Veteran Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
|
I'm not American but lately I've found myself curiously drawn to US politics.
Can anyone tell me why the Democratic race is just basically two people (Clinton & Sanders) and yet the Republic nominations have a whole host of people trying to win votes? Is this part of the voting system or something? Regards |
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
|
A couple of reasons...
1) Each party is more or less open to anyone who wishes to throw their hat in the ring, but pretenders tend to fall to the wayside quickly and early in most years, leaving only a couple of serious contenders by this point. The GOP hasn't culled out the secondary tier as quickly as most years, although there is definitely precedent for this. The biggest change that I see is the more public battles between the entire crowd. 2) The GOP hasn't reduced the ranks because there's a genuine fracturing of the party that's been brewing for years. Small government factions, fiscal conservatives, evangelical Christians, fundamentalist Christians, big business wonks, free market uber alles fans, libertarians... they all fell under the GOP umbrella, and the internal pressures between them have hit a boiling point. |
quote |
¡Damned!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Purgatory
|
The Clinton/Sanders thing on the Dem side is also very weird and splintered, even if less of a mess than the Repubs (for now). We have a self-proclaimed Democratic Socialist going against a Conservative Democrat, and the lines couldn't be more stark. Sanders is getting the youth and progressive vote, Clinton is getting the older, mostly white vote. Which is an oddity, given that you'd expect it to be the other way around, what with the First Female against some Old Jew. Apparently personalities make a difference in politics.
Even though Sanders tied Clinton in the Iowa caucus and trounced her in New Hampshire, her delegate count is far more than his owing to 'superdelegates', which are basically delegates (who ostensibly are tasked for voting who the people in their respective State voted for) that have no State affiliation and can vote for whoever they want to be the (D) candidate. Usually long-time politicians that enjoy a bit of palm-greasing. It's a bit fucked, as a lot of our processes are deciding on a candidate for the primary. I kind've wish Biden was in the mix as he'd be most electable (imo), but he's made it clear this isn't for him. So it goes. |
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
|
Quote:
The fact that an old fart is the only one backing them is sad. I hope Sanders' legacy is a new generation of citizens who feel actually empowered to change government so it goes back to 'for the People'. Quote:
|
||
quote |
¡Damned!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Purgatory
|
True, but were talking about an Independent running as a Democrat, so I guess we'll get to see what the DNC delegates have in mind if Clinton gets on a losing streak. I don't doubt that if Sanders gains more momentum and it looks like Clinton is about to go down that the supers will switch. Worse case scenario is that Sanders wins more State delegates (*Jason: the public vote) but not enough where the superdelegates (the DNC vote) can give the General to Clinton. What a beautiful shit-storm that will be.
So it goes. |
quote |
Mr. Vieira
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
|
I seem to say this about every 3-4 years, but it has never been more true: in a country of 300M+ people, how in the sweet holy hell does it always come down to a handful of mental patients, professional fuckwits, snake oil vendors and ego cases none of us would trust to look over our house and feed our pet while we went on vacation?
Truly unbelievable. There is nobody, on either side, I'd feel good about voting for. Been this way for 20+ years. I'm done with the "holding my nose and hoping for the best" nonsense. That's all I've ever done, it seems. It's all such a sad, ridiculous circus. It always has been, I suppose. But you'll never convince me that the 24/7 cable news outlets and the Internet (social media, etc.) haven't made it all 20x more idiotic, point-missing and zoo-like the past decade or two. NOTE: Kickaha and 709 answer your questions specifically. I'm just providing "big picture", general personal commentary on those things. |
quote |
Formerly “AWM”
Join Date: May 2009
|
The reason for the small field on the Dem side is that it's supposed to be Clintons turn. She's paid her dues and has been running forever. Plus she's bought up most of the endorsements and has most of the big money. That makes for a small field.
I do love seeing the establishment freak out when things don't go as planned though. |
quote |
Antimatter Man
Join Date: May 2004
Location: that interweb thing
|
NY Times Reporting on The Desperate Plans to Stop Trump from Inside the Republican Party ... included within is a link to a handy interactive graphic with sliders for you to calculate your own options and % for each remaining candidates based on results before or after Super Tuesday and other deadlines
It ain't Nate Silver level accurate, but fun to play with nonetheless All those who believe in telekinesis, raise my hand. |
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Promise Land of Trustafarians
|
Barring a Marco Rubio miracle tonight, Trump is going to be the GOP nominee, which means he's going to get absolutely creamed by Clinton.
