Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[iam416]

It was an Orwellian masterpiece.

It certainly was something. When the Ds are touting the City on the Hill, military service and patriotism and the Rs aren't, fuck, you know it's a bizarro year.

At the end of the day, though, it's still a optimism/pessimism election. PAH will have a hard time selling optimism to a lot of the electorate. CAVEAT--it's an optimism/pessimism election assuming voters can get past candidate issues.

[Hannibal]

It certainly was something. When the Ds are touting the City on the Hill, military service and patriotism and the Rs aren't, fuck, you know it's a bizarro year.

At the end of the day, though, it's still a optimism/pessimism election. PAH will have a hard time selling optimism to a lot of the electorate. CAVEAT--it's an optimism/pessimism election assuming voters can get past candidate issues.

Everything that I have seen says that pessimism wins that battle in a landslide. The opinion polls that I have seen have Trump on the winning side of just about every issue except for the Muslim ban, which isn't as unpopular as you might expect. Americans overwhelmingly want to curb illegal immigration and Obamacare has never had a positive approval rating. On the whole, the public's perception of BLM is negative. The Iraq War became wildly unpopular and Trump is innoculated from that.

But Trump himself is wildly unpopular, so there you go.

[froot loops]

The country is in a hell of a lot better shape than it was in 2008-2009.

The right track/wrong track number is an interesting data point, but since they been tracking it very few times do you find the country thinks it is on the right track.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/11/07/we-ve-been-on-the-wrong-track-since-1972.html

[iam416]

But Trump himself is wildly unpopular, so there you go.

Yeah, therein lies the problem.

[Hannibal]

The right track/wrong track number is an interesting data point, but since they been tracking it very few times do you find the country thinks it is on the right track.

This is true, but it is also usually isn't as negative as it is now. My guess is that if and when Hillary wins, it will be with a record worst "right track/wrong track" rating.

[Hannibal]

Yeah, therein lies the problem.

So then how does a Republican win? What does your ideal candidate look like? (serious question)

[iam416]

In the nearer-term, I think the Ds get a decisive electoral college win and the Senate, and then tone deafly double down on some sort of "mandate" ignoring all issues that motivated Trump voters and get asswailed in 2018.

[Hannibal]

Polls that I have seen show the Repubs barely hanging onto the Senate. 51-49 or something thereabouts.

[iam416]

So then how does a Republican win? What does your ideal candidate look like? (serious question)

Bill Clinton circa 1992? Heh. I mean, I joke, but it's funny to think of what party he'd more closely associated with these days.

Look, I'm a free-trade, pro-markets, anti- bureaucracy guy. I'm for sensible immigration reform and I think one can make a very good case for the ends Trump is pushing with very different means. I'd take Paul Ryan in a heartbeat. But we're talking my preferred R candidate.

In terms of what I think an R needs to look like to win -- I'd really have to think on that. They need some of Trump's populism but they also need core conservative values. And most importantly, IMO, they need to be able to sell their message to college-educated suburbanites. They can get blue-collar voters through refining key Trump issues, but they need to be able to sell conservatism to a larger audience. Those voters strike me as socially liberal and fiscally conservative, so you if you can sell them on conservative economic ideas and, of course, safety, you're in business.

Trump is going to wail PAH amongst blue collar voters. He'll destroy her in, e.g., WV -- a formally D state. But she's going to run up huge margins in urban areas and, I think, suburban areas.

So, I cycle all over central Ohio -- a region I think is very bellweather. There is a discernible pattern to PAH/Trump sign population. And right now, in my unscientific survey, the Trump signs become prevalent too far into rural areas. They need to be prevalent about 10 miles closer and they just aren't.

[froot loops]

That's how it may go down. That's one way of looking at it. There is also another way of looking at it, if Clinton wins and enacts some of the things they campaign on you energize the other side and by nature your side is less energized because you got some of your important stuff done.

The point of getting elected to Washington shouldn't be to stay in Washington but rather actually get something accomplished. The ACA was the culmination of the Democratic party's 50 year effort on trying to get some sort of universal care act. It ensured the 2010 Republican wave election.

[Wild Hoss]

The country is in a hell of a lot better shape than it was in 2008-2009.

The right track/wrong track number is an interesting data point, but since they been tracking it very few times do you find the country thinks it is on the right track.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...ince-1972.html

It also doesn't take into account why people think its on the wrong track. It doesn't help the GOP much to point to this poll if a majority of those saying the country is going to the wrong direction blame them for it.

Obama's approval rating is at 50%...last I saw GOP approval was at near-record lows.

[froot loops]

This is true, but it is also usually isn't as negative as it is now. My guess is that if and when Hillary wins, it will be with a record worst "right track/wrong track" rating.

If you read that article the low point of the wrong track number was in 2008 during the Bush presidency before the election, it was between 7 and 9 percent. It makes sense, President Obama inherited a real mess. There would have to be some real catastrophe to get it back down to those digits.

[AlabamAlum]

The countless arguments through the years we had....It still just kills me seeing Talent as a conservative.

[froot loops]

I'm not sure the Bill Clinton campaign of 92 could win. The demographics are much different. I'm not sure even if you could replicate the George W. Bush campaigns that it would work. Bush wasn't much as a governing president but he was a really underrated campaigner.

[Wild Hoss]

I'm not sure even if you could replicate the George W. Bush campaigns that it would work. Bush wasn't much as a governing president but he was a really underrated campaigner.

Well, he had a great campaign staff at any rate. Rove and those guys were masters at controlling and driving the message, even with a candidate who could barely speak.

Being on the other side, I had to grudgingly admire those guys. But eventually W's ineptness overpowered even their significant talent.