2016 Presidential Horse Race

[wizards8507]

24% Opt Out of a Clinton-Trump Race - Rasmussen Reports™

If there were ever a year where a third party could be viable, you'd have to imagine it's the year when the two nominees are the most disliked and polarizing nominees in modern politics, right?

 

[phgreek]

Nationalism is manifesting as xenophobia and racism. Populism is manifesting as tyranny of the majority. Agrarianism is manifesting as ethanol subsidies and Big Farming cartels.

I'm okay losing if the alternative is winning like THAT.

Trump is fighting the establishment and liberal Democrats by convincing people that establishment and liberal Democrat policies are what we need to Make America Great Again (TM). He's the same shit sandwich we've been fed for years, only served on a shiny platter and marketed as new and different.

How was the GOP supposed to adopt any part of that platform without bringing about the same destruction that a Trump presidency would bring? There's no point in winning if you implement the same policies that your vanquished opponent would have implemented.

I only disagree because of the impact to the scotus...if Hill wins the impacts will be suffered for generations...I'm voting only with that in mind now.

 

[wizards8507]

I only disagree because of the impact to the scotus...if Hill wins the impacts will be suffered for generations...I'm voting only with that in mind now.

While I agree that Clinton's SCOTUS picks would be disastrous, I have zero confidence that Trump's would be any better.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Nationalism is manifesting as xenophobia and racism. Populism is manifesting as tyranny of the majority. Agrarianism is manifesting as ethanol subsidies and Big Farming cartels.

I'm okay losing if the alternative is winning like THAT.

Trumpism isn't the only alternative to what the GOP has been selling. Nationalism could have been accommodated through a more realist foreign policy; instead, the GOP has doubled down on liberal interventionism, wasting trillions of dollars in the process. Populism could have been accommodated by tax and policy reforms that benefit middle class families; instead, the GOP has refused to budge from Art Laffer's supply-side playbook. Agrarianism could have been accommodated by simply sticking up for the principles of federalism; but the GOP gave up defending them decades ago.

How was the GOP supposed to adopt any part of that platform without bringing about the same destruction that a Trump presidency would bring?

Grand New Party: How the Republicans Can Win the Working Class and Save the American Dream was published seven years ago. And the "reformocons" have been advocating for such ideas for much longer than that even. Trump wasn't inevitable; but he's become so due to the intellectual bankruptcy of the GOP.

 

[Legacy]

While I agree that Clinton's SCOTUS picks would be disastrous, I have zero confidence that Trump's would be any better.

Then a wise choice would be to confirm Merrick Garland now.

 

[ACamp1900]

While I agree that Clinton's SCOTUS picks would be disastrous, I have zero confidence that Trump's would be any better.

I have to say a lot of people seem to have this concern. Well,... No, really. A lot of people come up to Trump and ask him. They say, 'Why would your SCOTUS picks be better than Clinton's'? That's when Trump tells them. It's clear as day, like the skyline when he plays golf with Bill and together they rag on Bill's haggard wife. Oh my God, I can't believe it. Hillary couldn't choose a reasonable justice, no way. It'd be terrible. Simply terrible. Trump will be the best at picking justice's. Hillary, I mean, that woman will be a cartoon, like just call her the Justice League. With Trump we're gonna be the best at picking justices, believe me.

#MakeAmericaVagueAgain

 

[Irish#1]

If there were ever a year where a third party could be viable, you'd have to imagine it's the year when the two nominees are the most disliked and polarizing nominees in modern politics, right?

I'll give you polarizing, but I don't think you can say Trump is the most disliked. His numbers prove he's pretty popular. Now if you said most disliked within party lines, you're probably right.

Not sure if Trump really needed Bobby Knights support, but it sure didn't hurt his chances to win Indiana on Tuesday.

Cruz announcing Fiorina as his VP is clearly a Hail Mary pass to save his campaign.

 

[pkt77242]

Boehner calls Cruz a 'miserable son of a bitch'

Boehner's description of Ted Cruz, who Boehner worked with in Congress? “Lucifer in the flesh,” Boehner said, according to the Daily. “I have Democrat friends and Republican friends. I get along with almost everyone, but I have never worked with a more miserable son of a bitch in my life.”

 

[NDinL.A.]

I'll give you polarizing, but I don't think you can say Trump is the most disliked. His numbers prove he's pretty popular. Now if you said most disliked within party lines, you're probably right.

