2016 Election
Feb 26th 2016, 5:47 pm
#4846
I love my brick!
Joined: May 2007
Location: Peachy
Posts: 9,304
Re: 2016 Election
When you ask Americans about whether they like features of the ACA, then they're pretty positive about it. But when you ask those same Americans how they feel about Obamacare, they start shaking their heads.
If Sanders won the nomination, he would be targeted as a pinko commie and he and his ideas would become less popular quickly. Sanders has largely been untouched by attack ads and aggressive campaigning to date, but that honeymoon would end if he became the nominee. Clinton has been in the national spotlight and attacked for decades, so you can't compare the two directly.
If Sanders won the nomination, he would be targeted as a pinko commie and he and his ideas would become less popular quickly. Sanders has largely been untouched by attack ads and aggressive campaigning to date, but that honeymoon would end if he became the nominee. Clinton has been in the national spotlight and attacked for decades, so you can't compare the two directly.
As for recycling the electability argument. You've still got nothing but opinion on that. An alternative view.
Feb 26th 2016, 6:00 pm
#4847
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Jan 2013
Location: Monterey, CA
Posts: 2,554
Re: 2016 Election
From watching the Republican debates (including last night that was great entertainment if nothing else), or the Tepublicans seem to care about is the constitution, the second amendment and strengthening the military so that they can bomb the **** out of anyone that so even looks at them the wrong way!
Feb 26th 2016, 6:00 pm
#4848
Bloody Yank
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 4,186
Re: 2016 Election
More deflections. Just admit that Sanders' proposals are a lot more popular than you asserted.
As for recycling the electability argument. You've still got nothing but opinion on that. An alternative view.
As for recycling the electability argument. You've still got nothing but opinion on that. An alternative view.
The naivete of the Sanders supporters is astounding. Nobody has beaten him up yet because there hasn't been a need, so naturally the negative sentiment against him is low because not many people know much about him.
Candidates in similar positions who end up as primary winners invariably drop in their ratings when their opponents ramp up the opposition messaging against them. The GOP would love if Sanders won because they will have a large bag of tricks to use against him, whereas the efforts against Clinton have gone about as far as they're going to get.
Feb 26th 2016, 6:07 pm
#4849
Forum Regular
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 237
Re: 2016 Election
Yes I understand but this is AMERICA.... By the way this is from someone that has lived in the UK for many years and owned a home in France which we lived in full time for the past three years so I guess I understand your pain. 
Feb 26th 2016, 6:14 pm
#4850
Bloody Yank
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 4,186
Re: 2016 Election
That query alone is about ten times longer than the average comment that Boiler makes.
Feb 26th 2016, 6:16 pm
#4851
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2010
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 8,106
Feb 26th 2016, 6:28 pm
#4853
I love my brick!
Joined: May 2007
Location: Peachy
Posts: 9,304
Re: 2016 Election
Pointing out that Americans have a long history of hating socialism is not a deflection, but just a fact.
The naivete of the Sanders supporters is astounding. Nobody has beaten him up yet because there hasn't been a need, so naturally the negative sentiment against him is low because not many people know much about him.
Candidates in similar positions who end up as primary winners invariably drop in their ratings when their opponents ramp up the opposition messaging against them. The GOP would love if Sanders won because they will have a large bag of tricks to use against him, whereas the efforts against Clinton have gone about as far as they're going to get.
The naivete of the Sanders supporters is astounding. Nobody has beaten him up yet because there hasn't been a need, so naturally the negative sentiment against him is low because not many people know much about him.
Candidates in similar positions who end up as primary winners invariably drop in their ratings when their opponents ramp up the opposition messaging against them. The GOP would love if Sanders won because they will have a large bag of tricks to use against him, whereas the efforts against Clinton have gone about as far as they're going to get.
It's strange, eight years ago a lot of people we saying that Obama was unelectable. These last eight years of President McCain have been terrible, if only we'd picked Clinton back then eh.
Last edited by zargof; Feb 26th 2016 at 6:32 pm.
Feb 26th 2016, 6:34 pm
#4854
Bloody Yank
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 4,186
Re: 2016 Election
Except that the more Sanders is known and the more Clinton and her surrogates have been attacking him, the more favourably he is viewed. Conversely, Clinton's favourability ratings are dropping the more exposure she gets.
It's strange, eight years ago a lot of people we saying that Obama was unelectable. These last eight years of President McCain have been terrible, if only we'd picked Clinton back then eh.
It's strange, eight years ago a lot of people we saying that Obama was unelectable. These last eight years of President McCain have been terrible, if only we'd picked Clinton back then eh.
When unknown candidates get into a position that they start getting attacked, their favorables usually fall because they are no longer monopolizing their own message.
And as more voters start paying attention, they'll start to form opinions that they currently don't hold because many of them are disengaged from politics and don't really have much of an opinion. They'll get more opinionated as the election approaches, and they will be forming opinions with that negative messaging contributing to their positions.
Feb 26th 2016, 6:36 pm
#4855
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jan 2006
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 12,865
Re: 2016 Election
It never occurred to me that Obama was more (or less) unelectable than Clinton. But in '16 I certainly have those concerns about Sanders.
Feb 26th 2016, 6:40 pm
#4856
Bloody Yank
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 4,186
Re: 2016 Election
I certainly didn't feel that. I agonized about who to vote for in the Democratic primary before going with Obama. My concerns were firstly Obama's lack of experience and on the flip side whether voting for Clinton would lead to a re-run of the anti-Clinton nonsense of the '90's.
It never occurred to me that Obama was more (or less) unelectable than Clinton. But in '16 I certainly have those concerns about Sanders.
It never occurred to me that Obama was more (or less) unelectable than Clinton. But in '16 I certainly have those concerns about Sanders.
In terms of popular vote, it was effectively a tie. But the Democratic establishment was worried about Clinton as a nominee and began to rally beyond Obama. (I believed that was a good choice at the time, and it proved to be a good bet.)
Of course, Obama had a few strengths: charisma, an ability to reach minority constituencies and an ability to win over the left and the middle. Sanders has only one of those three, and his appeal is strongest among the age group that is least likely to make a difference in a general election (the youth vote, which doesn't vote.)
Feb 26th 2016, 6:52 pm
#4857
I love my brick!
Joined: May 2007
Location: Peachy
Posts: 9,304
Re: 2016 Election
The Republicans haven't campaigned against Sanders. Nobody has been attacking Sanders.
When unknown candidates get into a position that they start getting attacked, their favorables usually fall because they are no longer monopolizing their own message.
And as more voters start paying attention, they'll start to form opinions that they currently don't hold because many of them are disengaged from politics and don't really have much of an opinion. They'll get more opinionated as the election approaches, and they will be forming opinions with that negative messaging contributing to their positions.
When unknown candidates get into a position that they start getting attacked, their favorables usually fall because they are no longer monopolizing their own message.
And as more voters start paying attention, they'll start to form opinions that they currently don't hold because many of them are disengaged from politics and don't really have much of an opinion. They'll get more opinionated as the election approaches, and they will be forming opinions with that negative messaging contributing to their positions.
Feb 26th 2016, 6:53 pm
#4858
I love my brick!
Joined: May 2007
Location: Peachy
Posts: 9,304
Re: 2016 Election
It was actually the opposite. The superdelegates were pushing for Obama.
In terms of popular vote, it was effectively a tie. But the Democratic establishment was worried about Clinton as a nominee and began to rally beyond Obama. (I believed that was a good choice at the time, and it proved to be a good bet.)
Of course, Obama had a few strengths: charisma, an ability to reach minority constituencies and an ability to win over the left and the middle. Sanders has only one of those three, and his appeal is strongest among the age group that is least likely to make a difference in a general election (the youth vote, which doesn't vote.)
In terms of popular vote, it was effectively a tie. But the Democratic establishment was worried about Clinton as a nominee and began to rally beyond Obama. (I believed that was a good choice at the time, and it proved to be a good bet.)
Of course, Obama had a few strengths: charisma, an ability to reach minority constituencies and an ability to win over the left and the middle. Sanders has only one of those three, and his appeal is strongest among the age group that is least likely to make a difference in a general election (the youth vote, which doesn't vote.)
Feb 26th 2016, 6:58 pm
#4859
I love my brick!
Joined: May 2007
Location: Peachy
Posts: 9,304
Re: 2016 Election
I certainly didn't feel that. I agonized about who to vote for in the Democratic primary before going with Obama. My concerns were firstly Obama's lack of experience and on the flip side whether voting for Clinton would lead to a re-run of the anti-Clinton nonsense of the '90's.
It never occurred to me that Obama was more (or less) unelectable than Clinton. But in '16 I certainly have those concerns about Sanders.
It never occurred to me that Obama was more (or less) unelectable than Clinton. But in '16 I certainly have those concerns about Sanders.
Obama unelectable, new Harris poll says - Illinois Review
Top Clinton Strategist Says Obama 'Can't Win The General Election' | Crooks and Liars
Feb 26th 2016, 6:59 pm
#4860
Bloody Yank
Joined: Oct 2005
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 4,186
Re: 2016 Election
We know from the same surveys that this anti-socialism sentiment is strongest among older people, i.e. those who are more likely to vote.
Obama benefited from having an excellent ground game, coupled with the fact that the Republicans were in charge when the economy achieved meltdown.
In any case, Sanders has low to no odds of being the nominee, so this is just an academic exercise at best. And even though Clinton is not an ideal candidate, the electoral map suggests that it would be very difficult (although not impossible) for her to lose the general election.