Chase Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Donald Trump - 743 delegates Ted Cruz - 517 delegates Marco Rubio - 171 delegates John Kasich - 143 delegates --- Hillary Clinton - 1,749 delegates (469 supers) Bernie Sanders - 1,061 delegates (31 supers) Updates: Ted Cruz ® and Bernie Sanders (D) win Wisconsin. The win for Cruz matters because Wisconsin was a winner-take-most state and it allows his campaign to justify it's case for 2nd ballot and beyond in the event of a now slightly-more-likely contested G.O.P convention in Cleveland. For Sanders, it continues a massive surge as Bernie looks to close the gap and swipe superdelegates from Clinton in hopes of an Obama-esque come-from-behind nomination over Hillary. The next challenge however gives both front-runners home-field-advantage. New York is the next huge contest on the map, with Sanders expected to nab Wyoming for the Democratic side en-route. Ted Cruz was also able to win all of the so-far-allocated delegates of Colorado and 18 of the 25 delegates in North Dakota last weekend (with only one delegate openly supporting Donald Trump.) The Cruz campaign seems to be owning the shadow campaign while picking up speed on Trump in the actual primary race. New York Strategies: Clinton: Preach pragmatism, and rally the non-white vote. New York is a very diverse area, of which similar locations have been tough for Sanders to win over. Clinton also has the ability to spin against Donald Trump with liberals and non-whites who won't be privy to the Donald's nativist message. Sanders: Win the Brooklyn debate, and Pin-the-tail-on-Hillary. Sanders will have the youth vote and women and needs to do better with older liberals in particular to make a serious challenge as the visiting campaign - despite growing up in Brooklyn himself. --- Trump: Thank God for 'New York Values' - Trump's spin of Ted Cruz's remarks should serve him well with Republicans in Manhatten - Metro GOPers shouldn't face a serious threat from the Cruz campaign and Kasich doesn't have enough wind in his sails to mobilize the city's center right against the Donald. Cruz: 'Believe in Your Strengths' - Not every New Yorker is the same - and despite Manhatten's Republican base looking a lot like Texas' Democratic Party, Upstate New York (particularly the Buffalo and Albany areas) and Long Island have a building block base for Ted to start his angle with - Evangelicals. The state of New York has about 600,000 of them, a number that in a perfect world would net Ted Cruz a win all by themselves. There's a CNN report about why that clearly won't be enough to help Cruz make a strong showing by itself much later in the thread (page 8 or 9) - but it's a solid start. From there, Cruz needs to find the New York Anti-Trump base before Kasich does. Should that happen, the two candidates not named Trump will be able to prevent the Donald from winning 50% of his home state with a solid preference for Ted Cruz in yet another unlikely state, keeping his campaign's success alive. Kasich: 'Poll Dance' - The Kasich campaign has only one viable reason to be running with a need for 121% of the remaining delegates to win outright - and that's his general election polling against Hillary Clinton, which has been steadily in favor of the Ohio governor. Kasich should try to tap NYC -as well- as college towns such as Syracuse as quickly as possible in order to consolidate the centrist-right. From there - he also needs to feed into Anti-Trumpism and avoid taking shots at Ted Cruz, as Cruz has likely too much of an uphill battle when it comes to earning enough delegates on the first ballot and he needs a floor fight to have a chance. Kasich has an opportunity to hold his lead over Cruz in the state however, which would give the establishment rulemakers a little bit of nudge when it comes to re-writing the rules. Kasich needs some changes on that front as well, so any help he can get from a liberal state like New York would be excellent for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mde2001 Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Well, I was certainly surprised by the results of this one! I thought that Trump and Clinton had Iowa in the bag! This shows that you can't predict everything. I still haven't decided whether I find Cruz or Trump more scary but I'm still hoping for a Clinton win. I'm going to be interested to see the final result of the democrats. If Sanders comes out on top it will show that there is no way to tell who is going to win the nomination let alone the election! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chase Posted February 2, 2016 Author Share Posted February 2, 2016 It depends on what you fear more - lack of experience and grandstanding resulting in a poor world leader, or someone that embodies a political idealogy you don't particularly agree with. Most people who are afraid of Ted Cruz are afraid of him because he's equally as hard-line as Trump, albeit more experienced in politics and has "always been" a conservative. Donald Trump is an enigmatic candidate. He doesn't have much political experience and is instead relying on his ventures as a CEO along with his ability to distract/enamor/cajole/amuse/outright fight the media up to this point. As far as ideology is concerned, he's actually more of a moderate than Cruz is - and his "born-again" conservatism is a constant point of attack from his fellow Republican candidates. He's major beef isn't even with the left so much as it is with Washington in general. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 If Cruz is more moderate that Trump, then Cruz is in a bad place because Trump is an extremist piece of shit. And I don't say that lightly. It might even be the understatement of the year. If Trump gets the Republican candidacy, then the Republicans are sure to lose the presidency. You have no idea the depths of loathing I will have for you if you vote for Trump. NO FUCKING IDEA. Words cannot convey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomas Elliot Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Rubio also was able to wrestle with Trump He wasn't the first one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chase Posted February 2, 2016 Author Share Posted February 2, 2016 The thing is - Trump is an airhead - he certainly -has- come off like an extremist conservative. The major thing with Trump however, is that he has no proven track record outside of this presidential campaign of BEING a conservative, when he in fact was actually very pro liberal earlier in his life with the video footage for his opponents to use against him to boot. This is why he's attacked as a "born again" conservative. There's no proof the Donald even wants to adhere to his constituents, whereas Cruz is someone who will scratch the backs of his right-wing companions because everyone knows he's a staunch right-wing kind of guy. To the point where the Washington folks hate his guts on top of his unlikable demeanor. So it's the risk Republican voters - prior to Marco Rubio's very good showing last night - appeared to have to take. If you were voting with honesty, you voted for Trump if you were MORE of a moderate because of how much we know Trump used to share the opposite point of view than Cruz. If Rubio gets even more competitive, that's BAD news for Trump because just like Cruz is a proven conservative, Rubio is a proven moderate - and his hot air balloon now has to fight a two front war in a manner that helps him WIN states - not just grab headlines. Clinton survives the Iowa scare needing a few actual "coin flips" in several precincts to fend off Sanders. The Secretary of State's luck ended up handing her a higher delegate count than Sanders in the end, with the vote very much indecisive. So Hillary is your technical winner. The "win" was a needed one for Clinton, as Sanders is projected heavily to win New Hampshire, the next state up. You should also expect this state to likely give Donald Trump his first state victory and for it to NOT be so kind to Ted Cruz as Iowa was. Trump however, should be most worried about Rubio, who also will be received warmly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomas Elliot Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 I would like to point out that I didn't post that GIF just for the sake of joking around. In fact, that GIF is the perfect way to explain the point of view of an outsider like myself who, while not capable of the subtle reasoning Hunter has delighted us with, still has something to say on the matter. Donald Trump is a frequently bored, always self-indulgent man who, courtesy of his money, will engage in any given activity (be it a Wrestlemania headliner or a political election) essentially because he can. I am italian, meaning that I've had Berlusconi as my president for 20 years, and now I am in the middle of this new catastrophe called Grillo. While different in political views, background and wealth, both man have something in common: they more or less barged into the political scene with little warning, essentially because they could. So I think I am the most qualified to warn you american people against the dangers of such an attitude: a man who has no clear ideology, and is into things for little more than shit and giggles, is not to be trusted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eviora Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 I actually laughed when I heard about the coin flip thing. Politics can be so silly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chase Posted February 3, 2016 Author Share Posted February 3, 2016 The thing that should probably scare everyone about Trump is that he's such a wildcard that he would probably run (and at times does) for President as a "moderate born-again conservative" and if elected, run America into outright Fascism. Fascism is actually much farther down the line from centrism than even Socialism, which democratic opponent Bernie Sanders holds to be the appropriate political ideology. - and difference there is quite simply seen between the two men themselves. Looking at Sanders, he seems like a nice man who wants equality to mean everyone has equal value. Trump is a guy who wants to equalize opportunity, but is an extremely strong nationalist - as seen by the nonsense about building a wall and driving millions of unregistered immigrants out of the country. However - Trump's flirtations with liberalism in the past are well documented, meaning Tomas is on point here. He will probably be highly manipulative and do what works for him - meaning Conservatives should be wary in case Trump decides to betray them and flirt with the left after using their votes to reach the presidency, and Liberals will absolutely pen the guy as America's own Mussolini. In short, You should just be afraid of Trump because he's liable to do whatever he wants. That applies to every American - not just the conservatives or the liberals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cool Girl Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Ugh, I swear to god, If I see that son of a b**** Trump, I'm gonna kick his a** (I never hated someone so much in my life! Excuse my language, but I'm just pissed at the guy!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maelstrom Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 What I don't get is why you're taking Trump seriously, Chase. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shamitako Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 What I don't get is why you're taking Trump seriously, Chase. Because he actually has a serious chance of winning? Which reminds me, I needa finish with that form so that he has a little less of one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chase Posted February 3, 2016 Author Share Posted February 3, 2016 Nailed it, Alexus. I don't know if you've been following the Republican race Mael, but Trump has not only been the most vocal and ostentatious of the GOP candidates, but he's also been the considerable front runner in polling. As I've said before, many, MANY Americans on the right are taking Trump seriously because they are fed up with who is in Washington currently - on both sides of the aisle. Trump is something different and gives those people someone to root for - as he says what that collective seemingly thinks. It's at the very least, good showmanship, and at the most earnest - if Trump even has that in him - better than throwing up someone like Mitt Romney and losing yet another general election due to not throwing their values in the ring along with the kitchen sink. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted User Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 I find it amusing how much everyone dislikes Trump, as if he's actually going to do half the things he's said. That's Trump's game, he talks big, and he'll say anything he has to to win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eviora Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 The good thing about the likes of Trump and Cruz is I don't think either Clinton or Sanders can realistically lose to either of them~ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted User Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 The good thing about the likes of Trump and Cruz is I don't think either Clinton or Sanders can realistically lose to either of them~ What makes you say that? I understand that you might not like them and feel that Clinton or Sanders are better candidates for you, but competing poll numbers have them all fairly close in general election matchups. Probably more like 18 dollars but close enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eviora Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Both Cruz and Trump come off as ego-maniacal lunatics. It would be so easy for whoever to paint a starkly malignant picture of Cruz if he actually becomes the nominee. Most Americans don't want religion in their politics, and he's the candidate to bring it. As for Trump... well, if we elect someone like that I think we deserve whatever horrors befall us. Contrast those two with Hillary, who comes off as the usual dishonest, and Bernie, who comes off as earnest but a bit too optimistic. Maybe I'm a fool, but I still have enough faith left in the human race that I can't imagine the country at large favoring those particular brands of crazy. I don't know how those polls are run, but it's entirely possible that the demographics of this election will differ from recent ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted User Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Believe me I like bernie in principle, his heart is in the right place, all in all though his proposed policies seem naive yo me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eviora Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 (edited) Maybe so! But I think most voters will prefer naivety to hatred, and both Cruz and Trump have proven themselves to be the sorts to promote the latter. Edited February 3, 2016 by Eviora Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chase Posted February 4, 2016 Author Share Posted February 4, 2016 And now, the clown car is emptying for the GOPers. Following Iowa, we know that Mike Huckabee (AR) dropped out of the race. He was joined by Rand Paul (KY) this morning, and Rick Santorum (PA) tonight. That leaves Donald Trump, Ted Cruz (TX), Marco Rubio (FL), Ben Carson, Jeb Bush (FL), Chris Christie (NJ), Carly Fiorina, Jim Gilmore (VA), and John Kasich (OH) left going into New Hampshire. We can actually count the number of candidates the Republicans have on our fingers now. As Santorum hung the hat, he also gave his endorsement for who he feels deserves the nomination - Marco Rubio. Rubio earlier today actually rejected being an "establishment" backed candidate - which is a nice little play. Trump's entrance polls in NH notwithstanding, Marco is actually tied with Trump for second in delegate count, with seven a piece. Cruz, the Iowa winner, has eight. I actually am -now- starting to like Rubio. He's conservative enough to keep the country from falling off the counter with bad financial policies while not being for only half of America's interests. In contrast to Trump, he's actually quite fair on immigration - which goes a long way in differentiating him from Trump's hatred - and is deemed "the most electable" Republican in the field. --- "Most voters will prefer naivety to hatred" It's a good thing you lead off that sentence with the phrase "but I think" - because the support the likes of Bernie, Cruz, AND Trump getting don't indicate a voter base that advocates such. All three candidates are supposed to be "fringe" guys in their own right - barring Trump lying to the Republican Party and it's voters - and all three of them are paying off of major disappointment in the officials in D.C. The candidates are feeding off of hatred - because the VOTERS are feeding off of hatred. Take some of the things you've pointed out about Ted Cruz in this thread, Eviora - and some of the things EVERYONE has said about Trump. You probably have some bit of distaste in a guy who speak at an event held by someone who would threaten to kill same-sex lovers. You've also even gone so far as to attack Hillary as a "usual liar" - be it to differentiate Bernie himself (which is fair) - or to point out that you don't like any other candidate. There's a reason folks "mudsling" - because at the end - in order to win an election, you have to - A - have a clear policy that is both effective -and- electable and - B - have the least dirt left on your suit/blouse in November. --- If I were to go so far as to say who the most electable guy in the field is - it's going to be Marco Rubio due to Clinton's scandal. He's fairly moderate, he's backed in Washington and willing to play ball with the grassroots in order to beat his more conservative counterparts, he's known for working with liberals respectfully, and he still has a relatively clean suit - save for the stuff Trump pulls out of his fake hair to throw at all of his opponents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted User Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 Maybe so! But I think most voters will prefer naivety to hatred, and both Cruz and Trump have proven themselves to be the sorts to promote the latter. Their platform may come across more as hatred, but I believe it's more about being against the overly restrictive social norms of political correctness where people feel they will be chastised for saying just about anything that comes to their mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eviora Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 Their platform may come across more as hatred, but I believe it's more about being against the overly restrictive social norms of political correctness where people feel they will be chastised for saying just about anything that comes to their mind. The thing is, it's not merely a matter of political correctness. We still have our First Amendment, after all - none of the politicians are talking about doing away with that. The platforms in question are not merely about saying what comes to people's minds, but discriminating based on those ideas... oppressing the few to soothe the fears of the masses. *** Hunter, I'd like to distinguish between a presidential candidate promoting hatred as part of his or her platform and the use of negativity to try to crumble the support for one's opponents. The latter is certainly valid, unsightly though it may be. Each of the candidates ought to be taken to task for ill-advised or outright malicious things they've done. Fortunately (for me =p ) Bernie doesn't have a whole lot of dirt to deal with. Yes, his platform is extreme relative to the status quo, but it's hardly unheard of, and more importantly, the man comes of as exceedingly honest and quite honorable, sometimes to a fault. Cruz and Trump share the former "weakness" without benefiting from the latter advantage. Rubio, I think, could give Bernie a run for his money, since he doesn't seem to want to rock the boat too much and doesn't have an especially lot of metaphorical blood on his hands (that I'm aware of). I wouldn't underestimate the influence raw likability has on voters. =p All that said, to state the obvious, all the opinions in this thread including my own are pretty much entirely speculative. xD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chase Posted February 4, 2016 Author Share Posted February 4, 2016 Now, this is where I can agree with you on the distinguishing between platform and campaign strategy, but "hate" is a very huge buzzword. With regards to the conservative candidates - you have to be very careful of how you use the word - especially if you're going to apply it to their policies. Let's take the same-sex marriage issue. There's essentially three possible agenda directions any given candidate can take with it. A. Push heavily for a constitutional amendment that makes marriage defined in the United States as a ritual that can be performed with hetero or homosexual couples. B. Push heavily for a constitutional amendment that makes marriage defined in the United States as a ritual that is reserved for heterosexual couples. C. Leave the definition of marriage in the United States determined