2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

That did not happen in 92 & 96 nor in any presidential election. Nobody ever won or lost (yet) because of the spouse.

That has been true, but this will also be unprecedented in a presidential election. When you pull the lever for the Queen of the Night you're getting Monostatos too.

[dxmnkd316]

Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

Come to think of it, in 92 and 96 you definitely got both. Does no one remember Hilarycare? Jeebus. I was like 10 at the time.

[Rover]

Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

Run any of the current front runners against her and watch Rover do a happy dance around the grave of his or her (lol, who am I kidding) campaign.

Yeah I'm not sure what governor joecct is thinking of. If its Gov Republican Jesus, sure but if its an actual person sitting in office today not so much. Jindal? Walker? Christie? Who exactly are we talking about here? Despite all their bleatings to the contrary the Dems are a well funded organization that's going to tear apart anybody who runs on the right long before the primaries are even over.

I share the question of on policy where has Clinton shown herself to be soul-less, but more than that for Kep, no Hillary probably means Andrew Cuomo as a possible Prez. Look, a potted plant can get 250 electoral votes for the Dems. We know this since that's what Kerry achieved. The electorate is more left leaning that it was 10 years ago in the midst of a war and 3 years removed from 9/11. It would be difficult for any Republican to win NM and NV which Bush took back then. That leaves generic R having to run the table against generic D in swing states, or they nominate a game changer (Republican Jesus again, or Reagan's corpse) who puts Dems states in play. Not sure who does that right now, especially when you consider the electorate is getting less and less "old white guy" every time around.

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

no Hillary probably means Andrew Cuomo

"Probably"? Come now, Cuomo has no greater shot than 5 or 6 other Dems: Biden, O'Malley, Warner (who as was pointed out is no prize) all are in that tier. Patrick, Klobuchar, Schweitzer and Gillibrand are in the next tier. If Elizabeth Báthory doesn't get it, Cuomo has at best a one-in-five shot, before accounting for the backlash among liberals for attempting to hand the Oval Office to Goldman Sachs.

[walrus]

Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

So is congress going to give up a few billion for the border issues? I'll bet Obama won't get it easily.

[ScoobyDoo]

Chris Christie has finally explained the GOP position on gun control to me. We can't save everyone, so we'll save no one. Thanks, Chris.

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

That did not happen in 92 & 96 nor in any presidential election. Nobody ever won or lost (yet) because of the spouse.

Probably the closest anyone's come to losing an election based on their spouse was Andrew Jackson in 1828, and even then it wasn't close, as Jackson pretty much won a landslide. That was a brutal election in which both parties more or less originated smear campaigning in this country, up to the point of JQA's camp accusing Jackson's wife of bigamy (which, technically speaking, had been briefly true over 25 years prior). As a writer for the Cincinnati Gazette put it, "Ought a convicted adulteress and her paramour husband be placed in the highest offices of this free and Christian land?" Ouch.

JQA, meanwhile, was accused of sex trafficking to obtain political favors from the Russian Czar, and using federal money for "gambling" (he purchased a chess set and a pool table for the White House); and we think today's dirty laundry is bad.

In terms of policy making or administration, how does Hillary have absolutely zero scruples? Serious question.

Dang it, why can't you just let me dislike Hillary without having to prove what I said?

[SJHovey]

Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

Not sure who does that right now, especially when you consider the electorate is getting less and less "old white guy" every time around.

This actually isn't true.

In 2004 white guys over the age of 65 made up 4.52% of the total population. In 2008 it went up to 4.59% and as of 2011 has hit 4.86%

For white guys 55 or older, they made up 8.55% of the population in 2004 but 9.81% in 2011 (9.18% in 2008).

Better start treating us with more respect. We're gaining on you.

Edit: Forgot link

http://www.census.gov/population/age/

[Priceless]

Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

Two breaking news stories:
Sarah Palin has called for Obama to be impeached
Water is still wet

[joecct]

Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

Two breaking news stories:
Sarah Palin has called for Obama to be impeached
Water is still wet

She's nuts -- see today's Pat Buchanan missive
Unless it's vapor??

[Rover]

Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

This actually isn't true.

In 2004 white guys over the age of 65 made up 4.52% of the total population. In 2008 it went up to 4.59% and as of 2011 has hit 4.86%

For white guys 55 or older, they made up 8.55% of the population in 2004 but 9.81% in 2011 (9.18% in 2008).

Better start treating us with more respect. We're gaining on you.

Edit: Forgot link

http://www.census.gov/population/age/

Minority voters gain 2% of the total voting pool every election since the 80's. They're coming at the expense of somebody. I'm wondering if the total population isn't corresponding to turnout much like you have in both youngsters and minorities (as in their % gain in the census doesn't always equate to their growth in the voting population).

[Rover]

Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

"Probably"? Come now, Cuomo has no greater shot than 5 or 6 other Dems: Biden, O'Malley, Warner (who as was pointed out is no prize) all are in that tier. Patrick, Klobuchar, Schweitzer and Gillibrand are in the next tier. If Elizabeth Báthory doesn't get it, Cuomo has at best a one-in-five shot, before accounting for the backlash among liberals for attempting to hand the Oval Office to Goldman Sachs.

Mind you I'm no fan of the guy, but you're pooh poohing his chances by putting him in the same category as O'Malley and Warner. I'm discounting a Biden bid for right now due to his age (73) at the time of the election. Thinking dispassionately for a second, Cuomo has 1) name recognition, 2) the ability to raise big bucks from his Wall St pals, 3) some bipartisan creds since he inexplicably went along with the GOP running the state Senate even though they're in the minority over there (long story) and 4) I believe was the driving force in NY being the first state to legalize gay marriage legislatively.

Beyond that, he pretty much locks down places like PA that Republicans always slobber over even though they haven't won the state since 1988. He can also reach out to the other Rust Belt states such as Ohio. Really, that's all he needs provided Hispanic heavy states of NV and NM stay home. Provided he can avoid a scandal (a big IF as he seems a little oily) I don't see the O'Malley's or Schweitzer's of the world keeping up with him.

So, no Hillary + no Biden = Cuomo IMHO. Not saying I like that, but he'd be tough to stop for the nomination.

[unofan]

Minority voters gain 2% of the total voting pool every election since the 80's. They're coming at the expense of somebody. I'm wondering if the total population isn't corresponding to turnout much like you have in both youngsters and minorities (as in their % gain in the census doesn't always equate to their growth in the voting population).

His stats are caused by the baby boomers aging.

Your stats are caused by the millennials replacing the boomers' parents (and ever moreso, the boomers themselves) in the voting pool.

You're both right.

[Kepler]

Re: 2nd Term Part VIII - The Thin Red Line

His stats are caused by the baby boomers aging.

Your stats are caused by the millennials replacing the boomers' parents (and ever moreso, the boomers themselves) in the voting pool.

You're both right.

Right. The two growth demographics are non-whites and old people, so in a 2x2 matrix of white/non-white and young/old, 3 squares are growing. The one that's shrinking relative to the others is young whites. This has enormous ramifications.

The political-demographic time-bomb isn't that old whites are dying off -- old whites are actually living a few weeks longer with each passing year. It's that when we finally do die we're going to be replaced by everything except young whites. After 150 years of patiently waiting for America to fix the racial-wealth correlation politically, Mother Nature has decided the hell with it, she'll just fix it Herself.

[joecct]

Right. The two growth demographics are non-whites and old people, so in a 2x2 matrix of white/non-white and young/old, 3 squares are growing. The one that's shrinking relative to the others is young whites. This has enormous ramifications.

The political-demographic time-bomb isn't that old whites are dying off -- old whites are actually living a few weeks longer with each passing year. It's that when we finally do die we're going to be replaced by everything except young whites. After 150 years of patiently waiting for America to fix the racial-wealth correlation politically, Mother Nature has decided the hell with it, she'll just fix it Herself.

Young whites have to start reproducin'!!