Not sure if Trump really needed Bobby Knights support, but it sure didn't hurt his chances to win Indiana on Tuesday.

Cruz announcing Fiorina as his VP is clearly a Hail Mary pass to save his campaign.

Trump's unfavorables are the highest in modern times, even significantly higher that Hillary's. In some polls it is up to 70%; his average is 65% as of last week. He is extremely disliked, and it shows in the polls he loves to brag about.

 

[wizards8507]

I'll give you polarizing, but I don't think you can say Trump is the most disliked. His numbers prove he's pretty popular. Now if you said most disliked within party lines, you're probably right.

Not sure if Trump really needed Bobby Knights support, but it sure didn't hurt his chances to win Indiana on Tuesday.

Poll: Trump, Clinton score historic unfavorable ratings - CNNPolitics.com

Cruz announcing Fiorina as his VP is clearly a Hail Mary pass to save his campaign.

I don't think it's so dramatic. Before the "blue state primaries" on Tuesday, it looked like Trump had a slight edge in Indiana and a win there would put him on the path to the nomination, while a defeat would make a contested convention much more likely. After the blue state primaries, in which Trump's dominance was already widely predicted, it now looks like... Trump has a slight edge in Indiana and a win there would put him on the path to the nomination, while a defeat would make a contested convention much more likely. In other words, nothing has changed. If anything, Kasich supporters voting strategically should be enough to push Cruz over the top.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I'll give you polarizing, but I don't think you can say Trump is the most disliked. His numbers prove he's pretty popular. Now if you said most disliked within party lines, you're probably right.

Not sure if Trump really needed Bobby Knights support, but it sure didn't hurt his chances to win Indiana on Tuesday.

Cruz announcing Fiorina as his VP is clearly a Hail Mary pass to save his campaign.

What numbers are you looking at? RCP shows Trump as the most disliked candidate out there and it's not even close.

 

[beryirish]

Just to note: This thread has got to be the biggest in terms of pages and replies...no?

 

[wizards8507]

Just to note: This thread has got to be the biggest in terms of pages and replies...no?

We haven't passed "Rumored Violations" yet.

 

[ACamp1900]

We haven't passed "Rumored Violations" yet.

Word Game Thread,.. and the other politics thread... lol

 

[Legacy]

Boehner calls Cruz a 'miserable son of a bitch'

Boehner was speaking at Stanford and said even more:
- He accepted Trump as the presumptive nominee,

- said he plays golf with Trump and they were "texting buddies",

- mocked Hillary Clinton (“Oh I’m a woman, vote for me.”) to a negative crowd reaction,

- tied the current administration to Clinton ("“Don’t be shocked … if two weeks before the convention, here comes Joe Biden parachuting in and Barack Obama fanning the flames to make it all happen.")

- referred to the Freedom Caucus as the “knuckleheads” and “goofballs” in Congress,

- “Well you know I’m a big fan of Ronald Reagan. But I love all these knuckleheads talking about the party of Reagan. He would be the most moderate Republican elected today.”

- “I think my proudest accomplishment is walking out of there the same jackass I was 25 years before."

- “If I were running for president I’d be running on things that unite Republicans. These other issues are just going to keep coming up, and the Democrats know where our soft spots are.”

- said the Republican Party needed to move away from divisive social issues,

- and said his most moving moment was meeting Pope Francis.

His full quote on Cruz: “Lucifer in the flesh. I have Democrat friends and Republican friends. I get along with almost everyone, but I have never worked with a more miserable son of a bitch in my life.”

 

[Legacy]

Biden and Boehner to jointly receive Laetare Medal

“We live in a toxic political environment where poisonous invective and partisan gamesmanship pass for political leadership,” said Rev. John I. Jenkins, C.S.C., Notre Dame’s president. “Public confidence in government is at historic lows, and cynicism is high. It is a good time to remind ourselves what lives dedicated to genuine public service in politics look like. We find it in the lives of Vice President Biden and Speaker Boehner.

“While both have been loyal and committed partisans, they were leaders who put the good of the nation ahead of partisan victory, seeking through respectful dialogue honorable compromise and progress. Speaker Boehner’s resistance to a simple reductionism made him suspect in his own party; Vice President Biden reminded his fellow Democrats that those in the other party are ‘our opponents, not our enemies.’

