2016 Presidential Horse Race

[wizards8507]

Its crazy to think about. I don't understand what Trump is doing, idk if he wants to be president or not but surely he knows he's not gonna be able to win the general election with the crazy shit he is saying. Part of me thinks he's bored and has nothing better to do than mess with the election and stir up a bunch of shit. He's got plenty of money, is he just being an attention whore now?

Part of me thinks he's trying to create a new blueprint for Republican candidates. He's proving that you don't have to play the media's game and tiptoe around certain issues to maintain and grow your support. He's taking Reagan's "bold colors" strategery to its extreme conclusion. No, that doesn't mean I think Marco Rubio should start behaving like Trump, but we can talk about difficult issues without being destroyed by the PC culture.

But then I remember that he's not actually a principled conservative so he probably doesn't care what the Republicans do.

 

[GoIrish41]

Except that Jews weren't waging a global jihad against the western world. Minor difference.

Are you suggesting that the 1 billion Muslims in the world are all "waging a global jihad against the western world?" That is what Trump and ISIS would like everyone to believe because it gives them both more power and influence. I reject that line of thinking. The vast majority of Muslims in the world want peace and do not support the violence of ISIS.

 

[GoIrish41]

Its crazy to think about. I don't understand what Trump is doing, idk if he wants to be president or not but surely he knows he's not gonna be able to win the general election with the crazy shit he is saying. Part of me thinks he's bored and has nothing better to do than mess with the election and stir up a bunch of shit. He's got plenty of money, is he just being an attention whore now?

At best his rhetoric is absurd, but it is also deeply irresponsible and harmful. Again, what are all those angry people who support him going to do with their rage and hatred when Trump slithers back into his hole? That's what scares me.

 

[phgreek]

Part of me thinks he's trying to create a new blueprint for Republican candidates. He's proving that you don't have to play the media's game and tiptoe around certain issues to maintain and grow your support. He's taking Reagan's "bold colors" strategery to its extreme conclusion. No, that doesn't mean I think Marco Rubio should start behaving like Trump, but we can talk about difficult issues without being destroyed by the PC culture.

But then I remember that he's not actually a principled conservative so he probably doesn't care what the Republicans do.

If that is what he is doing...I'll be glad when the object lesson is over. If the effect is Republicans step on the PC crowd from here forward, I'll send the Donald a cigar...after he gets out of the race.

 

[IrishinSyria]

Its crazy to think about. I don't understand what Trump is doing, idk if he wants to be president or not but surely he knows he's not gonna be able to win the general election with the crazy shit he is saying. Part of me thinks he's bored and has nothing better to do than mess with the election and stir up a bunch of shit. He's got plenty of money, is he just being an attention whore now?

If he wins the nomination (and I think he might) he'll begin a long road walking back everything he's said.

 

[GoIrish41]

Part of me thinks he's trying to create a new blueprint for Republican candidates. He's proving that you don't have to play the media's game and tiptoe around certain issues to maintain and grow your support. He's taking Reagan's "bold colors" strategery to its extreme conclusion. No, that doesn't mean I think Marco Rubio should start behaving like Trump, but we can talk about difficult issues without being destroyed by the PC culture.

But then I remember that he's not actually a principled conservative so he probably doesn't care what the Republicans do.

That's all well and good if your final goal is to be the GOP candidate. I've listened to GOP voters for the last two presidential election cycles complain that their moderate candidates cannot win elections. If Trump gets the nomination, he is going to lose in a landslide. What is the takeaway for Republicans in that?

 

[phgreek]

If he wins the nomination (and I think he might) he'll begin a long road walking back everything he's said.

Those are days I do not look forward to. There could be no better candidate for HRC to run against. She would literally get no air...and her campaign could get back into coronation mode.

 

[GoIrish41]

If he wins the nomination (and I think he might) he'll begin a long road walking back everything he's said.

If he can backpedal that well he needs to be the boundary corner for ND next year.

 

[wizards8507]

Are you suggesting that the 1 billion Muslims in the world are all "waging a global jihad against the western world?" That is what Trump and ISIS would like everyone to believe because it gives them both more power and influence. I reject that line of thinking. The vast majority of Muslims in the world want peace and do not support the violence of ISIS.

Even if only 1% of the world's 1.6 billion Muslims are waging a jihad against the western world, that's still 16 MILLION that want to destroy us. And research show's it's much higher. 51% of Muslims believe in shariah law. 13% of Muslims in Great Britain support al-Qaeda attacks on the United States. Religion is not a standard to deny anyone's Constitutional rights, but no one has a Constitutional right to immigrate to the United States.

If he wins the nomination (and I think he might) he'll begin a long road walking back everything he's said.

There's a theory out there that comes from Trump's book "The Art of the Deal." He basically says that, to get what you want, always open negotiations asking for the most ridiculous hyperbole of what you actually want. Then, when you negotiate down, you appear reasonable and compromising when you really get what you wanted in the first place.

That's all well and good if your final goal is to be the GOP candidate. I've listened to GOP voters for the last two presidential election cycles complain that their moderate candidates cannot win elections. If Trump gets the nomination, he is going to lose in a landslide. What is the takeaway for Republicans in that?

You're making a misunderstanding the Republican spectrum. Trump is not on some "conservative" end of a straight line that starts with Kasich and Romney on one end and Trump as the extreme right-winger. Trump is no conservative by any contemporary undesrtanding of the word. Trump getting slaughtered in the general election (as he would) would indicate that the Republicans shouldn't nominate lunatics. It wouldn't say much at all about the electability of moderate versus conservative candidates. If Ted Cruz were the nominee and got slaughtered, that'd be a different conversation.

 

[Wild Bill]

That's all well and good if your final goal is to be the GOP candidate. I've listened to GOP voters for the last two presidential election cycles complain that their moderate candidates cannot win elections. If Trump gets the nomination, he is going to lose in a landslide. What is the takeaway for Republicans in that?

Polls, whatever they're worth, suggest Trump vs Clinton would be a tight race.

 

[GoIrish41]

Even if only 1% of the world's 1.6 billion Muslims are waging a jihad against the western world, that's still 16 MILLION that want to destroy us. And research show's it's much higher. 51% of Muslims believe in shariah law. 13% of Muslims in Great Britain support al-Qaeda attacks on the United States. Religion is not a standard to deny anyone's Constitutional rights, but no one has a Constitutional right to immigrate to the United States.

What about the Muslim citizens who would be restricted from international travel under Trump's plan and not be allowed to return home?

There are a lot of Muslims who hate Americans, and we've given them lots and lots of reasons to hate us. To tie our two discussions together into one -- maybe if we didn't need their oil, we wouldn't be so aggressive in poking into the Middle East and constantly giving them reasons to hate us more. Maybe we should invest some intellectual capital into fixing those problems instead of creating new ones and/or intensifying old ones.

There's a theory out there that comes from Trump's book "The Art of the Deal." He basically says that, to get what you want, always open negotiations asking for the most ridiculous hyperbole of what you actually want. Then, when you negotiate down, you appear reasonable and compromising when you really get what you wanted in the first place.

Let's see how that works out for him in the election.

You're making a misunderstanding the Republican spectrum. Trump is not on some "conservative" end of a straight line that starts with Kasich and Romney on one end and Trump as the extreme right-winger. Trump is no conservative by any contemporary undesrtanding of the word. Trump getting slaughtered in the general election (as he would) would indicate that the Republicans shouldn't nominate lunatics. It wouldn't say much at all about the electability of moderate versus conservative candidates. If Ted Cruz were the nominee and got slaughtered, that'd be a different conversation.

My point is that starting with an electable candidate is always the first and most important step. They should really learn not to pander to the extreme positions of a minority of their party, which would give them less to overcome in the general election. And, LOL that you think Cruz is some intellectual giant. He'd get slaughtered in the general election, too.

 

[GoIrish41]

Polls, whatever they're worth, suggest Trump vs Clinton would be a tight race.

We're a year away and I don't put much stock into polls this far out. At some point, Trump is going to have to say something intelligent and substantive, or people are going to give up on him. I know a whole lot of Republicans who have told me that if Trump gets the nomination, they aren't going to vote in the election at all. If that carries through with the wider electorate, I think the GOP stronghold on Congress may also be in real peril in 2016.

 

[wizards8507]

What about the Muslim citizens who would be restricted from international travel under Trump's plan and not be allowed to return home?

Did he say that? If so, yikes.

My point is that starting with an electable candidate is always the first and most important step.

Look objectively at Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders from a strictly political baggage standpoint and then talk to me about electability.

They should really learn not to pander to the extreme positions of a minority of their party, which would give them less to overcome in the general election. And, LOL that you think Cruz is some intellectual giant. He'd get slaughtered in the general election, too.

Graduated valedictorian in 1988 from Second Baptist High School
Graduated cum laude from Princeton University in 1992
Graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School in 1995
1992 U.S. National Debate Champion representing Princeton
1995 World Debating Championship semi-finalist representing Harvard

That's just his educational resume, let alone his professional accomplishments.

 

[phgreek]

Did he say that? If so, yikes.


Look objectively at Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders from a strictly political baggage standpoint and then talk to me about electability.


Graduated valedictorian in 1988 from Second Baptist High School
Graduated cum laude from Princeton University in 1992
Graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School in 1995
1992 U.S. National Debate Champion representing Princeton
1995 World Debating Championship semi-finalist representing Harvard

That's just his educational resume, let alone his professional accomplishments.

And those are things he did...not just places he went.

