Red Mosquito

I was hoping Cruz would pull ahead of Rubio.

If you throw all the support that Bush and Kasich have towards Rubio (no guarantee he gets all of it, but he gets the majority) does the establishment have enough to beat Trump. It may not, especially since I would guess he gets quite a few of Carson's supporters.

turned2black wrote:

stip wrote:I'm still betting on Hilary. It's just not hard to envision ways for this to break for Bernie

Actually, it is pretty hard.

The schedule is really stacked in her favor with all the southern states on Super Tuesday.

I also think that coming out of Super Tuesday the Dem "establishment" will be pushing to end all doubt early and let the nation focus on the GOP circus.

The great irony of this whole process is, of course, that Hilary will win the nomination on the strength of states that she won't carry in the general election.

Her overall trustworthiness, likability, and support among independents is low. Her existence is a turnout boon for the GOP. She will not enlarge the size of the democratic coalition. Regardless of how this ends the Sanders campaign has really demonstrated her weakness as a general election candidate in this cycle.

If she wins she should select him for a running mate.

BurtReynolds wrote:

I hate jeb bush so much, and I'd normally be really enjoying what happened to him except Rubio will be their strongest general election candidate.

stip wrote:

turned2black wrote:

stip wrote:I'm still betting on Hilary. It's just not hard to envision ways for this to break for Bernie

Actually, it is pretty hard.

The schedule is really stacked in her favor with all the southern states on Super Tuesday.

I also think that coming out of Super Tuesday the Dem "establishment" will be pushing to end all doubt early and let the nation focus on the GOP circus.

The great irony of this whole process is, of course, that Hilary will win the nomination on the strength of states that she won't carry in the general election.

Her overall trustworthiness, likability, and support among independents is low. Her existence is a turnout boon for the GOP. She will not enlarge the size of the democratic coalition. Regardless of how this ends the Sanders campaign has really demonstrated her weakness as a general election candidate in this cycle.

If she wins she should select him for a running mate.

I'm not sure what that proves, no Dem has won those states since '96.

I'd say Hillary's chances of winning there are higher than Bernie's. The GOP's gonna have the "white guy" vote locked up in those states, the Dem's only real chance is wooing women and blacks, both areas where Hilldog does well.

sorry - i wasnt clear. just pointing out an oddity in the primary process on both sides. delegates arent proportionatley rewarded at least in part on states actually in play for the party

stip wrote:

Simple Torture wrote:I don't think the % margin of victory has much to do with it; I think it's that the polls are holding, and if the polls hold across the board, Clinton wins running away. Nevada was basically a toss up (there wasn't a lot of polling, but still), but the demographics held as expected.

I have not been following the polls particularly closely but I was under the impression they aren't holding, and that there seems to be a growing shift towards Sanders. Perhaps not quickly enough, given the massive slate of votes up for grabs in a week

Well, yes, the polls from like last October--when Hillary had 20-50 leads in some states--have shrunk, but yeah, there's not much time to make up more ground. I like Berniea lot, but I think it's going to be too little too late.

Way to go South Carolina!

turned2black wrote:

4/5 wrote:Democratic storyline regardless of who wins:
Is there something about Hillary that makes her fundamentally unelectable?

Ummmmm... No.

I think she starts rolling now.

I do too. But even after her win it looks like most of the headlines are still moderately negative for her, like "staving off disaster" and things like that. It's not as dramatic as I predicted on Friday since she won with a decent margin of victory, but you know the media was ready to jump all over her if they had been given any real reason to. That's all I was saying.

stip wrote:sorry - i wasnt clear. just pointing out an oddity in the primary process on both sides. delegates arent proportionatley rewarded at least in part on states actually in play for the party

Republicans do a moderately better job of this than Democrats, but yes I agree with you. Hillary is going to do well in the SEC primary states that she has virtually no chance of being even competitive in November.

You seem pretty down on Hillary at the moment, do you foresee that changing when she's your party's nominee?

4/5 wrote:

stip wrote:sorry - i wasnt clear. just pointing out an oddity in the primary process on both sides. delegates arent proportionatley rewarded at least in part on states actually in play for the party

Republicans do a moderately better job of this than Democrats, but yes I agree with you. Hillary is going to do well in the SEC primary states that she has virtually no chance of being even competitive in November.

You seem pretty down on Hillary at the moment, do you foresee that changing when she's your party's nominee?

Nope. She's a moderate liberal hawkish corporate shill, who embodies the rearguard fighting against systemic change (or the ability of our system to imperfectly move in that direction) But it's not hard to support her over any republican

stip wrote:

4/5 wrote:

stip wrote:sorry - i wasnt clear. just pointing out an oddity in the primary process on both sides. delegates arent proportionatley rewarded at least in part on states actually in play for the party

Republicans do a moderately better job of this than Democrats, but yes I agree with you. Hillary is going to do well in the SEC primary states that she has virtually no chance of being even competitive in November.

You seem pretty down on Hillary at the moment, do you foresee that changing when she's your party's nominee?

Nope. She's a moderate liberal hawkish corporate shill, who embodies the rearguard fighting against systemic change (or the ability of our system to imperfectly move in that direction) But it's not hard to support her over any republican

Would you describe Obama the same way? The two of them are very close ideologically and yet I suspect you may not describe him like that. If you wouldn't, then what makes you describe her this way but not him? (Moderate liberal and hawkish are self-evident, so I'm really focusing on the other claims.)

i think there is part of obama that wanted to be better than that, but was too reliant on the clinton wing of the party. the progressive strength that is becoming the dominant force in the party (clinton is a rearguard action) is birthed during the obama presidency. legacies of his campaign and occupy wall street and a few other factora coalecing into something that has the chance to be strong

thats a phone answer, anyway.

stip wrote:i think there is part of obama that wanted to be better than that, but was too reliant on the clinton wing of the party. the progressive strength that is becoming the dominant force in the party (clinton is a rearguard action) is birthed during the obama presidency. legacies of his campaign and occupy wall street and a few other factora coalecing into something that has the chance to be strong

Right.

Let's say public pressure overwhelms the Senate and the confirm a moderate liberal Justice. With that removed from the picture would there be a part of you that would be okay with Hillary taking the L in November and focusing on somebody like Elizabeth Warren for 2020?

definitley. thats the big election, and the one a rising progressive movement needs to win. i have a hard time imagining a tired hilary clinton leading the wave needed to win back the states. but im also not interested in throwing this election to increase those odds. its just a consolation prize

It'll be interesting to see where the GOP goes from here. Normally, I'd say Rubio is gonna start to roll and we are clearly headed for a Trump V. Rubio throwdown, but there are a lot of states coming up with a ton of evangelical voters and Cruz should do well there. I wonder if Trump will get some "wins" in those states because Cruz and Rubio split the evangelical and establishment votes or if Rubio gets enough of a post-Bush bump that sends him to those wins.

the three questions i have are

1. what circumstances prompt cruz to actually drop short of a complete collapse in his support

2. when does Carson hang it up?

(not sure either candidate has an incentive to)

3. where does their support go?

If Cruz drops, Trump is guaranteed to win, right?

No. Even though Cruz isn't popular with the "establishment", Rubio would still get the vast majority of those votes.