The Iowa Thread

[*bfine32*]

(02-03-2016, 12:15 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Obviously a lot of people are getting past the label and listening to what he is actually saying.

I hate when folks try to label others and not listen to what is actually being said.


As to Sanders, the most telling quote I've heard about him is one by John Kasich. He was asked: "What if Sanders wins the DNC?"

He laughed and said we will win every state in the General Election and then went on to another point. He said it in a way that showed he considered Sanders to be of no threat.  

[fredtoast]

(02-03-2016, 12:23 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I hate when folks try to label others and not listen to what is actually being said.


As to Sanders, the most telling quote I've heard about him is one by John Kasich. He was asked: "What if Sanders wins the DNC?"

He laughed and said we will win every state in the General Election and then went on to another point. He said it in a way that showed he considered Sanders to be of no threat.  

 Wow.  One of his opponents actually said he could not get elected?  Well that absolutely proves it.











Wait a second, based on this logic there is not a single candidate out there who can win because opponents of every candidate are sayi8ng the same thing about everyone else.

[*bfine32*]

(02-03-2016, 12:28 PM)fredtoast Wrote:  Wow.  One of his opponents actually said he could not get elected?  Well that absolutely proves it.











Wait a second, based on this logic there is not a single candidate out there who can win because opponents of every candidate are sayi8ng the same thing about everyone else.

It was actually the way he said it, as I stated. He totally dismissed it and then went on to focus on something else. I didn't expect you to understand.

Actually many Republicans are threatened by Hillary and it's Rubio's rallying cry. The way Sanders was just dismissed was telling to me. I'm sure most Republicans want to see Sanders get the bid and it's not because they agree with his policies. 

[BmorePat87]

(02-03-2016, 12:37 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It was actually the way he said it, as I stated. He totally dismissed it and then went on to focus on something else. I didn't expect you to understand.

Actually many Republicans are threatened by Hillary and it's Rubio's rallying cry. The way Sanders was just dismissed was telling to me. I'm sure most Republicans want to see Sanders get the bid and it's not because they agree with his policies. 

Yea, I think it goes beyond the socialist label which, while young independents don't care, older independents and conservatives do care (even if he isn't a European level socialist). Democrats don't think he can win. A 74 year old against a 46 year old? It won't even be close. 

Edit: I also think it's how he delivers his message and the fact that a lot of it is unrealistic. There's only so much a President can do, and I don't think his supporters realize that.

[StLucieBengal]

(02-03-2016, 08:15 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I don't know if I can call two religious conservatives and an anti-politician outsider "establishment". 

Also, Christie hasn't been a favorite since Bridgegate happened.

Policy wise they all are establishment.

[Benton]

(02-03-2016, 12:37 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It was actually the way he said it, as I stated. He totally dismissed it and then went on to focus on something else. I didn't expect you to understand.

Actually many Republicans are threatened by Hillary and it's Rubio's rallying cry. The way Sanders was just dismissed was telling to me. I'm sure most Republicans want to see Sanders get the bid and it's not because they agree with his policies. 

I disagree.

a growing trend in politics is picking your opponent. The GOP knows Hillary is a beatable candidate. Economic policies, skeletons in her closet, her cheating husband. They can mount enough of a campaign against her that the majority of issues wont matter.

but they're scared of sanders. He has an established voting record and he's been around long enough to cover any legislation he proposes. Kasich and anyone else being dismissive know it's because they couldn't beat him.

they're claiming they can beat Clinton, but hell, she can't even beat Bernie without a coin toss.

[fredtoast]

(02-03-2016, 12:37 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It was actually the way he said it, as I stated. He totally dismissed it and then went on to focus on something else. I didn't expect you to understand.

Actually many Republicans are threatened by Hillary and it's Rubio's rallying cry. The way Sanders was just dismissed was telling to me. I'm sure most Republicans want to see Sanders get the bid and it's not because they agree with his policies. 

Well, current Republicans are not exactly experts on winning Presidential elections.

But I understand their words are taken as gospel within the echo chamber.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-03-2016, 08:05 PM)Benton Wrote: I disagree.

a growing trend in politics is picking your opponent. The GOP knows Hillary is a beatable candidate. Economic policies, skeletons in her closet, her cheating husband. They can mount enough of a campaign against her that the majority of issues wont matter.

but they're scared of sanders. He has an established voting record and he's been around long enough to cover any legislation he proposes. Kasich and anyone else being dismissive know it's because they couldn't beat him.

they're claiming they can beat Clinton, but hell, she can't even beat Bernie without a coin toss.

