2016 Election Prediction Thread

[The Rabbi]

The press labeled her as an idiot. Once the meme started that was it.
Granted, Palin doesnt interview well but the level of vehemence against her was unprecedented.
But ultimately, as always, it is the candidate who carries the election. Bush won with Quayle on his ticket, Nixon won with Agnew. McCain lost because of McCain.

It's not she didn't interview well. It's that her knowledge base, a base of things to know that are absolutely essential for any pol running for high office, had more holes than swiss cheese. A Republican Vice-Presidential candidate who had know idea what the "Bush Doctrine" was, when even the sitting President of her own Party clearly enumerated it and there was considerable press buzz about it? Please, that is absolutely bottom of the barrel.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

Remind me how Obama got grilled on foreign policy in 2008. Yeah, he didnt.

He did interviews with O'Reilly twice, Chris Wallace, and Bret Baer.

He did no interviews with MSNBC.

So who failed to ask him about foreign policy?

I agree. The press was complicit in covering up his incompetence and painting him into the SuperNegro.

It's always fun to watch you let your racist side hang out. Please carry one.

Still waiting for your blowout proof that McCain would have won without Palin.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

You are right, McCain was campaigning in grocery stores when Palin came along and gave him a slight bump. Crowds were nowhere near Obama's but she did okay until she started doing interviews. People began to think about McCain's age and her being first in line of succession and attitudes toward her changed in a big hurry.

The press labeled her as an idiot. Once the meme started that was it.
Granted, Palin doesnt interview well but the level of vehemence against her was unprecedented.
But ultimately, as always, it is the candidate who carries the election. Bush won with Quayle on his ticket, Nixon won with Agnew. McCain lost because of McCain.

It's not she didn't interview well. It's that her knowledge base, a base of things to know that are absolutely essential for any pol running for high office, had more holes than swiss cheese. A Republican Vice-Presidential candidate who had know idea what the "Bush Doctrine" was, when even the sitting President of her own Party clearly enumerated it and there was considerable press buzz about it? Please, that is absolutely bottom of the barrel.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

Remind me how Obama got grilled on foreign policy in 2008. Yeah, he didnt.

He did interviews with O'Reilly twice, Chris Wallace, and Bret Baer.

He did no interviews with MSNBC.

So who failed to ask him about foreign policy?

I agree. The press was complicit in covering up his incompetence and painting him into the SuperNegro.

The Right Wing Press?

 

[Faun]

Only after she said enough stupid things that it was painfully obvious to the McCain team that the Titanic was more seaworthy than Palin.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

And then it became apparent that more people liked Palin than liked McCain.
Oops.
You really get your gay ass handed to you every time, dontcha?

Palin is a big part of the reason why McCain lost to President Obama by 7.26% in 2008.

Poll after poll after poll showed that once here true stupidity was revealed, far more than 2/3 of most polling respondents did not want to have her as VP, fearing what damage she could do were McCain to croak in office.

Enjoy your weird fantasies, sheygetz.

McCain lost because of McCain. You suck at political analysis.

Actually, no. You are way out of your league, here, and have no idea how much data flowed that showed that Palin sunk and already damaged ship.

You are right, McCain was campaigning in grocery stores when Palin came along and gave him a slight bump. Crowds were nowhere near Obama's but she did okay until she started doing interviews. People began to think about McCain's age and her being first in line of succession and attitudes toward her changed in a big hurry.

Absolutely correct. The 10 latest polls leading up to McCain announcing Palin as his running mate, Obama lead McCain by an average of just 2.2 percentage points. Compare that to the last 10 polls taken just one month later ... Obama's lead stretched to an average of 5.3 points.

WH2008 General

Only the truly brain dead thinks that Palin didn't sink McCain.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

You are right, McCain was campaigning in grocery stores when Palin came along and gave him a slight bump. Crowds were nowhere near Obama's but she did okay until she started doing interviews. People began to think about McCain's age and her being first in line of succession and attitudes toward her changed in a big hurry.

The press labeled her as an idiot. Once the meme started that was it.
Granted, Palin doesnt interview well but the level of vehemence against her was unprecedented.
But ultimately, as always, it is the candidate who carries the election. Bush won with Quayle on his ticket, Nixon won with Agnew. McCain lost because of McCain.

It's not she didn't interview well. It's that her knowledge base, a base of things to know that are absolutely essential for any pol running for high office, had more holes than swiss cheese. A Republican Vice-Presidential candidate who had know idea what the "Bush Doctrine" was, when even the sitting President of her own Party clearly enumerated it and there was considerable press buzz about it? Please, that is absolutely bottom of the barrel.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

Remind me how Obama got grilled on foreign policy in 2008. Yeah, he didnt.

He did interviews with O'Reilly twice, Chris Wallace, and Bret Baer.

He did no interviews with MSNBC.

So who failed to ask him about foreign policy?

Obama was even asked by Jon Stewart on The Daily Show about his complete lack of foreign policy experience.

Obama gave his stock answer. "You'll have to trust my judgment."

What FP experience did Reagan or GW Bush have?

 

[Sarah G]

I find it really doubtful that Warren will run.

The Democrats really need to get away from the idea/belief of Republicans fumbling the election with conservatives not supporting some candidate or the GOP putting up someone way too far right to win. The Democrats have REALLY popular policy ideas that voters downright love sometimes, in others they certainly have majority support. I really think they just need to focus on winning on their own accord and stop pointing negative fingers at the GOP all the time.

They've tried to stay above it before, Kerry as an example. They do need to get the message out but they also have to fight the negative ads that the wingnuts inevitably go with.

That's true. I guess it's impossible to avoid negative ads altogether. In the GOP's case literally ALL they have is negative ads. The party itself is so divided they can't come to any cohesive agreement on anything besides "Stop Obama's agenda" which itself is pretty much just a negative ad.

I would just amp up getting their own message/agenda out to the public more then they have in the last few elections.

Yeah, I agree with all of that.

 

[Statistikhengst]

And then it became apparent that more people liked Palin than liked McCain.
Oops.
You really get your gay ass handed to you every time, dontcha?

Palin is a big part of the reason why McCain lost to President Obama by 7.26% in 2008.

Poll after poll after poll showed that once here true stupidity was revealed, far more than 2/3 of most polling respondents did not want to have her as VP, fearing what damage she could do were McCain to croak in office.

Enjoy your weird fantasies, sheygetz.

McCain lost because of McCain. You suck at political analysis.

Actually, no. You are way out of your league, here, and have no idea how much data flowed that showed that Palin sunk and already damaged ship.

You are right, McCain was campaigning in grocery stores when Palin came along and gave him a slight bump. Crowds were nowhere near Obama's but she did okay until she started doing interviews. People began to think about McCain's age and her being first in line of succession and attitudes toward her changed in a big hurry.

Absolutely correct. The 10 latest polls leading up to McCain announcing Palin as his running mate, Obama lead McCain by an average of just 2.2 percentage points. Compare that to the last 10 polls taken just one month later ... Obama's lead stretched to an average of 5.3 points.

Only the truly brain dead thinks that Palin didn't sink McCain.

and as I just wrote, as soon as Princess Statalina is soundly snoozing, I will present ALL of the data, and let the fake Rabbi turn to a pile of goo.

 

[Statistikhengst]

The press labeled her as an idiot. Once the meme started that was it.
Granted, Palin doesnt interview well but the level of vehemence against her was unprecedented.
But ultimately, as always, it is the candidate who carries the election. Bush won with Quayle on his ticket, Nixon won with Agnew. McCain lost because of McCain.

It's not she didn't interview well. It's that her knowledge base, a base of things to know that are absolutely essential for any pol running for high office, had more holes than swiss cheese. A Republican Vice-Presidential candidate who had know idea what the "Bush Doctrine" was, when even the sitting President of her own Party clearly enumerated it and there was considerable press buzz about it? Please, that is absolutely bottom of the barrel.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

Remind me how Obama got grilled on foreign policy in 2008. Yeah, he didnt.

He did interviews with O'Reilly twice, Chris Wallace, and Bret Baer.

He did no interviews with MSNBC.

So who failed to ask him about foreign policy?

Obama was even asked by Jon Stewart on The Daily Show about his complete lack of foreign policy experience.

Obama gave his stock answer. "You'll have to trust my judgment."

What FP experience did Reagan or GW Bush have?

Reagan and Bush 43 had absolutely none.

Bush 41 had a considerable amount of FP experience: as head of the CIA and also as ambassador to the UN.

 

[Statistikhengst]

It's not she didn't interview well. It's that her knowledge base, a base of things to know that are absolutely essential for any pol running for high office, had more holes than swiss cheese. A Republican Vice-Presidential candidate who had know idea what the "Bush Doctrine" was, when even the sitting President of her own Party clearly enumerated it and there was considerable press buzz about it? Please, that is absolutely bottom of the barrel.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

Remind me how Obama got grilled on foreign policy in 2008. Yeah, he didnt.

He did interviews with O'Reilly twice, Chris Wallace, and Bret Baer.

He did no interviews with MSNBC.

So who failed to ask him about foreign policy?

I agree. The press was complicit in covering up his incompetence and painting him into the SuperNegro.

It's always fun to watch you let your racist side hang out. Please carry one.

Still waiting for your blowout proof that McCain would have won without Palin.

You really don't know how to read, either.

 

[Faun]

I find it really doubtful that Warren will run.

The Democrats really need to get away from the idea/belief of Republicans fumbling the election with conservatives not supporting some candidate or the GOP putting up someone way too far right to win. The Democrats have REALLY popular policy ideas that voters downright love sometimes, in others they certainly have majority support. I really think they just need to focus on winning on their own accord and stop pointing negative fingers at the GOP all the time.

If Hillary ends up not running, who have the Dems got? Joe BIden? Warren has the "star power" the Dems love. It's the first female president, hate on wall street, class warfare bullshit all rolled into one.

What difference does it make? At this point in the election cycle, most voters never heard of Barack Obama.

Take that up with Joe and Statistheilhitler. They both claim Obama was a lock by this point.

You just lied out your ass. I never made that claim. You are an amazing liar.

You mean he's an amazingly bad liar. He also claims he added me to his ignore list, yet he still responds to my posts -- which he wouldn't be able to see had he been telling the truth about putting me on ignore.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

It's not she didn't interview well. It's that her knowledge base, a base of things to know that are absolutely essential for any pol running for high office, had more holes than swiss cheese. A Republican Vice-Presidential candidate who had know idea what the "Bush Doctrine" was, when even the sitting President of her own Party clearly enumerated it and there was considerable press buzz about it? Please, that is absolutely bottom of the barrel.

Gesendet von meinem GT-I9515 mit Tapatalk

Remind me how Obama got grilled on foreign policy in 2008. Yeah, he didnt.

He did interviews with O'Reilly twice, Chris Wallace, and Bret Baer.

He did no interviews with MSNBC.

So who failed to ask him about foreign policy?

Obama was even asked by Jon Stewart on The Daily Show about his complete lack of foreign policy experience.

Obama gave his stock answer. "You'll have to trust my judgment."

What FP experience did Reagan or GW Bush have?

Reagan and Bush 43 had absolutely none.

Bush 41 had a considerable amount of FP experience: as head of the CIA and also as ambassador to the UN.

yes. and we were served better by GHW Bush than either Reagan or GW Bush.

at least GHW Bush had the integrity and honor to do what was right -- raised taxes when it was genuinely a duty to, regardless of silly campaign slogans

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

enough with the Rabbi's hijacking of threads. Can we get back on topic?

 

[The Rabbi]

Remind me how Obama got grilled on foreign policy in 2008. Yeah, he didnt.

He did interviews with O'Reilly twice, Chris Wallace, and Bret Baer.

He did no interviews with MSNBC.

So who failed to ask him about foreign policy?

I agree. The press was complicit in covering up his incompetence and painting him into the SuperNegro.

It's always fun to watch you let your racist side hang out. Please carry one.

Still waiting for your blowout proof that McCain would have won without Palin.

You really don't know how to read, either.

Translation: My "proof" wont be anything of the kind.
You are one blowout ginormous fraud, herr shgutz.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

enough with the Rabbi's hijacking of threads. Can we get back on topic?

some things derserve repeating...

:

 

[JimH52]

Hillary will run, if her health holds.

Whether she can beat Jeb or Chris or Rand will be the problem. Anyone else she and she will take 55% of the vote.

She's not even getting the nomination

It is hers if she wants it. Warren and Webb in the wings. Bush will get the GOP nod and will have the far right turn their back on him. GOP loses again.

Warren isn't even on most people's radar

Neither was Obama.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Hillary will run, if her health holds.

Whether she can beat Jeb or Chris or Rand will be the problem. Anyone else she and she will take 55% of the vote.

