, but I am a Democrat. Why? Because of ignorance like this ridiculous post. Perhaps the fact that the republicans have adopted a victim mentality in which their very survival is at risk from all of these "others" on the fringes is the reason that they will not see the White House anytime soon. You cannot continue alienating everyone else while not keeping up with the birth rate of those people who hate your policies and your politics. Eventually that coalition will become the majority and you and I will be the minorities. when that happens I hope that the coalition does not lump us altogether and treat us with the sort of dismissive contempt and ignorance that you have put on display here. Your side is losing because we live in a country of people who have the ability to show ignorance the door when they have had enough.

You being a Democrat is not related to the truth of my argument. There is a difference between a general statement about a population ("men are taller than women") and a particular statement about members of the population ("Sally is taller than Jim").

My side is losing because the country is flooding with immigrants. If you import Democratic voters then Democrats win more often. Not complicated. Poorer voters will always support the redistributionist party. As for "alienating" everyone else- they come to this country alienated! This is why so many immigrants send tons of money they make here back to wherever they came from. And who has a "victim" mentality? Your party is a cavalcade of victims, fighting over government spoils.

Also, are you a public employee/union worker? I should have added that to the list. If not, you are a rare person indeed.

So let me see if I understand you correctly. Blacks, Mexican-Americans, Gays, Jews, Single Women, Atheists, etc. do not fit your definition of "typical American" persons? What about Native Americans? Are they American enough to fall under your definition of what qualifies as a typical American? And really? You don't consider single-women to be typical Americans? There are probably more single and divorced women in this country than there are married women.

It's that attitude that drives these voters to the Democratic Party in droves. Until the Republican Party views diverse Americans as just as American as your so-called "typical Americans", the voters will continue to flock to the party that welcomes them with open arms, and not to the party that views them as some sort of lesser American or in some cases not worthy of being an American at all.

Basically, the less you are like George Washington the more likely you are to vote for Obama. All of those groups either resent people are more like George Washington or do not think of themselves as "American" in the normal sense. Just go to the annual ND/Mexico soccer game and see who the local Mexicans root for. They think it is racist to speak English to other Mexicans, too.

There are more single and divorced women in this country than married women. That's my point. This sort of fragmentation does not help the GOP.

You're an embarrassment to the GOP

So you think mass immigration helps the GOP? Would you care to provide any evidence for this thesis?

 

[pumpdog20]

I really don't understand the Rand Paul love. This one video where he runs like a coward because an uncomfortable situation is coming is all I need to know.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7HCpkVlX5OA

 

[DillonHall]

So you think mass immigration helps the GOP? Would you care to provide any evidence for this thesis?

I have no idea if you're twisting my words on purpose or if you just don't understand. Let me put it another way: your racist views are harming the way that the GOP is perceived and fuels the narrative that we're all racist and bigoted.

It's quite disapointing that you're associated with my alma mater.

 

[GoldenDome]

I would vote for that ticket, providing Sanders' name remained first.

Bernie Bernie Bernie!!!


Anyone but Hillary or a Koch Bros sock puppet. If Bernie was elected, we can safely say that he was not bought by SuperPACs and donors.

 

[GATTACA!]

I have no idea if you're twisting my words on purpose or if you just don't understand. Let me put it another way: your racist views are harming the way that the GOP is perceived and fuels the narrative that we're all racist and bigoted.

It's quite disappointing that you're associated with my alma mater.

The way he said it was less than tactful, but can you honestly say that you don't see a connection between the the party that wants more subsidies getting a the majority of the voters that use said subsidies?

 

[pkt77242]

The way he said it was less than tactful, but can you honestly say that you don't see a connection between the the party that wants more subsidies getting a the majority of the voters that use said subsidies?

Do you see a connection between old white men voting for Romney in 2012? Or the Rich voting for Romney? I wonder who would have benefited from Romney winning in 2012.

Here is the breakdown from the 2012 election.
How Groups Voted in 2012 - Roper Center

While yes the poorest and the people with the lowest education voted for Obama, did you notice that the most highly educated also voted for Obama? Yep, 55% of people with a postgraduate degree voted for him.

Also do you blame businesses for supporting Republicans when Republicans keep passing laws that benefit them? Do you blame old white people for voting for Republicans? Is it really shocking that minorities voted for a minority President?

If he had said that they voted Democrats because they felt supported by Democrats, or that they felt that Democrats represented them best, then I would agree but he wrote:

These days, the Democratic coalition is united by its contempt for the 'typical' American person. Blacks, Mexicans, gays, Jews, single women, atheists, etc., do not have that much in common except this resentment. It is a coalition of the fringes.

Yep, it sure must be resentment that drove them to vote for Obama, not the Republican's policies. Also they don't count as 'typical' Americans. Look we can debate how different subsidies encourage support (yes both among the poor and also among the rich and businesses) but he didn't do that. He attacked the minorities as not typical Americans, and that they only vote for Democrats because they are resentful of white males (and maybe white females but only the married ones). That is racist, and a little sexist. Sorry.

 

[DillonHall]

The way he said it was less than tactful, but can you honestly say that you don't see a connection between the the party that wants more subsidies getting a the majority of the voters that use said subsidies?

Obviously, there's a correlation. What kind of person votes without their best interests at heart?

In order to survive, however, the Republican party must not continue alienating these people. Instead, the GOP must offer feasible ideas that excite and engage these individuals so that they no longer need said help from the government.

You can continue harping about the increasing diversity of the nation and continue digging yourself in a hole, or you can shed the negative perceptions of the party by finding ways to empower groups who aren't traditionally Republican.