“In recognizing both men, Notre Dame is not endorsing the policy positions of either, but celebrating two lives dedicated to keeping our democratic institutions working for the common good through dialogue focused on the issues and responsible compromise.”

 

[wizards8507]

Biden and Boehner to jointly receive Laetare Medal

How did I miss this? Is there a thread on it? I'd love to see Whiskeyjack twist himself in knots to defend it.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I agree with Boehner that the GOP needs to move away from divisive social issues. It's very off-putting to me personally, but also to the majority of the U.S. who lean left on social/civil issues. I feel like a long time ago they (both parties) realized that pandering on social issues could score votes, but it's gotten out of hand. If the GOP just conceded these issues and began supporting what the majority of Americans are in favor of socially, they could then have a platform that focused on the more serious issues like climate change, the rising costs of healthcare and college tuition, wealth/income inequality and the disappearance of the middle class, etc. Dems and Repubs see a lot of the same issues, they just have different approaches to solving the problems. So lets move passed the social bullshit and focus on fixing the bigger problems. I mean what would be so hard with taking a more Libertarian/Small Government approach on social issues while taking a true conservative approach to economics, etc?

 

[Legacy]

I agree with Boehner that the GOP needs to move away from divisive social issues. It's very off-putting to me personally, but also to the majority of the U.S. who lean left on social/civil issues. I feel like a long time ago they (both parties) realized that pandering on social issues could score votes, but it's gotten out of hand. If the GOP just conceded these issues and began supporting what the majority of Americans are in favor of socially, they could then have a platform that focused on the more serious issues like climate change, the rising costs of healthcare and college tuition, wealth/income inequality and the disappearance of the middle class, etc. Dems and Repubs see a lot of the same issues, they just have different approaches to solving the problems. So lets move passed the social bullshit and focus on fixing the bigger problems. I mean what would be so hard with taking a more Libertarian/Small Government approach on social issues while taking a true conservative approach to economics, etc?

And yet the Republican Party establishment was surprised at the anger expressed by the voters at their Obstructionism? Talk about out of touch.

Sanders better be a wake-up call for the Democrats.

 

[irishfan]

Poll: Trump, Clinton score historic unfavorable ratings - CNNPolitics.com


I don't think it's so dramatic. Before the "blue state primaries" on Tuesday, it looked like Trump had a slight edge in Indiana and a win there would put him on the path to the nomination, while a defeat would make a contested convention much more likely. After the blue state primaries, in which Trump's dominance was already widely predicted, it now looks like... Trump has a slight edge in Indiana and a win there would put him on the path to the nomination, while a defeat would make a contested convention much more likely. In other words, nothing has changed. If anything, Kasich supporters voting strategically should be enough to push Cruz over the top.

Are they going to though? Their whole alliance can't be sitting well with voters at all. I feel like it's going to have the negative effect that they want it to have. I could see more Indiana Kasich voters being annoyed and voting for Trump instead of switching from Kasich to Cruz.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

How did I miss this? Is there a thread on it? I'd love to see Whiskeyjack twist himself in knots to defend it.

I won't defend it. Debated Legacy on this subject elsewhere. Abortion is a grave moral evil, on par with apartheid and genocide; so ND, as the flagship Catholic university in America, shouldn't risk scandal by honoring anyone, especially not one claiming to be Catholic, who publicly dissents from Church teaching on the subject. It's that important.

I assume that ND wanted to honor Biden, and felt like they had to honor Boehner as well in the interest of "balance". Mark Zimmerman at Crux argued yesterday that protesting Biden and not Boehner risks politicizing the American Church in dangerous ways. I don't think any of his objections to Boehner are morally equivalent to Biden's support for abortion, but he does have a point; from what I know of his career, I see no indication that Boehner takes his faith seriously, so I'd prefer that neither be honored by ND.

We risk too much chasing "relevance" at the expense of what makes ND special.

I agree with Boehner that the GOP needs to move away from divisive social issues. It's very off-putting to me personally, but also to the majority of the U.S. who lean left on social/civil issues. I feel like a long time ago they (both parties) realized that pandering on social issues could score votes, but it's gotten out of hand. If the GOP just conceded these issues and began supporting what the majority of Americans are in favor of socially, they could then have a platform that focused on the more serious issues like climate change, the rising costs of healthcare and college tuition, wealth/income inequality and the disappearance of the middle class, etc. Dems and Repubs see a lot of the same issues, they just have different approaches to solving the problems. So lets move passed the social bullshit and focus on fixing the bigger problems. I mean what would be so hard with taking a more Libertarian/Small Government approach on social issues while taking a true conservative approach to economics, etc?

I'm torn on this subject. On one hand, I think it would be very salutary for Christianity in America if our politicians dropped the pretense that this is a "Christian" country anymore. But on the other hand, it's harder than ever to maintain the legal space necessary to raise children in a counter-cultural way, and powerful political forces are increasingly driving Christians from the public square more with each passing day.

Put another way, I'd sign on for a culture war armistice if it came with robust protections for religious freedom. But I don't think that's what you and Boehner have in mind. You'd much rather see religious people forced into self-marginalization so we can just stop talking about these "uncomfortable" subjects.

 

[wizards8507]

Are they going to though? Their whole alliance can't be sitting well with voters at all. I feel like it's going to have the negative effect that they want it to have. I could see more Indiana Kasich voters being annoyed and voting for Trump instead of switching from Kasich to Cruz.

That's certainly a risk. I just feel like anyone inclined to support Trump already is supporting Trump. I don't see him as many folks' backup choice.

 

[wizards8507]

I won't defend it. Debated Legacy on this subject elsewhere. Abortion is a grave moral evil, on par with apartheid and genocide; so ND, as the flagship Catholic university in America, shouldn't risk scandal by honoring anyone, especially not one claiming to be Catholic, who publicly dissents from Church teaching on the subject. It's that important.

I think "refrain from honoring" the person is far too limited. Shouldn't the entire Democrat party be flat-out excommunicated?

 

[pkt77242]

Kasich wants Ind. votes despite Cruz pact | TheHill

Kasich’s Indiana allies rebel against Cruz pact - POLITICO

 

[Irish#1]

Trump's unfavorables are the highest in modern times, even significantly higher that Hillary's. In some polls it is up to 70%; his average is 65% as of last week. He is extremely disliked, and it shows in the polls he loves to brag about.

Poll: Trump, Clinton score historic unfavorable ratings - CNNPolitics.com


I don't think it's so dramatic. Before the "blue state primaries" on Tuesday, it looked like Trump had a slight edge in Indiana and a win there would put him on the path to the nomination, while a defeat would make a contested convention much more likely. After the blue state primaries, in which Trump's dominance was already widely predicted, it now looks like... Trump has a slight edge in Indiana and a win there would put him on the path to the nomination, while a defeat would make a contested convention much more likely. In other words, nothing has changed. If anything, Kasich supporters voting strategically should be enough to push Cruz over the top.

What numbers are you looking at? RCP shows Trump as the most disliked candidate out there and it's not even close.

To be honest, I haven't looked at any polls, but something has to be amiss given he keeps winning. Are they including democrats in these polls? If so, then I can see the numbers. That make the polls somewhat flawed IMO.

 

[wizards8507]

To be honest, I haven't looked at any polls, but something has to be amiss given he keeps winning. Are they including democrats in these polls? If so, then I can see the numbers. That make the polls somewhat flawed IMO.

He's winning in a field that started with 17 candidates. Take a normal candidate like Marco Rubio. He had supporters, people who were indifferent to him, and people who disliked him. With Trump, there's virtually no one who is indifferent to him. He has his supporters and almost everyone else dislikes him.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I won't defend it. Debated Legacy on this subject elsewhere. Abortion is a grave moral evil, on par with apartheid and genocide; so ND, as the flagship Catholic university in America, shouldn't risk scandal by honoring anyone, especially not one claiming to be Catholic, who publicly dissents from Church teaching on the subject. It's that important.

I assume that ND wanted to honor Biden, and felt like they had to honor Boehner as well in the interest of "balance". Mark Zimmerman at Crux argued yesterday that protesting Biden and not Boehner risks politicizing the American Church in dangerous ways. I don't think any of his objections to Boehner are morally equivalent to Biden's support for abortion, but he does have a point; from what I know of his career, I see no indication that Boehner takes his faith seriously, so I'd prefer that neither be honored by ND.

We risk too much chasing "relevance" at the expense of what makes ND special.



I'm torn on this subject. On one hand, I think it would be very salutary for Christianity in America if our politicians dropped the pretense that this is a "Christian" country anymore. But on the other hand, it's harder than ever to maintain the legal space necessary to raise children in a counter-cultural way, and powerful political forces are increasingly driving Christians from the public square more with each passing day.

Put another way, I'd sign on for a culture war armistice if it came with robust protections for religious freedom. But I don't think that's what you and Boehner have in mind. You'd much rather see religious people forced into self-marginalization so we can just stop talking about these "uncomfortable" subjects.

Just because I'm not religious doesn't mean I believe it to be insignificant to American culture. My main issue on this subject is when religious beliefs of one group seep into legislation that effects everyone, especially those not of said religious group. I support religious freedom (accept when it is used as an excuse to discriminate...because to me, that's counterproductive when figuring out how to reunite Americans instead of dividing them further, but I digress). It's part of this country's DNA. But so is freedom from religion. I think the latter is just as important because of the diversity within the U.S.

 

[pkt77242]

Cruz denies alliance with Kasich that his campaign announced earlier this week

Lying Ted?

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Just because I'm not religious doesn't mean I believe it to be insignificant to American culture. My main issue on this subject is when religious beliefs of one group seep into legislation that effects everyone, especially those not of said religious group.

What would you classify as a "religious belief"? Can the moral values underlying the Civil Rights Act of 1964 be proven empirically in ways that the Catholic prohibition on abortion cannot?

I support religious freedom (accept when it is used as an excuse to discriminate...because to me, that's counterproductive when figuring out how to reunite Americans instead of dividing them further, but I digress).

What do you mean by "discriminate"? Every rational person discriminates; "Catholics believe these things, but not those things", "Democrats support these policies, but not those policies", etc. Human society wouldn't be possible without it. You of course mean the sort of discrimination targeted by the CRA; and most Christians would agree with you, both because of the Christian concept of spiritually equality before God, and because that sort of animus is simply irrational. But when you seek to extend the protections of the CRA to human behaviors, and insist that one mustn't discriminate based on what that person does with other consenting adults sexually, well then you've just placed a massively important domain of human behavior beyond the reach of ethical inquiry, and it's you who is now acting irrationally (especially given the mountain of evidence that sexual liberalism is rapidly killing the West).

It's part of this country's DNA. But so is freedom from religion. I think the latter is just as important because of the diversity within the U.S.

There's no such thing as "freedom from religion". Secular liberalism is no less a religion than Christianity; it's just as totalizing in its truth claims. Good governance is impossible without some sort of shared moral framework among the governed. Protestant Christianity provided that basis for most of our history. The current unprecedented levels of polarization and social atomization are directly correlated to the loss of that basis. We can either agree to give local communities the freedom to largely govern themselves (according to their own values), or we can continue tearing each other apart in winner-takes-all battles over the Federal government. I think the former is the only way we can hold this republic together.

 

[phgreek]

Boehner was speaking at Stanford and said even more:
- He accepted Trump as the presumptive nominee,

- said he plays golf with Trump and they were "texting buddies",

- mocked Hillary Clinton (“Oh I’m a woman, vote for me.”) to a negative crowd reaction,

- tied the current administration to Clinton ("“Don’t be shocked … if two weeks before the convention, here comes Joe Biden parachuting in and Barack Obama fanning the flames to make it all happen.")

- referred to the Freedom Caucus as the “knuckleheads” and “goofballs” in Congress,

- “Well you know I’m a big fan of Ronald Reagan. But I love all these knuckleheads talking about the party of Reagan. He would be the most moderate Republican elected today.”

- “I think my proudest accomplishment is walking out of there the same jackass I was 25 years before."

- “If I were running for president I’d be running on things that unite Republicans. These other issues are just going to keep coming up, and the Democrats know where our soft spots are.”

- said the Republican Party needed to move away from divisive social issues,

- and said his most moving moment was meeting Pope Francis.

His full quote on Cruz: “Lucifer in the flesh. I have Democrat friends and Republican friends. I get along with almost everyone, but I have never worked with a more miserable son of a bitch in my life.”

makes me like Cruz a little actually...John Boehner is last generation's Republican. He was either oblivious or miscalculated regarding the desires of a big chunk of current Republicans. He was a dick to their representatives, and to them. So screw John Boehner...he fought like a girl.