POTUS Election thread

[Husar]

I wish someone sensible like Bill Gates would run, but he is probably too sensible.
Maybe Tom Cruise will run one day because he just knows he can win.

[Hooahguy]

Im rather excited to see someone who calls himself a socialist running for president. The smear campaigns should get interesting.

[Greyblades]

Maybe Tom Cruise will run one day because he just knows he can win.

He'd never take the job, there arent enough sofas or closets in the whitehouse.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Bernie Sanders will get his reputation ruined because of this, Clinton will give the Republicans fodder as she tries to counter the criticism that Bernie gives her. Now instead of cultivating support, she has to defend herself as a liberal and expose herself to Republican jabs when it comes time for the general election. Meanwhile, the Republicans wont have as big of a shit show as the last two elections, so instead of everyone looking like a fool, the Republican winner will come out stronger for it.

[Gilrandir]

Maybe Tom Cruise will run one day because he just knows he can win.

Mission impossible.

[Montmorency]

Bernie Sanders will get his reputation ruined because of this, Clinton will give the Republicans fodder as she tries to counter the criticism that Bernie gives her. Now instead of cultivating support, she has to defend herself as a liberal and expose herself to Republican jabs when it comes time for the general election. Meanwhile, the Republicans wont have as big of a shit show as the last two elections, so instead of everyone looking like a fool, the Republican winner will come out stronger for it.

Why wouldn't it be the exact opposite?

Also, I seriously doubt Bernie Sanders cares about his reputation in national politics when it comes to this...

[a completely inoffensive name]

Why wouldn't it be the exact opposite?

Also, I seriously doubt Bernie Sanders cares about his reputation in national politics when it comes to this...

Because anyone who is actually left-leaning has always been made to look like a fool by his opponents and by the media. Ralph Nader lost much of his reputation once he tried running in 2000. Dennis Kucinich took a beating as well and eventually couldn't hold onto his Congressional spot due to political redistricting.

You could say the same thing for Ron Paul, but oddly enough, while everyone else saw him as crazy during the elections, his followers just became more cult-like.

The reason why the Republican candidate will come out stronger is because there are at least two reasonable candidates this time around to spar against each other. Previous elections you had "the winner" and you had "the rest". It was embarrassing to see Romney play the primary game against Michele"all Democrats are traitors" Bachmann, Herman "how many women have I harassed" Cain, Rick "Jesus always takes my wheel" Santorum, Ron "Buy more Gold" Paul and Texan Rick "Texas" Perry from Texas.

[Montmorency]

Because anyone who is actually left-leaning has always been made to look like a fool by his opponents and by the media. Ralph Nader lost much of his reputation once he tried running in 2000. Dennis Kucinich took a beating as well and eventually couldn't hold onto his Congressional spot due to political redistricting.

You could say the same thing for Ron Paul, but oddly enough, while everyone else saw him as crazy during the elections, his followers just became more cult-like.

The reason why the Republican candidate will come out stronger is because there are at least two reasonable candidates this time around to spar against each other. Previous elections you had "the winner" and you had "the rest". It was embarrassing to see Romney play the primary game against Michele"all Democrats are traitors" Bachmann, Herman "how many women have I harassed" Cain, Rick "Jesus always takes my wheel" Santorum, Ron "Buy more Gold" Paul and Texan Rick "Texas" Perry from Texas.

Ah, but you see, there's some important distinctions:

1. Sanders is not an unsavvy politician.
2. He's no radical comparable to the Tea Party.
3. The Republicans are getting more unhinged by the day.

My prediction:

Sanders keeps Clinton honest, but more importantly acts as a lightning rod for Tea Party froth. In other words, Clinton keeps stable while the Republicans fall over themselves to condemn the 'evil Commies' and become even more extreme and accelerating their own collapse.

The only way this could fail is if the public at large reacts really strongly to the bare fact of a self-proclaimed socialist prodding Clinton to be more asseverent and turn to the Repubs in light of that alone - in which case I don't think the prospects would have been good for the left anyway...

