2016 United States Election

[Maria]

Considering that she has far less charisma than her husband, and far less than Obama, yes. She's personally just a nasty person and isn't able to present herself otherwise without obvious effort leaving her looking completely artificial.

If she's actually an INTJ as many internet sources report (here's one) http://www.josephchris.com/10-famous-pe ... ersonality then acting as an extremely public person might account for the artificiality you object to.

It might be interesting to have an INTJ as president again. It doesn't happen often and not since Eisenhower.
http://thoughtcatalog.com/lorenzo-jense ... iggs-test/
I blame TV. INTJs just aren't going to come across well on broadcasts, I think. Except for trained actors, of course.

[Lalaith]

REL posted this on FB:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/06/opini ... m=Facebook

(You'll have to go to the site to read it.)

[Lalaith]

Oh, I won't be back online till later, but I wanted to add a quick thought in response to tinwë's post. I don't know that the Republicans would choose Rubio to get behind. Last time I heard something (through the grapevine), Glenn Beck was endorsing Cruz. I'm not sure about Limbaugh, but these guys have quite a bit of sway in conservative circles.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

The only thing surprising about this one is that it took this long:

AUGUSTA, Maine — Gov. Paul LePage endorsed Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump on Friday, saying his bombastic style matches that of the billionaire businessman.

“I was Donald Trump before Donald Trump became popular, so I think I should support him since we’re one of the same cloth,” he told conservative radio host Howie Carr.

http://bangordailynews.com/2016/02/26/p ... president/

[superwizard]

This article comes very close to capturing my feelings about the Democratic race (even though I'm not a woman).

I feel pretty similarly. Still being on a college campus, I interact with many Bernie supporters and I often I feel like a wet blanket when I debate them. I let them know that while I agreed with the sentiment behind Sander's message, I do not think that he could be a viable general election candidate and that even if he did win the presidency, that true reform would occur under his watch. I'll point out that the debate over a $12 and $15 minimum wage is inconsequential when you realize that Obama has been advocating for a $10.10 minimum wage for years and that most American don't even know about it. While I agree Trump would be an unpredictable candidate to run against, I fear that Trump would have no problem immediately tarnishing Bernie as a commie-loving socialist who wants to turn America into some dreaded european country. One important trend, IMHO, is that a:

plurality of voters aged 18 to 29 had a favorable view of socialism. But among voters 65 and older, just 15 percent viewed socialism favorably, to 70 percent unfavorably."

(source: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why ... e-s.nders/

I think if Trump was to be the nominee, the whole democratic establishment would need to immediately and in full force go after him with everything they have. He's shown that he does very well when he is 'winning' but comes across quite poorly in moments of distress (think post-Iowa).

As an aside, I have lost all respect for Chris Christie.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I don't think anyone knows for sure what will happen, but I suspect that in a Trump - Clinton matchup a significant number of moderate voters from both parties that would not be likely to vote for Sanders would vote for Clinton (yes, even some Republicans). I think (though I don't know, obviously) that that would outweigh the number of that would vote for Sanders and would not vote for Clinton. I think that of the 60 - 70 percent of GOP voters that are not voting for Trump in the primary, there is likely to be a significant number that are so turned off by him that they would not vote for him in the general election, but also would never vote for Sanders, and might vote for Clinton.

But maybe I am wrong!

[Lalaith]

As of now, I'd vote for Clinton if there was a Clinton - Trump match up.

[Frelga]

And just in case you thought we've reached Peak Crazy...
Is Ted Cruz the Zodiac Killer? Maybe, Say 38 Percent of Florida Voters

More interestingly, there seems to be a robust Sunshine State debate over whether Ted Cruz is the infamous Zodiac Killer. Asked, point blank, "Do you think Ted Cruz is the Zodiac Killer, or not?" ten percent of voters said they think he is, and 28 percent said they were not sure. About two-thirds of voters expressed confidence that the Texas senator is not the serial killer who terrorized Northern California in the Sixties and Seventies, killing as many as 37 people.

Spoiler alert - he isn't.

[River]

Without doing any research into the matter, isn't it obvious that he's a little young to be the Zodiac Killer? Cruz looks like he's in his forties, which means he would have been a little kid, if he was even alive at all, when that murderer was active.

As for Sanders being tarred as a pinko commie socialist...didn't they do that to Obama too? How well did that work out in the general?

[Frelga]

Yes, Cruz was a toddler at the time.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

As for Sanders being tarred as a pinko commie socialist...didn't they do that to Obama too? How well did that work out in the general?

The difference is that with Sanders, it is true.

[Frelga]

That's a point I may come back to debate, although I think I've used up my monthly In Soviet Russia[TRADE MARK SIGN] allowance.

