American Politics the 2016 edition

The T wrote: Don't hate me but Bernie, though I agree with his message, couldn't win a general election under any circumstance.

Clinton is dragging a long line of baggage that goes back even before her term as Secretary Of State and it can't all be blamed on a vast right wing conspiracy  that never existed in the first place.

micky wrote: Democrats think he wouldn't have a chance.  If Hillary was able to knock him side wards... make him appear self severing and petty.. not to mention un-presidential and ..gasp.. not up to the position...even when she has hardly paying him any attention.... what do you think will happen the full weight of all the heavy artillery and the kennel of attack dogs the right can muster..  by the time they are done with him all that would be left is piile of rumpled clothes. It will bounce right off of Hillary.. they've been trying to destroy her since Bill was in White House. The American public has heard it all already. .and Hillary can hit back just as hard as she gets. What would Bernie do.. whine about how unfair it is to have his character assassinated. He has no idea what he'd be getting into.. I suppose his supporter don't either.. running for office in Vermont is nothing like he'd see for a national office. It would be cutthroat, nasty, and a pack of lies and innuendo. See Swift Boaters.. Based on what we have seen.. in very genteel Democratic primaries.. he'd be a major failure at the national level IMO. We've seen this movie too many times...it isn't latent racism or political self service as those quotes were above.. it is history ... old white male northeastern liberals do NOT win elections. The message is great Bob.. the problem is the messenger..  if Warren had run. She would be the nominee.. not Hillary.  She'll have her turn..and the whole of the party behind her..  she'll be waiting in the wings when Hillary's 8 years are done.

^ You keep saying not voting for hillary is a vote for trump, baloney, not voting is a vote for no one. Calling folks idiots for not voting for either of these candidates is lame. You like Clinton, I don't judge you. I don't like her don't judge me or others who are sitting this one out.

timothy leary wrote: ^ You keep saying not voting for hillary is a vote for trump, baloney, not voting is a vote for no one. Calling folks idiots for not voting for either of these candidates is lame. You like Clinton, I don't judge you. I don't like her don't judge me or others who are sitting this one out.

timothy leary wrote: I would never presume to tell some one who to vote for or whether they should vote at all. I also do not call folks idiots for their beliefs or political persuasions.

timothy leary wrote: Childish

I never found you funny no matter what joke you tell.

I would say that this thread went downhill but I mean with politics you're already starting at the bottom of the hill

something interesting Bob raised yesterday... the possibility of Bernie getting fed up with his perceived unfair treatment at the hands of Democratic Party.  He is not a Democat per se.. so little loyalty to the party. So what if he did run.

Senator Warren?  Never would be his running mate but she'd likely be a huge player.

The interesting thing..  look back on the last two 3rd party splits. Both doomed the party to lose. Perot for Bush Classic, Nader for Gore.  At first thought one might think that a Bernie run would doom Hillary. I'm not so sure about that. 

Going back x amount of years... elections may not have been close in the E.C but generally were in the popular vote. 

As has been well documented.. the core, and then some, of his support is of the young and idealistic.  Problem is.. and has been.. those voters simply don't vote to the degree that other demographics have in previous elections.  Hillay's core support is among older voters.. pragmatics.. realists if you will. Those that understand how important this election is to win. The vote is as much against the GOP as it is for Hillary.

so Bernie has energized the youth that may not have voted.. while they might have provided a significant boost to Hillary.. and still may.. the lack of their support? A Democratic split? Would that be fatal.  I would say it might not.  Enter the forementioned Senator Warren. I think a Bernie 3rd party run would force her to become more front and center in the Presidential contest, whereas now she is working hard behind the scenes to gain the Senate for the Democrats. She would surely see..as many of us .. that true disaster is losing the White House to the GOP and with a lunatic at the helm. There would go any chance of even starting down the long road of the meaningful economic change that Bernie and Elizabeth passionately want, but would also be a disaster socially as the GOP would start reversing, so quickly it the effort might hit Obama in the ass as he leaves the door, the 8 years of positive change we have had on trying to overcome this nations latent propensity towards division, bigotry and discrimination.

so in short. Warren would be forced to step forward and support Hillary. That might well wake up some of the core supporter of Bernie to vote responsibly...that sometimes it isn't as important who wins as it is who does NOT win.  If Bernie did run 3rd party those factors.. plus the whole dynamic of GOP support for Trump and his complete alienation of large segments of the voter populations means she likely has a far greater chance to survive a 3rd party split than either Bush or Gore. Interesting to see what happens.


Edited by micky - May 14 2016 at 08:33