She's not even getting the nomination

It is hers if she wants it. Warren and Webb in the wings. Bush will get the GOP nod and will have the far right turn their back on him. GOP loses again.

Warren isn't even on most people's radar

Neither was Obama.

and here you parade around your ignorance. in January 2007?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Obama Jumps Into Presidential Fray



By Shailagh Murray and Chris Cillizza
Washington Post Staff Writers​

Wednesday, January 17, 2007


Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, whose best-selling books and political travels generated huge pressure to run for the White House, joined a crowded Democratic field yesterday, vowing to advance "a different kind of politics" in a campaign that could make him the nation's first African American president.

Obama, a state legislator just three years ago, announced that he has formed a presidential exploratory committee, accelerating his already rapid emergence in national politics and establishing him as his party's most formidable rival to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, the Democratic front-runner. He will formally announce his candidacy on Feb. 10.

Obama Jumps Into Presidential Fray

 

[rcfieldz]

Jeb vs Hillary

 

[kaz]

The GOP led congress will pass bills, if obama vetoes then the failure is on him and the dems.

False. The failure will be on whomever writes a bill that won't be signed by Obama.

Republicans know what is acceptable. If they disregard that in order to make the crazies happy, like slipping tougher abortion legislation into a Defense Bill, Obama is not going to sign it and it will be Boehner/McConnell's fault.

So why do we have a congress at all if their job is only to give the President what he wants? You may want to read the Constitution at some point.

I didn't say "what he wants" I said what is acceptable.

Again with your lack of reading comprehension.

"The failure will be on whomever writes a bill that won't be signed by Obama."

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Jeb vs Hillary

keeper post thread

 

[toxicmedia]

Coming into this thread late....

It'll be Clinton/O'Mally VS Bush/(Christie, Ryan, or Rubio)

There are no southern Democrats to put on the ticket with Hillary, so it doesn't matter where Hillary's VP candidate comes from. Elizabeth Warren is too far left, and it's not quite time for two women on a presidential ticket.

Untill a Republican candidate starts polling within 5 points of Hillary, she will be the next President...especially if the Republicans go on about gay marriage/contraception/abortion in the mean time.

The GOP will also need to create legislation that Obama will sign, ot they'll be blamed for nothing happening in Washington, still!, in 2016

OK, try this insteadL
Hillary will not run as her negatives inside the Democrat Party are too great.
Dems will push Warren as Obama perfected. A Warren-Holder ticket will hit all the Dem strongpoints.
It will be utterly overwhelmed by a Walker-Cruz ticket, pitting the accomplished well spoken against the inexperienced radicals.

The GOP will work cleverly with dissident Dems, unhappy with their party's electoral performance, and come up with legislation that will easily get 2/3rds votes to override the veto, making Obama look like a blustering fool.

Wow.....I gotta hand it to you.....that seems like the most least likely scenario I've ever heard, and I'm impressed, because my worst fears are not as bad as that.

Were you joking?

It was every but as likely as yours.
At this point in 2008 if someone had said a one term junior senator from Illinois would be the next president he'd be laughed off the forum.
Lots can happen. Campaigns can blow up in 48 hours. Stars can emerge based on one dynamite performance.
Personally I think Obama will tip his hat to Deval Patrick and he will win the nomination. Dems have a winning formula. Why change?

I'm only thinking about the Cruz part of your ticket. I had forgotten about Walker actually being a viable candidate. Maybe a Walker/Rubio ticket...that might work. Ted Cruz though?...have you seen his national approval numbers with swing voters and Democrats?...they are the worst

And here is a possibility.

The worst thing the GOP can do is nominate Cruz and I wouldn't be surprised one bit if they managed to do it. Romney did get the last election though so perhaps the GOP will not go off the deep end.


Whoever runs on the republican side, I think the dems are going to take the next one with Hillary. its unfortunate - I cant think of anyone I would want to take the presidency less - but I think that is how things will eventually play out.

Nobody on the GOP side is within range of Hillary, and they've already done their worst to her publicity wize. They think Benghazi has weight, but it doesn't.

The fact is...IMO...that when the average Joe/Jane voter goes to the booth in Nov 2016...they'll have certain imagery in their heads......Hillary in the white house back in the 90's, when things were hunky dory, and her in the white house as Secretary of State...and that other guy.....