bmags Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 11:47 AM) That's true. Cruz and Trump might end up splitting EV's, but I can't imagine what states Bloomberg would pull enough votes from Hillary to cause her to lose. Bloomberg is a fraud. Under scrutiny, after he moves from "the idea of a third party candidate" to "actual candidate" his base falls out. People just like to say they are independents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 11:39 AM) Yes. I don't know why we are talking about this though, "brokered convention" and "leads way to a third party candidate" are the most overdone election tropes that come out and never happen. Just a fun what-if. QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 12:10 PM) People just like to say they are independents. Because many are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 12:35 PM) Because many are. Most independents reliably vote for one party or the other almost as much as self-identified partisans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 28, 2016 Author Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 12:10 PM) Bloomberg is a fraud. Under scrutiny, after he moves from "the idea of a third party candidate" to "actual candidate" his base falls out. People just like to say they are independents. Sadly the fact that he isn't Trump, Hillary, Sanders, Cruz or any of the rest of the clown car candidates we currently have would automatically put him at the top of my list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 12:52 PM) Most independents reliably vote for one party or the other almost as much as self-identified partisans. Not the same thing. When presented with two choices, of course most will lean one way or the other. You seem to be conflating independent with moderate. Furthermore, if one has views that are, let's just say, 60% one party, 30% another and 10% not in line with either... that's an independent in my view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 You must love the Clintons! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 01:15 PM) You must love the Clintons! eh, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 01:01 PM) Not the same thing. When presented with two choices, of course most will lean one way or the other. You seem to be conflating independent with moderate. Furthermore, if one has views that are, let's just say, 60% one party, 30% another and 10% not in line with either... that's an independent in my view. But if that person still votes for Party A 90% of the time because they more closely match their viewpoint, then for all intents and purposes they're no different than a self-identified Party A partisan if we're discussing openings for some 3rd party candidates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 02:00 PM) But if that person still votes for Party A 90% of the time because they more closely match their viewpoint, then for all intents and purposes they're no different than a self-identified Party A partisan if we're discussing openings for some 3rd party candidates. I completely disagree. People hold their noses and vote all the time, but would jump ship under the right circumstances. See Ross Perot, who was kind of a disaster but still ended up playing a significant role in the general election. And if he hadn't left then came back, his role would likely have been even bigger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 That's true. Cruz and Trump might end up splitting EV's, but I can't imagine what states Bloomberg would pull enough votes from Hillary to cause her to lose. I don't think Bloomberg can take states from Hillary. He could definitely take some from Bernie, though. That's your nightmare scenario, a three way race between Trump, Bloomberg and Bernie that ends up being decided by the house. Oh, in case you're wondering because I was, I just looked it up and the House is restricted to choosing from the three candidates with the most electoral votes, so they couldn't go off the board and vote in Rubio or anybody else. Because if those are their three choices, they might actually do that if they could. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 Most independents reliably vote for one party or the other almost as much as self-identified partisans. I agree with that. I'm as close to a true independent as you get. I've voted for at least one person from each party at every level except President. I've never voted for a Democrat for President, though I haven't voted for a Republican since 2000. Libertarian every time since then. Probably Libertarian again unless Bloomberg makes a 3rd party run or the Republicans somehow miraculously nominate Kasich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 How in the hell could you be a libertarian and vote for Bloomberg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 OK guys, there's no way Hillary can survive this email development. Granted, the public doesn't give a flip apparently she was recklessly firing off emails on secure matters, but these matters were SO PRIVATE and IMPORTANT to the US Government, they can't even release to the public what was in her emails. Can we all agree Hillary is a.) possibly going to jail over this. b.) certainly done as a candidate? http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/29...ml?intcmp=hpbt1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 according to a U.S. government official close to the ongoing review. probably more 100% bulls*** leaks from House Republican staffers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 29, 2016 -> 08:03 PM) probably more 100% bulls*** leaks from House Republican staffers. How long can people blame the messenger on this? Hillary finally is going down over this IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabiness42 Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 How in the hell could you be a libertarian and vote for Bloomberg. I don't really consider myself a Libertarian. I vote that way as a means of a protest vote to the major parties continually nominating s***ty candidates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 QUOTE (greg775 @ Jan 29, 2016 -> 01:08 PM) How long can people blame the messenger on this? Hillary finally is going down over this IMO. How many times have bulls*** rumors been leaked by "sources close to the investigation" that lead to a media s***storm that had to be retracted once the real story came out? Looking at google, this story first broke ten days ago and the story published today that you linked to doesn't really contain any new information. Clinton is still not the subject of any sort of criminal investigation, and nobody seems to care much about this latest development because it doesn't seem materially different from the story that came out last summer about the FBI investigating emails that potentially contained material that may or may not have been classified at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 I think you are close to convincing Greg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonWeltall Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 By election day, Greg will be Soxtalk's strongest Hillary proponent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 29, 2016 -> 04:18 PM) I think you are close to convincing Greg. nah it'll be some random USA Today op-ed and then he'll flip positions completely like he's done with just about every GOP candidate so far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerksticks Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 Poll: Who here likes Hillary Clinton for President and why do you think she'd make a great Commander In Chief? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 http://americablog.com/2016/01/bernie-sand...ng-atheism.html Uh oh, Greg.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LDF Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 QUOTE (Jerksticks @ Jan 30, 2016 -> 02:25 PM) Poll: Who here likes Hillary Clinton for President and why do you think she'd make a great Commander In Chief? i will vote for her, but i still will want to know who will be the vice-pres. reason, better than anything the Rep party is putting out. at this point, the rep party anything is like watching SNL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 30, 2016 -> 04:03 PM) http://americablog.com/2016/01/bernie-sand...ng-atheism.html Uh oh, Greg.... It's not great that Bernie is an atheist but clearly everybody has the right to not be a believer. I'm not so sure Hillary is much of a believer. I think I read somebody speculating she isn't into religion either. My bad if that's wrong. We have some weird candidates this time around. We have Cruz who seems like the male Hillary personality wise, kind of a jerk. We have Bernie who is an alleged socialist and I guess a non believer. We have Trump who is a selfish businessman And we have Hillary who feels she's entitled to be president for some weird reason. Is Jeb Bush so bad after all? Just asking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2Jimmy0 Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 QUOTE (greg775 @ Jan 30, 2016 -> 10:20 AM) It's not great that Bernie is an atheist but clearly everybody has the right to not be a believer. I'm not so sure Hillary is much of a believer. I think I read somebody speculating she isn't into religion either. My bad if that's wrong. We have some weird candidates this time around. We have Cruz who seems like the male Hillary personality wise, kind of a jerk. We have Bernie who is an alleged socialist and I guess a non believer. We have Trump who is a selfish businessman And we have Hillary who feels she's entitled to be president for some weird reason. Is Jeb Bush so bad after all? Just asking. I'm sure we've had many atheist presidents already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts