2016 Presidential Horse Race

[DomeX2 eNVy]

I think this is a great way to respond to personal attacks. Well done.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="und" dir="ltr"><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TrumpHasSpoken?src=hash">#TrumpHasSpoken</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/sadly?src=hash">#sadly</a> #9.99 <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/NoLongerA10?src=hash">#NoLongerA10</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/IHadAGoodRun?src=hash">#IHadAGoodRun</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/donaldtrump?src=hash">#donaldtrump</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/HeidiTrumpsTrump?src=hash">#HeidiTrumpsTrump</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/BeautyIsInTheEyeOfTheBeheld?src=hash">#BeautyIsInTheEyeOfTheBeheld</a> <a href="http://t.co/dwDmEXNKMR">pic.twitter.com/dwDmEXNKMR</a></p>— Heidi Klum (@heidiklum) <a href="https://twitter.com/heidiklum/status/633347987910074368">August 17, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[DomeX2 eNVy]

Big win in his home state for Rand Paul.

He gets (read: Pays) the GOP to move from a primary to a caucus so that he doesn't violate their law of not being on the same ballot for two different positions. It is also a win that he got them to move from a May primary to a March caucus. It is always good to get your best chance of winning moved up to get some attention, delegates, momentum, and money flow.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

The Dems need him to run. Hillary could go to prison and Bernie isn't going to cut it.

I'm pulling for The Bern. He's gaining popularity. It's almost a no brainer for the poor and middle class to vote for him, imo. He's not going to make any friends in the billionaire class though and unfortunately, this country is run by them. Hopefully he can change that.

 

[koonja]

I don't follow this closely. Trump doesn't have a legitimate shot to win, does he? Knowing nothing, I'd expect Jed Bush or Clinton to win this thing.

 

[connor_in]

I don't follow this closely. Trump doesn't have a legitimate shot to win, does he? Knowing nothing, I'd expect Jed Bush or Clinton to win this thing.

Well doggies...

just playin...

 

[EddytoNow]

I don't follow this closely. Trump doesn't have a legitimate shot to win, does he? Knowing nothing, I'd expect Jed Bush or Clinton to win this thing.

My Prediction - As the current Republican field begins to pair itself down, the non-Trump Republican vote will begin to consolidate into a united front that will keep him from getting the Republican nomination. (Most likely Republican nominee will be Kasich, Rubio, or Bush) If he does succeed in splitting the Republican primary vote enough to win the nomination, he will have a hard time surpassing 35% of the vote in the presidential election. His best bet is to narrowly win the nomination and then face a badly beaten and battered Hillary Clinton in the general election. If enough voters are disillusioned by those two choices and choose to show their displeasure by staying home on election day, we could have a Clinton or Trump elected by less than half the eligible electorate. The diehard Trump and Clinton voters might be the only ones showing up on election day. If the electorate were given a choice of "Neither of the Above", I suspect "Neither of the Above" would garner more votes than either Trump or Clinton.

The one encouraging sign for Democratic voters is the meeting held between Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren. I suspect the meeting was to gauge whether Biden and Warren could form a team that would galvanize the Democratic electorate. Right now Bernie Sanders is garnering the anti-Hillary support in the Democratic Party. A Biden-Warren team would give Democratic voters a viable alternative to Clinton. If Warren threw her support behind Joe Biden (either as the Vice-Presidential candidate or simply vigorously campaigning for Joe Biden), the two could upset Hillary and then go on to beat Trump or whomever the Republicans have left standing at the end of their primary season.

 

[BleedBlueGold]

I have a serious question. Why are Democrats seemingly freaking out about the possibility of Hillary not winning, to the point where they're "unleashing their secret weapon" in Biden/Warren? Why not get behind Bernie, who's trending up and bringing in some of the biggest crowds out of every candidate?

 

[Irish8248]

I have a serious question. Why are Democrats seemingly freaking out about the possibility of Hillary not winning, to the point where they're "unleashing their secret weapon" in Biden/Warren? Why not get behind Bernie, who's trending up and bringing in some of the biggest crowds out of every candidate?

Because he's bat shit crazy and has no moderate bone in his body

 

[EddytoNow]

I have a serious question. Why are Democrats seemingly freaking out about the possibility of Hillary not winning, to the point where they're "unleashing their secret weapon" in Biden/Warren? Why not get behind Bernie, who's trending up and bringing in some of the biggest crowds out of every candidate?

There's a large percentage of Democrats that aren't thrilled with a Hillary Clinton candidacy. Bernie Sanders has generated a lot of interest from these left-leaning Democrats, but Democrats remember what happened with McGovern, Mondale, and Dukakis. They can't win with just the far left anymore than the Republicans can win with just the far right. They have to appeal to a good percentage of the moderates to win the swing states. Biden and/or Warren appeal to both the left-leaning Democrats and the moderates who determine the winner in most presidential elections.