Not a huge Ted fan, but to dismiss him as less than the top end of intellect is...you know what, never mind...I hope people keep doing that. The one thing I know...he may not get elected but he would swab the floor with HRC's tears in a head to head debate...even with Candy Crowley's help I might add.

 

[Ultimate Penn St. Hater]

And those are things he did...not just places he went.

Not a huge Ted fan, but to dismiss him as less than the top end of intellect is...you know what, never mind...I hope people keep doing that. The one thing I know...he may not get elected but he would swab the floor with HRC's tears in a head to head debate...even with Candy Crowley's help I might add.

His name is Rafael.

 

[IrishLax]

That's all well and good if your final goal is to be the GOP candidate. I've listened to GOP voters for the last two presidential election cycles complain that their moderate candidates cannot win elections. If Trump gets the nomination, he is going to lose in a landslide. What is the takeaway for Republicans in that?

I think the big issue is that while Trump and Cruz are certainly not "moderate" they're also crazy. Ben Carson is also (in a very different way) crazy, but I think he's closer to what people were looking for when they said "not moderate" at least from an ideology standpoint.

On that political spectrum quiz thing that matched you with a candidate that was floating around on here awhile I ago I came out a centrist. Right smack dab in the middle. I matched up closest with Clinton, but there were also some Republicans (I think Rubio and maybe Bush) that I was close to.

What people don't want is Kasich or Bush or Romney because it's very easy to paint them as "evil" or "women hating" or "gay hating" or "racist" like the left can do with any candidate with an R next to their name. So they get no pull or credit for having beliefs/policies that are close to a populist like Clinton, but they still get villainized like any Republican will.

Moderate republicans aren't electable because they aren't appealing, crazy republicans aren't electable because they're crazy. Pretty much the only person in the entire field I could see having a realistic chance is Rubio, because he has the most broad appeal and comes off as having a minimal amount of crazy. Everyone else when you add up their crazy + unappealing it = no chance.

 

[Grahambo]

His name is Rafael.

 

[GoIrish41]

Did he say that? If so, yikes.

That's what he's proposing. Its not no new Muslims coming into the country ... it's NO Muslims coming in.

Look objectively at Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders from a strictly political baggage standpoint and then talk to me about electability.

I get it. You don't like them. That is altogether different than if they are electable or not. For all the crap out there on Hillary -- some of it legitimate and some of it not -- she remains electable and extremely popular among the Democrats (although not me). Bernie is also popular, and if not for Hillary in his way, he might well be widely accepted by the party. He is also liked by many on the right, although they do not agree with a damn thing he says. Also electable.

Now, compare them to Trump the bigot, Carson the wacko, and Mr. Government Shutdown Cruz. These people are not even popular within their own party, let alone to the wider electorate. People are not going to come out to make sure they win. At best, they will show up to make sure Hillary loses, but I suspect any of them would garner a dip in GOP voting next November. Trump's greatest hope of victory is that the field stays large in the GOP, but he will get killed in the general.

Rubio, IMO, is your party's best hope, but he has a tendency to bend with the political wind and is easily corrupted by the "popular" whims of the silliest people in the party. But, he is electable. Maybe Christy is electable. Kasich is electable. Trump and Carson are side show acts, and nobody on the left or right likes Cruz.

Graduated valedictorian in 1988 from Second Baptist High School
Graduated cum laude from Princeton University in 1992
Graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School in 1995
1992 U.S. National Debate Champion representing Princeton
1995 World Debating Championship semi-finalist representing Harvard

That's just his educational resume, let alone his professional accomplishments.

He has a nice resume on paper, but he pulls politically suicidal, stupid stunts like lead the charge to shut down the government. But again, he's just not a likable guy. Most people I know who are Republicans and Democrats can't stand him. Expressing a desire to punch in the face comes up a lot when his name is mentioned.

 

[GoIrish41]

I think the big issue is that while Trump and Cruz are certainly not "moderate" they're also crazy. Ben Carson is also (in a very different way) crazy, but I think he's closer to what people were looking for when they said "not moderate" at least from an ideology standpoint.

On that political spectrum quiz thing that matched you with a candidate that was floating around on here awhile I ago I came out a centrist. Right smack dab in the middle. I matched up closest with Clinton, but there were also some Republicans (I think Rubio and maybe Bush) that I was close to.

What people don't want is Kasich or Bush or Romney because it's very easy to paint them as "evil" or "women hating" or "gay hating" or "racist" like the left can do with any candidate with an R next to their name. So they get no pull or credit for having beliefs/policies that are close to a populist like Clinton, but they still get villainized like any Republican will.

Moderate republicans aren't electable because they aren't appealing, crazy republicans aren't electable because they're crazy. Pretty much the only person in the entire field I could see having a realistic chance is Rubio, because he has the most broad appeal and comes off as having a minimal amount of crazy. Everyone else when you add up their crazy + unappealing it = no chance.

