OMG Politics, I'm over it already.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Help!I'maRock! said:
I mean not confusing anything. An Independent candidate is any candidate that is not running as a Democrat or Republican. Sanders was an Independent for most of his career.
Click to expand...

We were talking about the chances of a third party candidate. That implies a unified party with a platform. A bunch of single minded candidates with an ambiguous 'independent' label isn't a party, and they have no implied support between them. It's not the same thing.
 
from Politico:
"The coherence gap: Let's be blunt -- Donald Trump is having some trouble putting clear thoughts together tonight. And Hillary Clinton's easy familiarity with the argot of public policy is striking in contrast to his word salads."
 
335clone said:
We were talking about the chances of a third party candidate. That implies a unified party with a platform. A bunch of single minded candidates with an ambiguous 'independent' label isn't a party, and they have no implied support between them. It's not the same thing.
Click to expand...

Not at all. You said an independent couldn't win anything higher than dog catcher. You may not want them to win, and certainly no independent candidate will win this particular presidential election, but they have indeed won prominent public office in the past, as proven by Sanders and Bloomberg. And independent candidates have a good chance of winning again. Especially if the Libertarians win 5% of the popular vote in this election, which qualifies them for matching funds in 2020. It's not much, but it's a step in the right direction.
 
Help!I'maRock! said:
Not at all. You said an independent couldn't win anything higher than dog catcher. You may not want them to win, and certainly no independent candidate will win this particular presidential election, but they have indeed won prominent public office in the past, as proven by Sanders and Bloomberg. And independent candidates have a good chance of winning again. Especially if the Libertarians win 5% of the popular vote in this election, which qualifies them for matching funds in 2020. It's not much, but it's a step in the right direction.
Click to expand...

"That is 7x more likely than a third party candidate being elected to anything above dog catcher. Ever."

Third Party.

Party. Not maverick independents by name.

As I have said numerous times, you simply cannot run the country without supporting players. That was the real problem facing Bernie Sanders if he had been elected. Which I wanted to happen. But knowing full well that neither the republicans nor democrats would work with him to make the changes we wanted. If there were say 30 libertarian (to name an actual political party) Senators, or 200 green party congressmen, then you have the ability to compete with the big 2. Third party advocates always think from the top down, not the bottom up. That is why they have no chance at the presidency. They lack the foundation to reach that stature.
 
335clone said:
"That is 7x more likely than a third party candidate being elected to anything above dog catcher. Ever."

Third Party.

Party. Not maverick independents by name.

As I have said numerous times, you simply cannot run the country without supporting players. That was the real problem facing Bernie Sanders if he had been elected. Which I wanted to happen. But knowing full well that neither the republicans nor democrats would work with him to make the changes we wanted. If there were say 30 libertarian (to name an actual political party) Senators, or 200 green party congressmen, then you have the ability to compete with the big 2. Third party advocates always think from the top down, not the bottom up. That is why they have no chance at the presidency. They lack the foundation to reach that stature.
Click to expand...

You want a movement. That's not what we have in this country. It's like wishing Clinton was the perfect Democrat. The major parties have quashed any possibility of it. Independents who have the opportunity to get their names out there, and random third party affiliated candidates to move the ball forward is all we have right now. So you can either wait 20 years and continue to vote for the downward spiral in the interim, or get behind it now and quote Oscar Jordan with your best, "I was there!"
 
I missed the first 30 or so minutes as I was in a meeting, and understood Trump did slightly better in those minutes, which is not awesome. But turned it on via NPR on the way home and from that point forward, Ms. Clinton seemed in control. The "word salad" statement I quoted above seemed to fit. Real time fact checking once I got home was nailing him repeatedly while much more favorable for Ms. Clinton.

His misogynistic condescension was unreal. The Tax Return non-answer and birther sections were also unreal. It was like he lobbed Ms. Clinton some softball pitches and she teed off. She also scored some big hits on the business dealings, and lack of prep. I thought she did very well. She was candid and did not make excuses about the emails. Not sure what more she could have done. I cannot believe anyone really wants to vote for him.

But that is what is mostly bothering me. It seems, if you believe polls and the media, that a large segment of the population still wants to vote for him. ( up to last night, haven't seen any new polls). This just blows me away.
 
Oh, and this from the NYT this morning is something I agree with:

“Debate” is an iffy word for an exercise in which candidates are prompted by moderators to dole out their stump speeches bit by bit under hot lights while a clock counts the seconds and every quip and jab and stumble is used to keep score and proclaim a “winner.”

But when just one candidate is serious and the other is a vacuous bully, the term loses all meaning."
 
sunvalleylaw said:
I missed the first 30 or so minutes as I was in a meeting, and understood Trump did slightly better in those minutes, which is not awesome. But turned it on via NPR on the way home and from that point forward, Ms. Clinton seemed in control. The "word salad" statement I quoted above seemed to fit. Real time fact checking once I got home was nailing him repeatedly while much more favorable for Ms. Clinton.

His misogynistic condescension was unreal. The Tax Return non-answer and birther sections were also unreal. It was like he lobbed Ms. Clinton some softball pitches and she teed off. She also scored some big hits on the business dealings, and lack of prep. I thought she did very well. She was candid and did not make excuses about the emails. Not sure what more she could have done. I cannot believe anyone really wants to vote for him.

But that is what is mostly bothering me. It seems, if you believe polls and the media, that a large segment of the population still wants to vote for him. ( up to last night, haven't seen any new polls). This just blows me away.
Click to expand...

After watching last night, I really can't believe he got the nomination. The rest of the republican field was not very good, but man, he is in over his head. He can't even deliver a clear concise response. He can't let anything go and nit picks every little jab thrown his way. He would be a total disaster and destroy the progress made in the last 8 years.
 
sunvalleylaw said:
I missed the first 30 or so minutes as I was in a meeting, and understood Trump did slightly better in those minutes, which is not awesome. But turned it on via NPR on the way home and from that point forward, Ms. Clinton seemed in control. The "word salad" statement I quoted above seemed to fit. Real time fact checking once I got home was nailing him repeatedly while much more favorable for Ms. Clinton.

His misogynistic condescension was unreal. The Tax Return non-answer and birther sections were also unreal. It was like he lobbed Ms. Clinton some softball pitches and she teed off. She also scored some big hits on the business dealings, and lack of prep. I thought she did very well. She was candid and did not make excuses about the emails. Not sure what more she could have done. I cannot believe anyone really wants to vote for him.

But that is what is mostly bothering me. It seems, if you believe polls and the media, that a large segment of the population still wants to vote for him. ( up to last night, haven't seen any new polls). This just blows me away.
Click to expand...

He did well enough in the first 30 minutes to cast reasonable doubt on her campaign and he was surprisingly calm. His unraveling came in the last 20 minutes or so, peaking with the Rosie O'Donnell thing, which was surreal. I don't even like Rosie O'Donnell. But seriously, what the fuck was that?

As for people voting for him, the win is in the middle margin. If he has two more debates like that one, the polls should swing significantly in her favor. Unless Julian Assange gets involved again.
 
Help!I'maRock! said:
He did well enough in the first 30 minutes to cast reasonable doubt on her campaign and he was surprisingly calm. His unraveling came in the last 20 minutes or so, peaking with the Rosie O'Donnell thing, which was surreal. I don't even like Rosie O'Donnell. But seriously, what the fuck was that?

As for people voting for him, the win is in the middle margin. If he has two more debates like that one, the polls should swing significantly in her favor. Unless Julian Assange gets involved again.
Click to expand...

I couldn't believe the Rosie thing. It really shows he lacks the ability to lead. All he had to do was calmly say, I have said some things in a public feud that I regret and he would have knocked that out of the park. But he can't. He can't be wrong or apologize. It was the same thing with birther topic.
 
Lerxst said:
Well, the only thing I learned last night is that Lester Holt should never moderate another debate. Ever.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, and he took great pride during the introduction saying all the questions were his. Why the hell did he bring up the birther thing, other than to rile up Trump (which doesn't take much). Why would Obama's birth certificate have anything to do with choosing our next president?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top