Having lost the last two elections through a failure to generate any support among minorities, the Republicans seem bound and determined to nominate someone as far-right as possible. The Democrats may fall victim to this same line of thinking if Bernie Sanders does in fact win the Democratic nomination, but I think they are attempting to appeal to moderates and would prefer a more moderate candidate.

 

[wizards8507]

I have a serious question. Why are Democrats seemingly freaking out about the possibility of Hillary not winning, to the point where they're "unleashing their secret weapon" in Biden/Warren? Why not get behind Bernie, who's trending up and bringing in some of the biggest crowds out of every candidate?

Because Bernie is a "true believer" in all the lies the Democrats have been spreading for years. Namely, he thinks that government exists to protect the "little guy" against special interests. He hasn't figured out that the Democratic power structure is built to serve their own special interests just like the Republicans do.

 

[ND NYC]

I still think Bloomberg is gonna jump into this thing at some point...

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

I'm pulling for The Bern. He's gaining popularity. It's almost a no brainer for the poor and middle class to vote for him, imo. He's not going to make any friends in the billionaire class though and unfortunately, this country is run by them. Hopefully he can change that.

You can pull all you want, but it's not happening. Even though the coastal leftists in NY and CA have taken over the DNC, they still aren't ready to call themselves the socialist party they are becoming.

Almost a no brainer for the poor and middle class to vote for him? The poor and middle class want more redistribution of wealth, more debt, more social programs, and a stagnant economy that's barely dragging along? News to me.

 

[Buster Bluth]

You can pull all you want, but it's not happening. Even though the coastal leftists in NY and CA have taken over the DNC, they still aren't ready to call themselves the socialist party they are becoming.

Almost a no brainer for the poor and middle class to vote for him? The poor and middle class want more redistribution of wealth, more debt, more social programs, and a stagnant economy that's barely dragging along? News to me.

Wut.

If Bernie Sanders makes it to the general election he will run on campaign finance reform and wealth inequality. He's not going to turn the US into the USSR, and I would love for the GOP to try to make that case in an election. Considering the GOP's awful demographic and electoral situation, I'm not losing sleep about his ability to win a general election.

And the economy is doing very well for the rich, that's basically his whole point. The middle class is getting screwed.

 

[Buster Bluth]

Because Bernie is a "true believer" in all the lies the Democrats have been spreading for years. Namely, he thinks that government exists to protect the "little guy" against special interests. He hasn't figured out that the Democratic power structure is built to serve their own special interests just like the Republicans do.

Interesting that you say that considering he's not a Democrat and is the only liberal in Congress to criticize the Democratic Party. Not exactly "believing all the lies," or else he'd be in the damn party.

I have no disagreements about the Democrats serving their own (corporate donor daddy) interests, and I think he would too considering arguably his largest issue is campaign reform.

 

[BGIF]

Run Joe Run!

 

[Circa]

Presidential Sensation Deez Nuts Is a 15-Year-Old Iowa Farm Boy - The Daily Beast

Go Polls!

 

[pkt77242]

You can pull all you want, but it's not happening. Even though the coastal leftists in NY and CA have taken over the DNC, they still aren't ready to call themselves the socialist party they are becoming.

Almost a no brainer for the poor and middle class to vote for him? The poor and middle class want more redistribution of wealth, more debt, more social programs, and a stagnant economy that's barely dragging along? News to me.

You love to throw stuff like this around.

Here is a very interesting website that might help you.
DW-NOMINATE Joint House and Senate Scaling Page

Here is a great graph from that site.

Also while you weren't discussing Obama here is an interesting article from 538
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/29/how-liberal-is-president-obama/

Here is an interesting graph from that article

 

[bobbyok1]

Win, Ben, Win! That's all

 

[yankeehater]

Bernie Sanders: A 90 Percent Tax Rate Isn't Too High

Not sure how motivated anyone would be to work if they had to give 90% to our lovely gov't.

 

[pkt77242]

Bernie Sanders: A 90 Percent Tax Rate Isn't Too High

Not sure how motivated anyone would be to work if they had to give 90% to our lovely gov't.

I am not saying that I am a huge fan of a 90% tax rate but historically we have done it before for the highest earners.

Not my favorite graph on it but it works. Basically from the 40's to the early 60's we had a rate that was about 90% (I believe that highest was 94%).

This one is interesting as well

 

[yankeehater]

I am not saying that I am a huge fan of a 90% tax rate but historically we have done it before for the highest earners.

Not my favorite graph on it but it works. Basically from the 40's to the early 60's we had a rate that was about 90% (I believe that highest was 94%).

You would need goods and services to be priced at levels of the 40's to be able to survive.

 

[pkt77242]

You would need goods and services to be priced at levels of the 40's to be able to survive.

Huh? 90% would be the marginal tax rate not the effective tax rate. Or did you mean something else entirely?


ETA: The graph shows the highest marginal rate at the point in time.

 

[yankeehater]

Huh? 90% would be the marginal tax rate not the effective tax rate. Or did you mean something else entirely?