I hate Hillary but I will still hold my nose and vote for her before I ever vote for Trump. If it came down to Trump vs. Sanders (which it won't, but) I would happily vote for Sanders in that situation. At least he has some integrity. Romney's been getting increasingly feisty the last few days, I wonder if he's considering jumping in. |
quote |
ಠ_ರೃ
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
|
Quote:
Part of me absolutely hates him, since, you know, he's a racist, narcissistic, chauvinistic, compulsively-lying, pandering asshole. But another part of me loves that the GOP establishment is getting their ass handed to them by popular revolt, even if I'm not part of it. This would be like if Sanders was pulverizing Clinton despite the Democrats' best laid plans. Quote:
|
||
quote |
Hoonigan
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Canada
|
Not sure this should go in here, but here you go:
Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Donald Trump OH MY GOD what a great way to spend 20 minutes. If you haven't seen it yet, grab a coffee and sit back. |
quote |
@kk@pennytucker.social
Join Date: Jan 2005
|
It's sad, but I just stay the hell out of it.
There's no incentive in it for people who don't fall specifically into either of the two predominant parties. Yes, there are other candidates, but they don't stand a snowball's chance in hell of making an impact. No more Twitter. It's Mastodon now. Last edited by kieran : 2016-03-01 at 17:50. |
quote |
Mr. Vieira
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
|
Quote:
|
|
quote |
Antimatter Man
Join Date: May 2004
Location: that interweb thing
|
Quote:
Might be getting late to get on the ballot in some states though... That said... given how the last few Billionaire 3rd party Independent runs have gone (Perot, etc.)... and the net effect attributed to them (if they don't win, they're just splitting votes away and playing spoiler... but most likely from whom this time)? All those who believe in telekinesis, raise my hand. |
|
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Promise Land of Trustafarians
|
Quote:
I think Romney would be getting in knowing he would lose (again). I think he just wants to deprive Trump of a general election victory. What really interests/concerns me is the number of Trump voters who are saying in exit polls that they were previously Obama voters. That's an... interesting mindset. |
|
quote |
Right Honourable Member
|
Quote:
But yeah, that's where the similarity ends, I'd say. |
|
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Promise Land of Trustafarians
|
Just returned from my caucus. I was the only person who showed up from my precinct, so by unanimous vote I'm the precinct delegate to the county convention in three weeks.
|
quote |
Dark Cat of the Sith
|
|
quote |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: UK's most densely packed city. It's not London...
|
I'm sorry, but elections have consequences, and Drumpf getting anywhere near the presidency is completely appalling. This is beyond normally warranted apathy, the choice here is rather plain to see.
|
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Ottawa, ON
|
My view is that the rise of Trump reflects an internal contradiction within the Republican Party. Despite having had considerable support among parts of lower-income working voters for the past 40-50 years, the GOP has offered them little other than tax cuts for the wealthy, exporting their jobs overseas, and putting their lives at risk in foreign wars fought for questionable purposes. Trump makes noises that he will change that. While his candidacy might make the Republican establishment fearful, the establishment is no longer in control. That Trump combines his promise for change with hints of xenophobia, racism, and totalitarianism does not seem to have hurt him. I am not sure that Trump actually is personally a fascist, but I think that it is more likely that he is a salesman that is using an overlay of facism as a campaign ploy. I also doubt that he actually is in a position to deliver much, if anything, for the people who support him. I think that he would largely be an ineffectual boob as President.
When there's an eel in the lake that's as long as a snake that's a moray. |
quote |
Formerly “AWM”
Join Date: May 2009
|
I'd rather have an ineffectual boob as President than Clinton who is a blood thirsty war monger and tool of the Oligarchs. Just my two cents.
|
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Promise Land of Trustafarians
|
Get ready for this to run nonstop for the next eight months:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JGJVJTwLYo |
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
|
|
quote |
ಠ_ರೃ
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Minnesota
|
Quote:
As for the second bolded sentence, yes, I also think he crafts his statements and positions to attract the most attention and support. Every politician does this to some extent, some more than others. Bernie Sanders seems to do it less. Hillary Clinton does it more IMO (one reason I'm not a huge fan of hers). I think Trump is the least principled candidate in the race and his acts as president would be wildly unpredictable. One of many reasons why I'm scared of him possibly becoming president. Chinney referred to Trump as that in his post. |
|
quote |
Which way is up?
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
|
I long for the day when both voting bases will stumble from their brainwashed stupors and realize that there is no such thing as "Republicans" or "Democrats" amongst their elected officials. There are only "Republicrats" whose primary motive is to use an ancient military tactic called Divide and Conquer, in which a large power (the American people) are systematically divided into smaller (Republicans and Democrats) and smaller (Trump/Cruz/Rubio supporters and Clinton/Sanders supporters) and smaller (Protestant/Catholic/Mormon and Black/Mexican/White) powers until the balance of power has been shifted from the people to the government (in this case, the Executive and Judicial branches) such that the people no longer have control over those who rule over them and are, instead, relegated to surf status.
