I'd forgotten how good RationalWiki is.
I'd forgotten how good RationalWiki is.
Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd
I've done a lot of phone-banking for Bernie Sanders over the past few weeks, calling in to Iowa primarily, and I can tell you that you're wrong. I've talked to more Trump supporters than supporters of the rest of the Republican candidates combined (which is not that many, of either, based on how the phoning works). Whether or not it's sustainable is hard to tell, but it's very real. I think you perhaps underestimate just how much coverage he has gotten on TV for months and months here.
An interesting sidenote is that the Trump supporters invariably sound more enthusiastic, more zealous but also more optimistic, than anybody else.
If I'm wrong about that I'll be right that he gets dicked to nigh on zero college votes in the run-off against Hillary.
Jesus mate. Get a games console or something.
Matt Santos won the White House starting with just Spoonsky and a couple of shit women in the back of a garage somewhere. He could be Chief of Staff within a year.
Hurricane Santos.
I really think Bernie could win the lot. He'll win New Hampshire for sure and I have a gut feeling about Iowa. After that shit could get crazy a la 2008. On the other hand I basically have to be optimistic to do the phone-banking, so I'm probably not a great judge.
I agree with you, Floyd, that Rubio is the obvious candidate to win the general election and that he should be pissing it, and most of my liberal friends agree with that, but it's just not happening. Which is great news for the Democrats tbh, he's the one person that would beat either Clinton or Sanders.
He'll get mugged off in the south on Super Toosday. Poor Bernie.
I haven't reminded myself of the electoral college distribution since the last one, but I reckon Trump is such a god awful candidate that he could either lose every state, or come very close to doing so. I think Bernie would thrash him as well, though not by quite as much.
I will piss myself with laughter and shit myself with glee if Sanders beats Clinton.
Bernie thrashes him by far more than Hillary does. It makes sense, really, the people who support Trump will all necessarily hate Clinton but that won't be the case for Sanders.
Trump is nailed on to win New Hampshire. He's neck-and-neck with Cruz in Iowa. I think you're grappling with what we in America were all grappling with in the summer, which is that Trump is a god awful candidate yet he's completely dominant and nothing he does or says can change that. He's tapped into a particular strain of American thought (or lack thereof) more spectacularly than probably anyone else in the last fifty years. It's fascinating, especially when I've talked with real people that support him.
Dominant among shouty cunts a year out. Fortunately they don't do all the voting.
If he won it would be approaching military coup time. They'd have to have him killed by the Cubans or something.
Him winning the nomination used to be unthinkable to me (hence my worrying bet with Mert). It's not anymore. Him winning the general still is, but that could well change too.
This thread missed something important too:
I liked that advert-cum-folk music video 'Bernie' put out, so I may as well get on board since my priorities went 1) Rand Paul; 2) anyone but 'Hillary'. On the other hand, it's tempting to set myself up to revel in an entire generation having its faith in politics shattered when he can't get anything done. Decisions.
With Club Lewis's endorsement we're winning Iowa for sure!
Just got my third Trump supporter of the day.
Do you reckon Chinny's project was helping Donald Trump in Iowa?
Is Chinny Sarah Palin?
Ted Cruz told a whopper lie about sexual assaults going up after Port Arthur.
So many blatant lies being spread about Australia from the pro gun people.
The thing is, the youth never shows up to polling places. In every election ever, the youth vote has been overrepresented in polls when compared to the actual turnout, so if Sanders is neck and neck in Iowa now, he will lose come caucus.
They have to tell stories about Australia. It's that or acknowledge actual evidence that actually happened. The gun lobby need to explain us away somehow.
Yeah fair enough I suppose.
Iowa attack-ad on Bernie.
Really nails it.
Is that an actual attack ad or a parody or what? I'm unclear.
I don't know what point it's trying to make in either case.
The organization seems to be real. http://esafund.com/
It's quite bizarre, but then this is a campaign where even the most boring candidate in the race has given us this, so who knows:
The US of A :******)
Natural Law Party aside that is so far above and beyond the kind of stuff we see here. I mean I'd rather have a vaguely functional political system but you can't deny how great that is.
It surprises me that American political ads always seem so low budget and poorly produced. I don't think it's just the retro font that makes that Rubio attack look like you should be watching it on a tinny CRT with a clothes hanger for an aerial.
Is it just because they do loads of them whereas in Britain they're only occasional and only to a national audience?
Those are done by third parties, no?
Is their telly still a different resolution or am I stuck in the 90's?
Could it be that they spend the big money on buying air time rather than on production?
Someone told me that American voters prefer their advertisements to "feel" local, rather than stage-managed and national.
Because the USA is so huge, they take their regional identities very seriously.
Not always true.
His America looks like your family barbecue.
I might officially endorse Bernie at this point. Go Bernie.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e85_1453854316
But at the same time,
'Doing a Rand.'
The real Dennis the Menace.
Clinton and Sanders have agreed in principle to four additional debates. Props to her, I never thought that would happen. It's still up to the DNC to approve it, though, and shit could hit the fan if they don't.
Talked to a guy yesterday who complained about all the illegal immigrants from "North Africa and southwest Asia." Maybe the call went to Budapest by mistake.
It all kicks off today. Finally. I think Trump will win for the Republicans and it's a toss-up for the Democrats.
Bernie will don it. Still don't think Trump will win but it is blind faith talking at this point.
I'm sticking with Not Trump as well.
I saw Rand Paul giving it the big'un that he was fourth in Iowa, but first with young voters. So fourth, mate.
60% of Americans view Trump unfavourably. He's also only got a plurality of the Republican vote, so most of those nutters aren't voting for him.
It depends how voting goes with Cruz, I think. If you could position Rubio as the alternative, you'd have a strong anti Trump candidate (even if the nutters think he's some sort of traitor over immigration). Anyone sensible can see that Cruz is a genuine nutter and unashamedly so.
As it stands though, the not Trump vote is split so he might just barge his way through.
GS is accurate there with his last sentence especially.
I'm actually surprised that Rand Paul is in 4th in Iowa, I thought he was doing much worse. That puts him above political titans like Ben Carson and Jeb Bush.
'The Donald' getting in on the back of Michael Bloomberg hoovering up the 'moderates' would be the best (worst) thing ever.
I was going to
EDIT: Just remembered I don't count as a voter at all.
Preferential voting: avoiding split-vote misrepresentation since 1871.
Reply With Quote