But say it's true about Sanders. We already know that the Republicans are going to label ANY Democratic candidate as a pinko commie. Given that, does running one of whom it's (arguably) true make a difference?

[Lalaith]

I studied the websites of various candidates last night. I wrote down what I saw as pros and cons (and unknowns) for each. Here are some preliminary thoughts.

1) I couldn't even find a website for Rubio, and I'll be darned if I'm going to go digging around past the first page of results for one! <smh> So I have nothing for him. (Honestly! How am I supposed to take you seriously if you don't even have your crap together enough to make sure your presidential race website is front and center?! )

2) Cruz addressed 9 areas of issues. Trump addressed 5. Clinton addressed 27. Sanders addressed about the same. (I quit counting.) I thought that disparity was interesting.

Cruz's general issue areas were: Constitution; 2nd Amendment; secure the border; defend our nation; stand with Israel (really? this is a forefront issue?); religious liberty; life, marriage, and family; jobs and opportunity; and rein in Washington.

Granted, Clinton and Sanders had their issues more individualized, rather than lumped into broad categories, but they still addressed so much more on their sites than Cruz (and way more than Trump).

3) Clinton and Sanders were almost identical in their views. I'm sure there were differences somewhere, but, for the most part, they were the same.

How to pay for many of the things I do support is the number one concern I have with both of them.

4) Cruz actually had some things that I agreed with (about 9 things) and some things that I disagreed with (about 11). There were about 7 things that I simply don't know enough about to have an intelligent opinion (such as economics).

That is not to say that I can give equal weight to all of those. Some of those issues are more important to me than others, but I haven't weighted my views yet.

5) Trump has very little substance on his website. Of that, there were a few things I agreed with (about 6). There were 4 I am unsure about and 3 that I am against. Keep in mind, however, that this is out of the relatively few issues his site even addresses. (I know of many more things he supports that I do not from what I've read and seen online or on TV.)

So I'm still processing through all of that. I think Rubio has no chance of gaining the majority of Republican support, mainly because of what I said previously—he is not endorsed by Beck or Limbaugh and many conservatives are avid followers of those two. That being said, there's Cruz. I did not look up Kasich's website because I don't think he has a chance either, but, if he starts to gain in strength, I will. I still think he has turned out to probably be the best of the bunch on the Republican side, but my opinion doesn't count for much.

And I like many of the things Clinton and Sanders stand for, but I have qualms. I am afraid of many of the things Cruz and Trump stand for, but I have qualms about electing a Democrat.

[Impenitent]

I hope I'm not inadvertently doubling up by linking this, but I've found this to be the most inteligent analysis of Trump's success that I've come across.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/n ... 224?page=1

Posting on phone via Tapatalk

[Cerin]

I hope I'm not inadvertently doubling up by linking this, but I've found this to be the most inteligent analysis of Trump's success that I've come across.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/n ... 224?page=1

Posting on phone via Tapatalk

I did not take the time to read all of this, but I'm glad to see someone put the blame for Trump where it belongs -- on our campaign system and media. Some say that Trump is making a mockery of that system, but it is the system itself that is a mockery, and so an ideal conveyance for someone like him.

Thanks for posting!

[Frelga]

As a sanity check - this BBC article points out that Trump's 46% win in Nevada is based on only 34,531 votes or 1% of Nevada's total population of 2.9 million.

[Primula Baggins]

Hillary Clinton has won the South Carolina Democratic primary, and won big—preliminary estimates are on the order of 68% for Clinton, 31% for Sanders. More significantly, she won a bigger share of the black vote (84-16) than Obama did in 2008 (79-21). This is not a good sign for Sanders, going forward, and the margin is bigger than generally expected.

[yovargas]

Trump isn't the first rich guy to run for office. But he is the first to realize the weakness in the system, which is that the watchdogs in the political media can't resist a car wreck. The more he insults the press, the more they cover him: He's pulling 33 times as much coverage on the major networks as his next-closest GOP competitor, and twice as much as Hillary.

Trump found the flaw in the American Death Star. It doesn't know how to turn the cameras off, even when it's filming its own demise.

F*** the media.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Hillary Clinton has won the South Carolina Democratic primary, and won big—preliminary estimates are on the order of 68% for Clinton, 31% for Sanders. More significantly, she won a bigger share of the black vote (84-16) than Obama did in 2008 (79-21). This is not a good sign for Sanders, going forward, and the margin is bigger than generally expected.

I happened to hear part of her victory speech and I thought it was by far the best I had heard her sound.

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk

[Primula Baggins]

Newer reports of the margin are closer to 74-26. We'll see what happens on Super Tuesday (in both parties).

Didn't hear the victory speech; I was at a concert of ancient music. Very soothing in troubled times. They knew how to craft a tune in 1330, that they did.