by the state legislatures. This is essentially the three major points of the Conservative-Liberal spectrum regarding the issue. Right-wingers would be more inclined to side with B to appease their constituents and make a personal leadership decision that is adherent to a religious belief - OR because they do indeed "hate" homosexual people. The definition of the word "hate" is as follows - an intense hostility and aversion usually deriving from fear, anger, or sense of injury. None of those three derivations include religious beliefs - so if one were to even make option B a part of their platform - it wouldn't necessarily be due to hatred. There's even more to it though, because even though Senator Cruz is a somewhat radical conservative in this race - he actually isn't so far right on the issue to pick option B. He's been quoted to have said that he wouldn't love his daughters any less if they were gay. - His stance on the issue is actually more attributed to his love for the Constitution as is. As it stands, that issue is a state's right to determine and he's for leaving it as such. That's good news for states that already define marriage ambiguously for proponents of same-sex marriage, -and- for those who oppose it. Essentially, he's leaving the power in other hands with that issue, and - my personal opinion - that is something that should make everyone happy, as the state legislatures are closer to home, giving you the voter a little bit more say in the matter yourself. Want to support your LGBT groups? GREAT! Call your district rep and let it be known it's an issue you the people care about, and change the trajectory of your state. Yes - he does deal with the devil - but Obama is of the same, having dealt with off-the-wall religious guys himself as backers. We've already discussed how it's a shame that there actually is such thing as "homophobia" and how you don't give a rip if people are doing something because they feel they are __personally__ voting on their religious beliefs. It's almost like the arguments we have would flip here though. In order to promote equality, you would encourage voters to stay out of the discussion if the topic doesn't interest them - where as I think having that much personal say is one of the most basic American liberties in this regard. To end this response, I -will- point to Trump as someone who IS acting on genuine "hatred" for people. As a business mogul, undocumented workers can be a very big pain - and it would be natural that he would hold an aversion to them strong enough to hold his overtly nationalistic views. That would be indeed acting out of hate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eviora Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 Religious beliefs have no place influencing laws everyone has to follow. That's the whole point of separation of church and state - no one is compelled to follow any religion. While I'm aware that voting with those beliefs in mind doesn't render the result unconstitutional, it is inherently opposed to the clear intent of the document - to establish a nation where you worship (or not) as you see fit, and others don't interfere just because your beliefs may be different. If you believe gay marriage is immoral, you probably shouldn't have one, and if you don't, there's no reason a bunch of other people's opinions about god should prevent you from having one. The existing system has already dealt with this issue as of last June, so ardor to defend that system is misplaced here. Cruz and the others are just trying to effectively flip the table to get the outcome they want. I read through your entire response and have to ask myself, "What's the point?" Are you that unhappy to have the word 'hatred' applied to the platforms of candidates you might vote for? Because the word is just that - a label. You can try to justify whatever by proposing subtleties, offering definitions, or delving into intricacies, but this issue is very, very simple. Some people want to live their lives in a way that makes them happiest and doesn't particularly seem to hurt anyone else. Do we live and let live, or do we just HAVE to thrust our beliefs into the affairs of nearby strangers, for "their own good" or otherwise? As far as I'm concerned, the latter is a sort of hatred - the type born of having so little respect for someone that you feel compelled to rob them of their autonomy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted User Posted February 4, 2016 Share Posted February 4, 2016 The argument could be made that Sanders, Obama, hell most left wingers hate people who have success, well except themselves, fellow politicians, and the CEO's who line their pockets. "If you have success GREAT, pay your fair share which is far far more because obviously you got there by taking advantage of others, you scum." Do I believe any of these individuals running hates specific groups of people? No. Do they all discriminate? Do they all generalize? Do they all say things that could be considered controversial? Yeah, they do. Politicians will pander to whoever their voting base is, it doesn't mean they hate anyone else, they believe something different than you and they're wording it in ways to appeal to those who will give them the office. It's called playing politics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.