Yojinbo Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 Mainstream media have done everything in their power to make it look like Bernie Sanders doesn't even exist. At least Trump got mass amounts of free advertisment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anouleth Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 Math seems to be that Bernie needs to start winning with an overwhelming advantage, and the only way I see it happening is for him to completely crush Hillary on a debate to the point of irrecuperability. The thing is, I don't see Bernie completely destroying Clinton the same way Trump has done with Jeb, or Christie with Rubio. There's also the possibility that Clinton gets indicted over the email scandal, which I don't think is very likely but could still happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Wright Posted March 16, 2016 Share Posted March 16, 2016 Some of the first scenario, a little of the third, and none of the second. Should we bring up the elephant in the room? Do you guys think Bernie has a shot left at this point? cruz and sanders still have a shot. their main opponents have a pretty commanding lead, but i'd say they're down, but not out. a little over half of the states have voted, along with them 51% of normal delegate votes, and supposedly the states that have voted thus far are the "high watermark" for clinton (based on an email sent by bernie lol). it's not looking good for either of them, but conceivably their chances are not negligible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naughx Posted March 20, 2016 Share Posted March 20, 2016 (edited) Wasn't Bernie's main goal to push Clinton toward the left of the political spectrum? I mean, even him probably had doubts that he could win. Mudslinging won't help the democratic party at all since they are both democrats. (Is it just me or the democrats seem less divided than the republicans?) Edited March 20, 2016 by Naughx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VantagePoint Posted March 20, 2016 Share Posted March 20, 2016 (edited) Wasn't Bernie's main goal to push Clinton toward the left of the political spectrum? I mean, even him probably had doubts that he could win. Mudslinging won't help the democratic party at all since they are both democrats. (Is it just me or the democrats seem less divided than the republicans?) I don't believe so. Sanders isn't stupid, he knows Hillary has dug into way too many coorporate sleaze's pockets to inact the kind of change he's aiming for. Hillary has also shown an remarkable lack of initiative, waiting and watching what the general opinion is before weighing in on an issue. Hillary is practically the antithesis to Sanders, and nothing is really going to change that. Though, yeah, Sander's chances of winning have always been marginally low. Not being establishment is a remarkably large disadvantage. The only reason Trump got off the ground was because all of these anti Trump politicians coming out en masse trying to disparage him, A.K.A free publicity. Clinton supportive entities has merely made Sanders nonexistant in media. A Clinton vs Trump situation... isn't going to be a pretty one. The democratic voters seem a lot more split than the republican ones, many Sanders suporters either abstaning from a Clinton v Trump situation or maybe even voting for Trump due to the commonality Trump and Sanders share in that they aren't bought. A Clinton victory is pretty much guarentued to merely be another 4 years of political stagnation, unless Clinton finds a way to work around those political ties she has to the corporate entities pushing and to stop being afraid of taking an unpopular opinion, neither of which are likely by themselves, but together, is but a fleeting dream. Edited March 20, 2016 by VantagePoint Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crysta Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 (edited) I don't really agree with that assessment. Clinton is a chameleon and will go with the most favorable stance; she tried to go further to the right when she went up against Obama; but she is not truly his "anti-thesis". The shift from Hillary's views (and I'm pretty sure she has them even if she's a decent actress) to Bernie's isn't nearly as dramatic as it would be from going from Bernie to Donald; if you do the latter you are literally going from a socialist to an autocrat pretending to be a populist. Clinton will be a continuation of Obama's policies but I don't get why you think Sanders wouldn't simply come up against the same obstructionism/opposition that hounded Obama's administrations. Assuming he could still win, how exactly do you think he will get the other party on board with his proposals? I will be voting Bernie in my primary because I simply like him / agree with him more but the idea of a Trump or Cruz presidency easily helps me get over any aversion I may have with throwing a vote for Hillary in the general election. I'm also not sure how difficult it would actually be for her to win; she turned a 11-hour interrogation into her best fundraiser and he's still bitching about Megyn Kelly on his Twitter. A 1 versus 1 debate may actually end up being hilarious show of contrasts and I am curious if Trump can go at her like he did against his Republican rivals with the same amount of success. Edited March 21, 2016 by