Beat me to it. Good post.

 

[wizards8507]

He has a nice resume on paper, but he pulls politically suicidal, stupid stunts like lead the charge to shut down the government. But again, he's just not a likable guy. Most people I know who are Republicans and Democrats can't stand him. Expressing a desire to punch in the face comes up a lot when his name is mentioned.

Americans hate the government. The only people who even notice when it shuts down are non-essential government workers and they ain't voting Republican anyways.

 

[wizards8507]

Moderate republicans aren't electable because they aren't appealing, crazy republicans aren't electable because they're crazy. Pretty much the only person in the entire field I could see having a realistic chance is Rubio, because he has the most broad appeal and comes off as having a minimal amount of crazy. Everyone else when you add up their crazy + unappealing it = no chance.

You sound like the GHW Bush spin room in 1979.

 

[FearTheBeard]

I would agree that Rubio is the most electable. Then probably Kasich but im pretty sure most republicans dont really want him. Watching the republican debates i couldn't stand listening to Cruz talk, he'd go off on some weird off-topic rants that didn't even contribute to the conversation and it drove me nuts.

 

[GoIrish41]

Americans hate the government. The only people who even notice when it shuts down are non-essential government workers and they ain't voting Republican anyways.

Do you really think all government employees are Democrats? lol

Americans don't hate the government ... Republicans hate the government (although they get lathered up when their candidates don't win). Most Democrats I know believe government is broken, but if repaired could be a force for good.

 

[GoIrish41]

I would agree that Rubio is the most electable. Then probably Kasich but im pretty sure most republicans dont really want him. Watching the republican debates i couldn't stand listening to Cruz talk, he'd go off on some weird off-topic rants that didn't even contribute to the conversation and it drove me nuts.

My take on Cruz ... he is always earnest in his desire to say something profound and important, but he never gets there.

 

[phgreek]

Americans hate the government. The only people who even notice when it shuts down are non-essential government workers and they ain't voting Republican anyways.

Hey, aren't you being racist or something?

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Americans hate the government. The only people who even notice when it shuts down are non-essential government workers and they ain't voting Republican anyways.

Americans hate the government in the abstract. But the often love what the government does. See the "keep your government hands off my medicare" and Craig T. Nelson ("I've been on food stamps and welfare, anyone help me out? No.") crowd.

Most people have a libertarian streak, but only for certain things.

 

[MJ12666]

I know this was yesterday's discussion but two interesting articles on climate change covering opinions from two President Obama supporters who are both highly respected physicists.

Top Physicist Freeman Dyson: Obama ‘Took the Wrong Side’ on Climate Change

Nobel-winning physicist who backed Obama: Prez 'dead wrong' on global warming - Washington Times

 

[Grahambo]

Americans hate the government. The only people who even notice when it shuts down are non-essential government workers and they ain't voting Republican anyways.

...and the essential personnel who still have to work and don't get paid. Do we get the money eventually? Sure. But then they bump us up into a higher tax bracket. So, when we did get the back pay, a few weeks later, we all noticed we got less then what we should've gotten on a normal cycle.

In 2013, I still had to work more normal schedule but missing normal payday screwed up some things financially for my family. Was not fun.

Oh, and I'm a registered Republican.

 

[wizards8507]

...and the essential personnel who still have to work and don't get paid. Do we get the money eventually? Sure. But then they bump us up into a higher tax bracket. So, when we did get the back pay, a few weeks later, we all noticed we got less then what we should've gotten on a normal cycle.

Okay I'm a CPA, and that's extremely misleading. Your tax liability for the year has nothing to do with the timing of how you're paid. If a weekly fluctuation makes your department's payroll system *think* you're in a higher tax bracket than you really are, you'd get the exact equivalent refunded at tax return time (or you'd owe less if you enter tax season with a payment due).

*This does not constitute tax, legal, accounting, or other professional advice.

 

[woolybug25]

Okay I'm a CPA, and that's extremely misleading. Your tax liability for the year has nothing to do with the timing of how you're paid. If a weekly fluctuation makes your department's payroll system *think* you're in a higher tax bracket than you really are, you'd get the exact equivalent refunded at tax return time (or you'd owe less if you enter tax season with a payment due).

He's talking about that specific check, not the aggregate at year end. Payroll systems are constantly trying to estimate your full year earnings based on the current paycheck it is processing and then estimating the total amount of taxes you will need withheld for the year. In Grahambo's situation, they would take the gross earnings on the paycheck (which is now back pay + regular pay) and multiply it by the rest of the pay periods for the year to estimate the full year earnings. So that one paycheck would be taxed higher than normal because it would be estimating much higher year end earnings. Sure, he will get it back in his tax return (hypothetically), but that doesn't help him pay the bills he's been sitting on since his last paycheck.

C'mon, CPA...