Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Nov 12, 2016 13:22:06 GMT
Joe Manchin has described this statement as "an absolute embarrassment to the Senate as an institution, our Democratic party, and the nation."
|
|
maxque
Non-Aligned
Posts: 9,237
|
Post by maxque on Nov 12, 2016 13:27:43 GMT
France all depends on who reaches the run off. If it is Le Pen v the PS candidate she could win. If it is Le Pen v the LR candidate it is very hard to see how she avoids a broad repeat of what happened in 2002, although it would be closer. That said she might have a chance against Sarkozy but any other likely LR candidate would surely maintain enough voters from the centre right and the left to secure victory. That more or less reflects my own thinking. The cordon sanitaire around the FN is weakening, but still in existence. Her problem is that is difficult to see how, in present circumstances, the Left candidate could be runner-up. Even without a cordon sanitaire, I doubt left voters would heavily vote for FN in a Right-FN runoff. They would probably heavily abstain (and I would imagine those voting would split close to 50/50). Centrists would still prefer the right in any case (especially as the French centrists are very pro-Europe). FN pretty much have to convince the most people in the first round and hope the lead is wide enough to resist in the 2nd one (it's what happened in the Départementales elections, they mostly won in cantons where they had a good lead after 1st round or where the main opposition to them was not clear (since most cantons where FN was in good position to win had an higher turnout in 2nd round, but FN vote stayed the same, so we can assume those voters didn't vote FN)). That's their main issue, FN vote tends to stay the same, number wise, between turns.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,391
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Nov 12, 2016 13:37:16 GMT
Here is another couple of thoughts. I wonder just how many Republicans inclined voters who didn't like Trump ended up voting for him on the assumption that Clinton was going to win and so they were free to cast a protest vote. Likewise how many Hillary sceptics on the left stayed at home because they thought she had got it in the bag? I think it's fanciful and unrealistic to think that either of those things happened. People said the same sort of thing after the EU referendum. I have been pondering the thought of how much difference it would have made if Hillary hadn't had her health scare in September, and/or if her emails had never been an issue. To be honest, I think neither of those would have made the slightest difference. I disagree, both those incidents probably cost her small but crucial segments of support. They provided some people with the excuse they were loooking for to not support her and/or vote for Trump.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2016 13:41:48 GMT
That more or less reflects my own thinking. The cordon sanitaire around the FN is weakening, but still in existence. Her problem is that is difficult to see how, in present circumstances, the Left candidate could be runner-up. Even without a cordon sanitaire, I doubt left voters would heavily vote for FN in a Right-FN runoff. They would probably heavily abstain (and I would imagine those voting would split close to 50/50). Centrists would still prefer the right in any case (especially as the French centrists are very pro-Europe). FN pretty much have to convince the most people in the first round and hope the lead is wide enough to resist in the 2nd one (it's what happened in the Départementales elections, they mostly won in cantons where they had a good lead after 1st round or where the main opposition to them was not clear (since most cantons where FN was in good position to win had an higher turnout in 2nd round, but FN vote stayed the same, so we can assume those voters didn't vote FN)). That's their main issue, FN vote tends to stay the same, number wise, between turns. True, but does that still hold up after the wave of terror attacks? That is likely the big question. How relevant are the regionals as an indicator anymore?
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Nov 12, 2016 13:43:35 GMT
I think it's fanciful and unrealistic to think that either of those things happened. People said the same sort of thing after the EU referendum. I have been pondering the thought of how much difference it would have made if Hillary hadn't had her health scare in September, and/or if her emails had never been an issue. To be honest, I think neither of those would have made the slightest difference. I disagree, both those incidents probably cost her small but crucial segments of support. They provided some people with the excuse they were loooking for to not support her and/or vote for Trump. I think the most costly was the "basket of deplorables" remark. Never attack the electorate. Not even a small sector of it.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Nov 12, 2016 13:46:24 GMT
I'm not much of an honest broker here because my political outlook is effectively old-fashioned Gaullist. But the circumstances in France are very different. Taking on France's most popular politician, and the whole of the centre-right, is a very tall order. And as maxque points out, they tend not to get up to 50% even in many of their strongholds. It's hardly out of the question though that in a fevered, one against one , presidential contest she could poll more than 50% in some strongholds.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 38,391
Member is Online
|
Post by The Bishop on Nov 12, 2016 13:50:22 GMT
I disagree, both those incidents probably cost her small but crucial segments of support. They provided some people with the excuse they were loooking for to not support her and/or vote for Trump. I think the most costly was the "basket of deplorables" remark. Never attack the electorate. Not even a small sector of it Yes, something those criticising the approach of most Labour people post-referendum (ie for not pledging to "stop Brexit" or whatever) would do well to remember.