Crysta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alertcircuit Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 I'm also not sure how difficult it would actually be for her to win; she turned a 11-hour interrogation into her best fundraiser and he's still bitching about Megyn Kelly on his Twitter. A 1 versus 1 debate may actually end up being hilarious show of contrasts and I am curious if Trump can go at her like he did against his Republican rivals with the same amount of success. Trump will work with the premise that he's self-funded, and how Hillary is "for the establishment and not the people". There's also a chance he might end the name calling, but who knows. Hillary will work to make herself look like the serious candidate and accentuate whenever Trump says something stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blah the Prussian Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 Trump would crush Clinton in a debate. He'd just do to her what he did to Bush and Rubio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yojinbo Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 Clinton will be a continuation of Obama's policies [...] I have my doubts about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tuvarkz Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 Trump would crush Clinton in a debate. He'd just do to her what he did to Bush and Rubio. Agreed, as Trump's powerful combination of charisma and force of personality will make him be the one to drive any debate between the two, and unless Clinton manages to get the reins of the situation, even if some of Trump's points are countered he will appear to be the winner of the debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VantagePoint Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Trump will work with the premise that he's self-funded, and how Hillary is "for the establishment and not the people". There's also a chance he might end the name calling, but who knows. Hillary will work to make herself look like the serious candidate and accentuate whenever Trump says something stupid. I'm very dubious as to if that would work. It isn't like none of the other Republicsn candidates tried to do this? It's just Trump, as much as I hate to admit it, has a very commanding presence and has a knack to public speaking. Hillary, as far as she's shown, isn't particularly charasmatic or commanding in her positions, and I honestly don't see her holding up too well if Trump decides to do some digging in her past and bring it to light, as Hillary's supporters typically either go with Hillary because Trump is even scarier, or due to a lack of knowledge on their part concerning Clinton's tendancy to change major positions as casually as one changes socks. That being said, the debates will certainly be interesting. I don't see Trump backing down and going more centralist, as that's part of the reason Romney lost. The Country, judging by Bernie shocking results, despite small media coverage, not being funded by corporations, and not being the establishment choice and Trump even getting off the ground in the first, is becoming more and more disillusioned with establishment candidates. So it depends, despite Trump's scary positions, will people still prefer that to 4 more years of political stagnation? Because I don't see Hillary attempting to do much of anything... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Cynthia- Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 I don't think Democrats are divided as Republicans. Sanders may be more of an outsider than Clinton is, but he's been a politician for a long time- not really much of a leap from Senator to president. An option left of Hillary showing up was pretty predictable really. Trump is a true outsider and his policies don't line up with the Republican establishment. They'll probably coalesce around him somewhat because they can't support Clinton, but I doubt they'll be happy about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirby9612 Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 (edited) Trump will need to moderate his positions once he locks up the nomination, and I expect him to so do. Romney did not lose because he moderated during the general, he lost becuae he was a stale, no-frills slice of bread. Edited March 22, 2016 by kirby9612 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crysta Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 (edited) Trump would crush Clinton in a debate. He'd just do to her what he did to Bush and Rubio. By... what? Calling her low energy? Mocking her ears? Calling her ugly? That worked out well for him last time! Saying she's part of the establishment and a retail politician? If that was a winning issue, she'd be losing. I will put money on her not going down in flames like Rubio and Bush. He will actually have to engage her on the issues; there won't be any distractions and she is a policy wonk. The Democratic debates have been a league above the Republican debates, mostly due to the candidates and the field being significantly smaller. She's not charismatic but I don't think she has to be; she simply can't let him get under her skin, and Clinton's good at keeping her head on her shoulders. Trump is the complete opposite. EDIT: tl;dr version pretty agree with what Alert thinks will happen She will be fine. Bernie