You know I respect your opinion but you are dead wrong on this.  Literally the only GOP candidate that Sanders could beat in the national election is Cruz.  Even then, it's only because Cruz is so damn hateable that even his fellow politicians can't stand him.  Sanders could absolutely win the Dem primary, he will drive away independent voters in droves.

[*bfine32*]

(02-04-2016, 02:03 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Well, current Republicans are not exactly experts on winning Presidential elections.

But I understand their words are taken as gospel within the echo chamber.

Since 1900 Republicans have held the White House longer than any Political Party; including 3 of the past 5 Presidents.

It is great you learned a new phrase, and that you now use it (echo chamber) as a synonym for facts. 

[Benton]

(02-04-2016, 07:29 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: You know I respect your opinion but you are dead wrong on this.  Literally the only GOP candidate that Sanders could beat in the national election is Cruz.  Even then, it's only because Cruz is so damn hateable that even his fellow politicians can't stand him.  Sanders could absolutely win the Dem primary, he will drive away independent voters in droves.

I can agree to disagree.

sanders is doing better with young people than anticipated. That's not showing up in polls. It's becoming trendy to like him. Microbrews are throwing "been & beer" nights. I interviewed an 18 year old today for something different, but I asked her about her Bernie t-shirt. Her answer? She's part of a Bernie sanders club and invited me to a meeting.

I don't pretend to understand the appeal, but he's gaining an amazing amount of steam. And getting ignored by the majority of media is only helping that.

Bernie is doing decent and the GOP knows he's what happened last time an opponent with unexplainable appeal to some voters showed up.

the only person really a threat is Rubio.

[fredtoast]

(02-04-2016, 07:54 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Since 1900 Republicans have held the White House longer than any Political Party; including 3 of the past 5 Presidents.

It is great you learned a new phrase, and that you now use it (echo chamber) as a synonym for facts. 

I said ''current" republicans.

Republican presidential candidates have only won a majority of the vote once since 1988.

[*bfine32*]

(02-04-2016, 11:44 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I said ''current" republicans.

Republican presidential candidates have only won a majority of the vote once since 1988.

As I said: 3 of the last 5 have been Republican.  Kinda goes against your claim that they are not experts on winning Presidential Elections.

Are you saying they are expert enough to do that while only winning a majority once?

You post was silly,  but that will not keep you from trying to defend it. So have at it..

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(02-03-2016, 08:05 PM)Benton Wrote: I disagree.

a growing trend in politics is picking your opponent. The GOP knows Hillary is a beatable candidate. Economic policies, skeletons in her closet, her cheating husband. They can mount enough of a campaign against her that the majority of issues wont matter.

but they're scared of sanders. He has an established voting record and he's been around long enough to cover any legislation he proposes. Kasich and anyone else being dismissive know it's because they couldn't beat him.

they're claiming they can beat Clinton, but hell, she can't even beat Bernie without a coin toss.

Here's the problem with your own logic.  First, younger voters are outnumbered by older voters.  Two, older voters actually turn out in a larger percentage than younger voters.  Three, independents are much less driven by ideology and are more likely to be turned off by extreme examples of it.  Clinton is the more moderate candidate.  She's more palatable to the moderate voter, the exact type of voter that decides national elections.  Lastly, he doesn't have the broader appeal that Obama did.  I sincerely see no way he wins a national election.  The word socialist is akin to the N word in American politics.  Sanders has no chance in the national.

[BmorePat87]

(02-05-2016, 01:54 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Here's the problem with your own logic.  First, younger voters are outnumbered by older voters.  Two, older voters actually turn out in a larger percentage than younger voters.  Three, independents are much less driven by ideology and are more likely to be turned off by extreme examples of it.  Clinton is the more moderate candidate.  She's more palatable to the moderate voter, the exact type of voter that decides national elections.  Lastly, he doesn't have the broader appeal that Obama did.  I sincerely see no way he wins a national election.  The word socialist is akin to the N word in American politics.  Sanders has no chance in the national.

He also has no chance in the primary. Super delegates are there to prevent this. His supporters expect this primary process to be 100% democratic and are whining about things like coin flips that have been around for decades. If you want to take part in the Democratic Party's process, you will have to play by their rules. Don't whine because it's not easy for independents to register as Democrats and nominate an independent as the Democratic nominee 

[Benton]

(02-05-2016, 01:54 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Here's the problem with your own logic.  First, younger voters are outnumbered by older voters.  Two, older voters actually turn out in a larger percentage than younger voters.  Three, independents are much less driven by ideology and are more likely to be turned off by extreme examples of it.  Clinton is the more moderate candidate.  She's more palatable to the moderate voter, the exact type of voter that decides national elections.  Lastly, he doesn't have the broader appeal that Obama did.  I sincerely see no way he wins a national election.  The word socialist is akin to the N word in American politics.  Sanders has no chance in the national.