|
|
Crimson King
Lib Dem
Be nice to each other and sing in tune
Posts: 9,756
|
Post by Crimson King on Nov 12, 2016 14:09:48 GMT
Well, he's already started to row back on Obamacare and prosecuting Clinton. The idea of him prosecuting Clinton is absurd. Forget the campaign rhetoric, he has been friends with the Clinton's for years, Ivanka and Chelsea are friends, etc. It isn't going to happen. As for actually policy, honestly who knows what he will do. His campaign was largely an act and aside from his view of trade policy, which has been consistent for years, we have little idea where he really stands on most issues. I have been wondering what will happen when "those the establishment don't listen to" find that either his campaign rhetoric is an act, or at the best he can't put it into practice for practical reasons. Will they realise that actually they are being listened to, but what they want is simply not possible, or (sadly more likely) just become even more dissilusioned and poison (with help from an irresponsible media) politics even more
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Nov 12, 2016 14:11:29 GMT
I think the most costly was the "basket of deplorables" remark. Never attack the electorate. Not even a small sector of it Yes, something those criticising the approach of most Labour people post-referendum (ie for not pledging to "stop Brexit" or whatever) would do well to remember. Slightly different as most of those being criticised are "activists" rather than just voters and part of the justification for trying to stop it is that a lot of leave voters have now "changed their minds" as they see the likely outcome (which of course, isn't clear and won't be until, well, who knows) - but you're right the general point of attacking people is the same.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2016 14:15:11 GMT
I am afraid that he is very religious, seemingly a true believer rather than a typical GOP politician who just says what the religious right want to hear. I think he's on record as saying he's a Christian first and everything else is far behind that.
|
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,413
|
Post by right on Nov 12, 2016 14:43:31 GMT
I disagree, both those incidents probably cost her small but crucial segments of support. They provided some people with the excuse they were loooking for to not support her and/or vote for Trump. I think the most costly was the "basket of deplorables" remark. Never attack the electorate. Not even a small sector of it. Unless they voted for Brexit
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 12, 2016 14:48:44 GMT
link to my breakdown state by statenot sure if it has already been worked out by someone else and put on here. but i did a state by state d#hondt format and got Trump 268 Clinton 267 Johnson 2 McMullin 1
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Nov 12, 2016 14:50:16 GMT
I think the most costly was the "basket of deplorables" remark. Never attack the electorate. Not even a small sector of it. Unless they voted for Brexit you might have missed the exchange between The Bishop and myself on this very subject.
|
|
Jack
Reform Party
Posts: 8,475
|
Post by Jack on Nov 12, 2016 14:52:09 GMT
Here is another couple of thoughts. I wonder just how many Republicans inclined voters who didn't like Trump ended up voting for him on the assumption that Clinton was going to win and so they were free to cast a protest vote. Likewise how many Hillary sceptics on the left stayed at home because they thought she had got it in the bag? A lot of people's preferred result probably would have been for Trump to almost win but not quite in order to give the establishment a shock. I think that was probably what Trump would have preferred too. He seems a bit "rabbit in the headlights" at the moment.
|
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,413
|
Post by right on Nov 12, 2016 14:56:48 GMT
Yes, I find esquire tends only to be used jokingly these days. American lawyers use it. Even female ones... Wasn't there a weird (US) constitutional scuffle about holders of titles of nobility not being allowed in the Congress or Senate and lawyers being called Esquire as a title of nobility?
|
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,413
|
Post by right on Nov 12, 2016 14:57:17 GMT
Unless they voted for Brexit you might have missed the exchange between The Bishop and myself on this very subject. Yep
|
|
Richard Allen
Banned
Four time loser in VUKPOTY finals
Posts: 19,052
|
Post by Richard Allen on Nov 12, 2016 14:58:30 GMT
link to my breakdown state by statenot sure if it has already been worked out by someone else and put on here. but i did a state by state d#hondt format and got Trump 268 Clinton 267 Johnson 2 McMullin 1 With 4 million votes still top be counted in California the final totals could easily change.
|
|
right
Conservative
Posts: 18,413
|
Post by right on Nov 12, 2016 15:04:53 GMT
I wonder how many will stop playing the Trumpet in protest? A wind up?
|
|
Sharon
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 2,560
|
Post by Sharon on Nov 12, 2016 15:12:43 GMT
link to my breakdown state by statenot sure if it has already been worked out by someone else and put on here. but i did a state by state d#hondt format and got Trump 268 Clinton 267 Johnson 2 McMullin 1 With 4 million votes still top be counted in California the final totals could easily change. According to www.washingtonpost.com/2016-election-results/us-presidential-race/ California has completed counting, whilst Alaska Connecticut Illinois Iowa Maryland New Jersey New York Oregon Pennsylvania Utah Virginia Washington are still to complete their counting.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Nov 12, 2016 15:16:01 GMT
A lot of people's preferred result probably would have been for Trump to almost win but not quite in order to give the establishment a shock. I think that was probably what Trump would have preferred too. He seems a bit "rabbit in the headlights" at the moment. I could be wrong but I suspect he'll get used to the idea... Or at the very least other people will get used to it for him.
|
|