[a completely inoffensive name]

1. Sanders is not an unsavvy politician.

That is yet to be seen. The campaign trail will show either way.

2. He's no radical comparable to the Tea Party.

Sure he is, if we are going by US political conventions since 1992. The US left is now what used to be called "third way". Sander's is a bonafide Socialist, and some of his views are probably closer to Eugene Debs than Clinton.

3. The Republicans are getting more unhinged by the day.

I would say the opposite, 2012 was off the rails. The Republicans are beginning to transition to a new platform more inclusive of Hispanics. This election may have some internal strife's from nativist views clashing with this retooling, but so far it is already better for the GOP (candidate wise) than this time 4 years ago.

My prediction:

Sanders keeps Clinton honest, but more importantly acts as a lightning rod for Tea Party froth. In other words, Clinton keeps stable while the Republicans fall over themselves to condemn the 'evil Commies' and become even more extreme and accelerating their own collapse.

The only way this could fail is if the public at large reacts really strongly to the bare fact of a self-proclaimed socialist prodding Clinton to be more asseverent and turn to the Repubs in light of that alone - in which case I don't think the prospects would have been good for the left anyway...

I think you are way off base here with your predictions, but your last sentence gets close to the truth.

[Montmorency]

Sure he is, if we are going by US political conventions since 1992.

https://berniesanders.com/issues/

Point out anything unusual, please.

At this point, Clinton would be about as left as Nixon.

I would say the opposite, 2012 was off the rails. The Republicans are beginning to transition to a new platform more inclusive of Hispanics. This election may have some internal strife's from nativist views clashing with this retooling, but so far it is already better for the GOP (candidate wise) than this time 4 years ago.

That alone will have little bearing on the upcoming election, and the long-term productivity is still doubtful.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I am almost ready to offer prayers that NEITHER of them finish with 270 EC votes, that one "faithless" elector will put Paul Ryan into the mix and that the House selects him as President. Kaine would end up VP since the Senate, following Trump's "elegant leadership" of the campaign, is very likely to be a Dem majority in January (or a majority factoring the two independents who usually caucus with the Dems).

[drone]

I am almost ready to offer prayers that NEITHER of them finish with 270 EC votes, that one "faithless" elector will put Paul Ryan into the mix and that the House selects him as President. Kaine would end up VP since the Senate, following Trump's "elegant leadership" of the campaign, is very likely to be a Dem majority in January (or a majority factoring the two independents who usually caucus with the Dems).

Actually, the best-case scenario might be Evan McMullin. He may very well win Utah's EC votes, which would put him in the mix if neither of the sociopaths gets to 270. The House could be convinced to put him in, he's a true conservative.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I am almost ready to offer prayers that NEITHER of them finish with 270 EC votes, that one "faithless" elector will put Paul Ryan into the mix and that the House selects him as President. Kaine would end up VP since the Senate, following Trump's "elegant leadership" of the campaign, is very likely to be a Dem majority in January (or a majority factoring the two independents who usually caucus with the Dems).

Fun Constitutional oddities aside, this would be greatly devastating to the American psyche and the people's faith in government.

[Fisherking]

I don’t see any reason to take any of the candidates seriously. The media will trash anyone they view as a threat to Hillary and she need do nothing except continue to tell her lies. The Republican Candidate that emerges will be the one most easily defeated and everything will continue on track.
Should the Republican win it still would make little difference as they will be beholden to the same people as the Democrat and the same special interests (Banks and Mega-corporations) will still get everything they want.

You may agree with what a party says but if you actually agree with what they are doing it is only because they managed to deceive you.

[Montmorency]

You may agree with what a party says but if you actually agree with what they are doing it is only because they managed to deceive you.

The interesting thing is that individual politicians in general actually do most of the things they say they will do while campaigning. Most outright "promises" are not technically broken.

But this is cleverly concealed through a mass of obscurantist and non-committal language. When politicians "say a whole lot of nothing", they're doing so in a very careful way. "Plausible deniability" is one way to put it.