First, agreed.

Second, agreed... but irrelevant as they're not going to turn out as strongly for a RINO candidate. Possibly for Rubio — since he reminds that demographic of their grandson — but nobody is getting out during the Price Is Right to vote for Cruz. He just isn't likable. He doesn't remind anyone of someone they like. Carson would be an outside possibility as he's that whacky neighbor or co-worker everyone's had at least once.

The missing million between Bush in 2004 and Romney in 2012 is going to play into it. They're going stay MIA if Cruz or Trump gets it. That's not even factoring in the difference between Kerry in 04 and Obama in 08 — although it's worth noting Obama and Sanders are picking up some of the same demographics — but just on the lack of interest GOP voters had comparing Bush to Romney. And everybody on the GOP side is as likable (or unlikable) as Romney.

Third, agreed... but trying to capture their vote is part of why McCain and Romney failed. The GOP turned out for Bush because he was conservative riding a horse of tax cuts and swinging a sword shaped Bible promising to end abortion, gay marriage rumbling, and evolution teaching. Not because he gravitated toward the middle, the GOP turned out because he was promising 1950 America (which, in all honesty, he gave it to them in terms of services provided and wages earned).

If they want to win, they need someone far right and have to hope the Dems put up someone nobody cares about. That would be Clinton. She may be more palatable, but that's not going to get voters out. The majority of people are going to chose the lesser of two evils, but to gain that pickup like Bush or Obama had, you have to have something more than moderate.

[fredtoast]

(02-04-2016, 11:55 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As I said: 3 of the last 5 have been Republican.  Kinda goes against your claim that they are not experts on winning Presidential Elections.

Are you saying they are expert enough to do that while only winning a majority once?

You post was silly,  but that will not keep you from trying to defend it. So have at it..

I don't consider Reagan to be a "current" Republican.  If you consider him to be current then give me his opinion on the 2016 race.

Spin it any way you want, but the Republican Presidential Candidate has only won the popular vote one time in the last 25 years.

[BengalHawk62]

Once they are out of New Hampshire and the NE, Sanders is going to fall by the wayside to the Clinton machine.  And then the Dem's are going to push Clinton into the White House, no matter who the elephants choose to run against her.  It won't matter if they are conservative, moderate, progressive, left handed, tall, dark, and handsome.........the Clinton's are moving back to Washington and we'll have our first woman POTUS.  

Just my gut feeling. 

[Yojimbo]

Looks like the Democratic Party trying to rig the Iowa caucus in Hillary's favor has been caught red handed.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2016/02/05/iowa-margin-between-clinton-sanders-shifts-errors/79877898/

Apparently this chairwoman Andy Mcguire was Hillary's Iowa campaign manager in 2008, has donated $7,000 to her campaigns over the years and has a license plate that reads HRC2016. I'm sure she's completely unbiased.

[StLucieBengal]

(02-06-2016, 09:55 AM)Yojimbo Wrote: Looks like the Democratic Party trying to rig the Iowa caucus in Hillary's favor has been caught red handed.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2016/02/05/iowa-margin-between-clinton-sanders-shifts-errors/79877898/

Apparently this chairwoman Andy Mcguire was Hillary's Iowa campaign manager in 2008, has donated $7,000 to her campaigns over the years and has a license plate that reads HRC2016. I'm sure she's completely unbiased.

Too lazy to look back but I believe it was pat that said the democrat party would manipulate it so the democrat beat the independent. However he said that.... I agree with him and there is no reason why they shouldn't ensure a democrat actually wins. It's amazing that sanders hasn't been forced to switch to democrat.

[*bfine32*]

(02-06-2016, 09:55 AM)Yojimbo Wrote: Looks like the Democratic Party trying to rig the Iowa caucus in Hillary's favor has been caught red handed.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2016/02/05/iowa-margin-between-clinton-sanders-shifts-errors/79877898/

Apparently this chairwoman Andy Mcguire was Hillary's Iowa campaign manager in 2008, has donated $7,000 to her campaigns over the years and has a license plate that reads HRC2016. I'm sure she's completely unbiased.

First of all: I'm pretty sure the one female was wearing that scarf to hid an Adam's Apple.

Secondly: It is common knowledge that the DNC has sold out to Clinton and will do everything in their power (legal or illegal) to ensure she wins the Party.  The only thing that can stop Hillary getting the Democratic nod is criminal charges; then, maybe.