ETA: The graph shows the highest marginal rate at the point in time.

As far as incentivizing people to go above and beyond the threshold it makes very little difference. Years ago, I worked for a company (industry wide union standard....figures) that the commission structure began at 3% and once a certain dollar figure was achieved each month the commission percentage moved to 1%. This did exactly what the union wanted and leveled the playing field because once a sales rep hit the threshold they stopped working for the month, held over orders to following month, etc. This allowed the weaker sales people to sale items towards the end of the month while the others sat at home.

This in turn caused top sales people to leave the company because it was very limiting as to your annual earning. Is this what we want is for people to leave the industry (country) or to stop working all together once they hit the earning threshold?

 

[phgreek]

As far as incentivizing people to go above and beyond the threshold it makes very little difference. Years ago, I worked for a company (industry wide union standard....figures) that the commission structure began at 3% and once a certain dollar figure was achieved each month the commission percentage moved to 1%. This did exactly what the union wanted and leveled the playing field because once a sales rep hit the threshold they stopped working for the month, held over orders to following month, etc. This allowed the weaker sales people to sale items towards the end of the month while the others sat at home.

This in turn caused top sales people to leave the company because it was very limiting as to your annual earning. Is this what we want is for people to leave the industry (country) or to stop working all together once they hit the earning threshold?

Sure...why not. If the talented can work 1/2 as hard, and stand down waiting for the talent hampered to get theirs, then think of the Utopia...

 

[BGIF]

Donald Trump's immigrant wives - CNNPolitics.com

By Chris Frates, CNN
Updated 9:50 PM ET, Mon August 24, 2015

Mother born in Scotland. Grandfather born in Germany. Trump second generation American.

Two wives, Melina born in Slovenia and Ivana born in Czechoslovakia both become citiznes after marrying Donald.

Anchor Husband?

 

[potownhero]

I am not saying that I am a huge fan of a 90% tax rate but historically we have done it before for the highest earners.

Not my favorite graph on it but it works. Basically from the 40's to the early 60's we had a rate that was about 90% (I believe that highest was 94%).

This one is interesting as well

This is the most moronic post ever. Yeah take us back to a time when there was no global competition... Do you remember what that great Democrat JFK use to say about taxes and their stifling national growth?

Why do you want our country to be poorer? Are you anti-American?

 

[phgreek]

Donald Trump's immigrant wives - CNNPolitics.com

By Chris Frates, CNN
Updated 9:50 PM ET, Mon August 24, 2015

Mother born in Scotland. Grandfather born in Germany. Trump second generation American.

Two wives, Melina born in Slovenia and Ivana born in Czechoslovakia both become citiznes after marrying Donald.

Anchor Husband?

...well except I'm pretty sure I don't pay for his anchor wives...or anchor wives in general.

 

[wizards8507]

Donald Trump's immigrant wives - CNNPolitics.com

By Chris Frates, CNN
Updated 9:50 PM ET, Mon August 24, 2015

Mother born in Scotland. Grandfather born in Germany. Trump second generation American.

Two wives, Melina born in Slovenia and Ivana born in Czechoslovakia both become citiznes after marrying Donald.

Anchor Husband?

Are you intentionally being intellectually dishonest, or do you honestly not see the difference between IMMIGRATION and what's happening at the Mexican border? One of them consists of following the laws of a country in order to become a citizen. The other involves willfully breaking the law to sneak into said country in order to receive benefits not due to you.

That braindead argument is akin to equating a bank robbery to a guy going to the bank to use the ATM.

 

[Ndaccountant]

I am not saying that I am a huge fan of a 90% tax rate but historically we have done it before for the highest earners.

While 90% catches the eyes and attention, we cannot fail to mention where the lowest marginal rate was.....cannot imagine that today.

 

[pkt77242]

This is the most moronic post ever. Yeah take us back to a time when there was no global competition... Do you remember what that great Democrat JFK use to say about taxes and their stifling national growth?

Why do you want our country to be poorer? Are you anti-American?

LOL. Nice personal attacks. If you actually read the start of my post it states that I am not a fan of a 90% rate now. Just posting what the highest marginal rate has been historically as a little history is good for everyone. Calling someone a moron and then asking if they are anti-american in the same post shows that you really aren't interested in having a conversation.

While 90% catches the eyes and attention, we cannot fail to mention where the lowest marginal rate was.....cannot imagine that today.

Completely agree. Though I would add that real wages weren't stagnant then for many people.

My ideal would be making a top rate of 45-50% which would start at 25 million or so. I would actually like to keep the 35% rate and expand it to 500K or 600K (instead of where it currently ends somewhere in the low to mid 400,000) then 40% (or the current 39.6) after that, then maybe a 42.5 or 45% (depends on if the top rate is 45 or 50%) rate at 5 or 10 million.

I also would like to see us lower the top corporate rate by eliminating some "loopholes" and incentives. I also think that we need to find ways to cut spending but that is a whole different bag of worms.