The word "racist" is a weapon hurled by the left flank of the Divide and Conquer strategy. - AppleNova is the best Mac-users forum on the internet. We are smart, educated, capable, and helpful. We are also loaded with smart-alecks! :) - Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (Mat 5:9) Last edited by kscherer : 2016-03-03 at 12:26. |
quote |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
|
Alright! Surf status! Catch some waves!
Racist is code for 'mouth breathing dumbfuck without the required four functioning braincells to see what the world actually looks like beyond their little enclave'. |
quote |
Which way is up?
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
|
If anyone wants to have a civil discussion of the "ideas" of either candidate, I am game to do so. If we are going to call each other (or the candidates) names, then I'll go back to my popcorn.
— Quote:
Trump has not (to my knowledge) claimed his race is superior to all others, nor have any of his followers (excepting the KKK, who I suspect "endorse Trump" more to stir up trouble than to grant him their support). While I disagree with that other long thing you said, Kick, it is much closer to the truth than "racist", which is why the word is so damaging to the American people as a whole. Attack his ideas with reason and you will have my respect. Call him names and you lose credibility. For what it's worth, the Democrats also have a racist skeleton in the closet, considering they are backed by the Black Panthers and the Jackson/Sharpton crowd. So, let's just chuck the "racist" garbage and focus on America's actual, you know, issues. Like war, which leads to debt, which leads to high taxes, which leads to high unemployment, which leads to elevated poverty, which leads to claims of racism. Let's also discuss the increasing interference of government in private business and it's negative effects on the cost of goods, employment, and competition. We could also discuss the government's outright refusal to protect individual liberties as mandated by the Bill of Rights, or any other such thing. I have no intention of being drawn into worrying over social issues (which do not fall within the powers of the federal government). These are best left to the people and the states to decide. — As for my support of either candidate, neither has it. Both have made it abundantly clear they will illegally use "Executive Action" to further their respective administrations. Since the role of the President does not include making law, the promises made by all candidates (including those who are currently losing) are irrelevant and little more than white lies. The Executive Privilege exists to give the President authority to execute the laws of the United States, not to make or amend them. To promise to "make laws regarding …" is outside the authority of POTUS. Clinton and Trump have both vowed to use Executive Privilege to either create law or amend existing law, which would be illegal. Regarding this, it is clear to me that neither candidate has it in mind to uphold and defend the Constitution and, thus, neither has my support. This reason, alone, is enough to disqualify both—and should. However, the American people (both parties) have no intent on securing their freedoms. Instead, both sides are working overtime to reduce those freedoms, and the candidates are playing to the fears of their constituency. A good, strong candidate would be working to unite both parties rather than serving to continue their division. The name-calling we can see in both party's debates should make it clear to Americans that the candidates at large are more interested in grand-standing than leading. This is a power play, and nothing more. - AppleNova is the best Mac-users forum on the internet. We are smart, educated, capable, and helpful. We are also loaded with smart-alecks! :) - Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (Mat 5:9) |
|
quote |
On Pacific time
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Moderator's Pub
|
|
quote |
On Pacific time
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Moderator's Pub
|
Well, things are certainly getting exciting in the Republican universe! I can picture Romney and other GOP party leaders convening in back rooms to discuss how to take down Trump. Perhaps as a group, they came up with Romney's speech against Trump today.
It seems possible that at the very least they will try to bring about a brokered convention by combining all the electoral college votes massed by candidates "other than Trump" to try to come up with a party nominee "other than Trump." Romney says he doesn't intend to run, but he would be so much better a candidate than Trump, in terms of the sheer decency and decorum that people generally hope to find in the occupant of the Oval Office. As has been obvious for some time, Trump acts like a low-class person, perhaps because he *is* one. He didn't have to act that way, but I guess that's the kind of behavior he was raised around, and so that's how he conducts himself. He should have gone to finishing school, to learn some manners and how to act like a person with class. I guess such schools, if they still exist, are, or were once, found in Europe, maybe Switzerland; and are/were intended for young girls as they headed into their teen years, to be taught how to conduct themselves like young women with class. Too bad such a school was not available to Trump as a young teen. I can't imagine how the Republican convention will be. If they do try to keep Trump from being the party's nominee, God only knows what Trump will do and say in response. I even heard commentators saying GOP leaders might try to lock Trump out of the convention! Holy moly! |
quote |
Posting Rules | Navigation |
Page 1 of 61 [1] 2 3 4 5 Next Last |
Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Obama's new campaign ad... | PKIDelirium | AppleOutsider | 21 | 2018-11-15 13:29 |
Election Day theme | kieran | Feedback | 30 | 2008-11-06 00:32 |
How are YOU watching the election? | Fahrenheit | AppleOutsider | 58 | 2008-11-05 03:45 |
New Mac ad campaign | defaultmike | Speculation and Rumors | 40 | 2006-07-13 07:10 |
The Campaign (the new iMac, not the other one) | psmith2.0 | General Discussion | 51 | 2004-09-09 21:43 |