would be, too, quite frankly. I kind of wish he could participate too just for the inevitable snarky one-liners which are 100% true. Edited March 22, 2016 by Crysta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yojinbo Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 I don't think Hillary could credibly argue against her ties to the wall street and her support of the Iraq war, two points I'll expect Trump to bring up. Since her rhetorics are pretty unimpressive I can see her resorting to her being a woman as the main argument for her to become president in which case I hope she loses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyborgZeta Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Trump would crush Clinton in a debate. He'd just do to her what he did to Bush and Rubio. Basically. Regardless of how many them actually hold up under scrutiny, Trump has a number of ammo he could use against Hillary. http://static.currentaffairs.org/2016/02/unless-the-democrats-nominate-sanders-a-trump-nomination-means-a-trump-presidency http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/03/18/hillary-clinton-will-lose-to-donald-trump/ And, as mentioned, he can basically point to her as an establishment candidate; even mentioning that he's funded her before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magical CC Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Trump has just got helped by the terrorists again. God damn it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Trump has just got helped by the terrorists again. God damn it. Um, I originally just came into this thread to lurk a bit, but mind explaining just what the hell you're talking about here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Cynthia- Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 There was a terrorist attack in Brussels at an airport and subway, 30 dead. ISIS says it's behind it apparently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acacia Sgt Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Would it have an impact on the voting done today...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blah the Prussian Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Um, I originally just came into this thread to lurk a bit, but mind explaining just what the hell you're talking about here? Presumably he means that the terror attacks against Brussells have contributed to the feeling of fear that Trump thrives on. He didn't mean it literally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tuvarkz Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 (edited) Would it have an impact on the voting done today...? Considering the 24/7 news cycle...probably. Cruz and Trump will still win the respective states that polling has shown, but there's a chance Cruz may not get to the 50% threshold and thus Trump/Kasich will get some more delegates. To note, Trump has around 15% of the votes in Utah, which means only 4-8 delegates, but it denies 20 delegates to Cruz. (For all purposes, Kasich's delegates are irrelevant as he can't realistically win outside of a brokered convention). Edited March 22, 2016 by tuvarkz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 (edited) There was a terrorist attack in Brussels at an airport and subway, 30 dead. ISIS says it's behind it apparently. I heard about that attack, I was going to ask you what that has to do with Trump, but... Presumably he means that the terror attacks against Brussells have contributed to the feeling of fear that Trump thrives on. He didn't mean it literally. I see, I hoped he didn't mean it literally, because that would just be flat out untrue. Also, a "feeling of fear"? That probably means Trump wants the US to be feared by its enemies, not that Trump himself wants to be feared. Edited March 22, 2016 by Anacybele Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Cynthia- Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 To try and put this in a more neutral way, Trump's political policies often are dependent on the notion that people such as immigrants or Syrian refugees are inherently dangerous. The more crimes committed by immigrants or terrorist attacks happen internationally, the more this notion seems true to people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 (edited) You mean CAN be dangerous. Trump doesn't actually want to ban all of them from the country, he just wants a better way of weeding out the terrorists. And right now, there isn't a good enough way as far as I'm concerned. Terrorists can use children and even babies to hide themselves. So even a normal-looking Muslim family with a toddler and infant can actually be terrorists. If the safety of our innocent people means temporarily closing our borders to everyone until these terrorists are eliminated, that's what has to happen. It isn't fair to the innocent immigrants, I know. I don't like having to keep them out anymore than non-Trump supporters do. But sometimes you have to do things you don't like, you know. Seriously, I do partly blame Trump for some of the crap he gets, he needs to think before he speaks sometimes. I swear he must have Asperger's like me or something. But I still think he has ideas and policies that make sense and that's why I'll vote for him...eventually. Edited March 22, 2016 by Anacybele Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.