Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius (Post 11870720)

This so-called "2016 Election" thread has become positively boring, with posters banging on endlessly about how terrible and how unelectable and how intellectually dishonest, etc, etc. the Republican candidates are and breathless posts on 'here's the latest proof.' Probably 99.8% of the posts are as I described. It case you all haven't noticed, Boiler and I are about the only non-liberals still bothering to check in, and it's likely he'll be the last one standing in the thread very shortly.

There is close to ZERO analysis as to why Hillary's campaign is imploding and what that portends. The latest Quinnipiac Poll shows her in a nation-wide statistical dead heat with a 74 year-old self-proclaimed socialist (44 - 42%). She's losing millennials and young women. Why? Even Move-on.org isn't firmly in her camp. She and Trump have the highest negatives of everyone out there. If she gets the nomination and the Republicans nominate either of the Hermanos Cubanas or another non-Trump, what happens then?

Could we please have some real thinking about the strengths and weaknesses of candidates on both side? Or is this just the Ex-Pat subsidiary of Daily Kos?

Originally Posted by dc koop (Post 11870882)

The plot sickens ! John Poindexter now saying that when Scalia was found dead there was a pillow on his face.

Course this happened in Texas so why not think there was a conspiracy involved :lol:

Originally Posted by Leslie (Post 11870925)

I want to know who paid for his little trip.

Originally Posted by Boiler (Post 11870927)

Just wanted to say Hi.

Originally Posted by zargof (Post 11870769)

Plus he did say he wouldn't be doing this if he didn't think he could win.

Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP (Post 11870936)

Perhaps he lacks objectivity to that degree, but I would surmise that his objective was to move Clinton to the left, not necessarily to become president himself. He probably will accomplish that.

Originally Posted by Leslie (Post 11870922)

You obviously don't read ANY of the stuff we post and your tirades make it difficult to take you seriously.

Originally Posted by Leslie (Post 11870940)

I agree but I think his mindset has changed and now he's in it to win it --- for reals.

Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP (Post 11870936)

Perhaps he lacks objectivity to that degree, but I would surmise that his objective was to move Clinton to the left, not necessarily to become president himself. He probably will accomplish that.

Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP (Post 11870941)

Flavius prefers to argue against the things that he wishes that his opponents would say, rather than against what they actually say.

"There is close to ZERO analysis as to why Hillary's campaign is imploding" coming from me because it isn't. She has a commanding lead going into Super Tuesday, so there isn't a particularly good reason to believe that her campaign is imploding. I know that Flavius and the GOP would dearly love for Sanders to be the nominee so that the GOP can beat him like a Fidel Castro pinata, but the polls don't suggest that will happen.

Originally Posted by Leslie (Post 11870951)

Yeah, I would be surprised if it didn't go exactly this way. I've been made a little less convinced because everything has been so Bizzaro World so far. However, I still mostly believe that she'll get the nomination. I generally predict the races fairly accurately but question myself and have a crisis of confidence as my own neurosis requires.

But to suggest that we don't criticize Hillary on this thread, as FA has done, is bonkers.

Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP (Post 11870955)

As I noted, she will most likely win the primary on the superdelegates even if she doesn't win the popular vote. The establishment won't want Sanders -- hell, he isn't even a Democrat.

Originally Posted by Boiler (Post 11870963)

Define Democrat?

Originally Posted by Leslie (Post 11870992)

ANYBODY BUT CRUZ. :ohmy: