• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Republicans for POTUS, 2016 Edition

Deacfreak07 said:
Why do you think he's supporting her?
Click to expand...

I suppose because he thinks she has a better chance to win than Bernie....and possibly for a position in a Clinton administration. I guess there is even a longshot chance that she would pick him as a running mate. Lord knows she needs help with white liberals. That's why I've never understood the talk about picking an Hispanic. She doesn't need any help with Hispanics, Blacks or Women. Progressive White Liberals is the voter group she needs to energize....because they sure as hell aren't very enamored with her right now.
 
bobknightfan said:
I suppose because he thinks she has a better chance to win than Bernie....and possibly for a position in a Clinton administration. I guess there is even a longshot chance that she would pick him as a running mate. Lord knows she needs help with white liberals. That's why I've never understood the talk about picking an Hispanic. She doesn't need any help with Hispanics, Blacks or Women. Progressive White Liberals is the voter group she needs to energize....because they sure as hell aren't very enamored with her right now.
Click to expand...

So you are saying he's smart enough to realize that, if we can't have Bernie, Hillary is still way better than anyone the current Republican Party can throw out there?
 
Christie's takedown of Rubio last night was impressive. Not sure he can generate enough interest to get to the top of the ticket, but that was a hell of an attack-dog VP audition.
 
That's going to hurt Rubio more than it helps Christie.
 
RChildress107 said:
So you are saying he's smart enough to realize that, if we can't have Bernie, Hillary is still way better than anyone the current Republican Party can throw out there?
Click to expand...

Well, you would just have to ask him about that. In any case, Dean may feel that way, but I don't. Read the salon article I just posted on the Democratic candidates thread. Hillary & her cronies are beyond disgusting. The way the Democratic power brokers have crapped on Bernie is exactly the way they crapped on Howard Dean twelve years ago. I've had enough of that stuff. The Clintons can go to hell as far as I am concerned....and if that means the Republicans win the White House, then so be it. A Republican in the White House wouldn't negatively affect me personally, anyway.....so I'm not going to bust my ass trying to get a damned crook like Hillary Clinton elected.
 
bobknightfan said:
I suppose because he thinks she has a better chance to win than Bernie....and possibly for a position in a Clinton administration. I guess there is even a longshot chance that she would pick him as a running mate. Lord knows she needs help with white liberals. That's why I've never understood the talk about picking an Hispanic. She doesn't need any help with Hispanics, Blacks or Women. Progressive White Liberals is the voter group she needs to energize....because they sure as hell aren't very enamored with her right now.
Click to expand...

GOP needs 40% of the Latino vote nationally to win. W got that, but McCain and Mitt didn't come close. Mitt got 27%. Winning the Latino vote will yield Western swing states NV, CO, and NM. It's also the fastest growing demographic. Once TX and AZ turn blue, it's all over for the GOP. Dem floor moves from 242 to well over 270. It's why Trump's and Cruz's hardline immigration stances are EC suicide for the GOP. That's why Jeb or Rubio with Susana Martinez would be a potent electoral ticket for the 'Pubs.

Mobilizing White liberals only helps in swing states Iowa and NH, tiny states that aren't aren't representative of changing national demographics. GOP's a homogeneous (race and age) regional party in decline.
 
The weirdest thing about the GOP's anti-immigration stance is that Latinos would probably be voting for them otherwise. They skew conservative socially and the Latinos I know are all in on the American Dream.
 
FuckmouthedRube said:
GOP needs 40% of the Latino vote nationally to win. W got that, but McCain and Mitt didn't come close. Mitt got 27%. Winning the Latino vote will yield Western swing states NV, CO, and NM. It's also the fastest growing demographic. Once TX and AZ turn blue, it's all over for the GOP. Dem floor moves from 242 to well over 270. It's why Trump's and Cruz's hardline immigration stances are EC suicide for the GOP. That's why Jeb or Rubio with Susana Martinez would be a potent electoral ticket for the 'Pubs.

Mobilizing White liberals only helps in swing states Iowa and NH, tiny states that aren't aren't representative of changing national demographics. GOP's a homogeneous (race and age) regional party in decline.
Click to expand...

I agree with all of that....but my point is that a Democratic candidate is going to get that Latino vote anyway against today's GOP. Are you suggesting that in spite of the GOP rhetoric against Latinos, the Democrats need to put a Latino on the ticket to get them to come out & vote? Latinos are already solidly behind Hillary...for reasons mentioned. White Progressives, on the other hand...and particularly young progressives, who are notoriously poor at getting out to vote anyway...are completely disenchanted with Hillary....and are going to be even more so when they read things like that Salon article I posted on the other thread that details just exactly how Hillary & her cohorts in the Democratic Establishment have been butt-fucking Bernie thruout this campaign. What percentage of the Democratic vote falls under the "progressive" category? I'd say that it is significant. Democrats need progressives to get out and vote in more places than just Iowa & New Hampshire. It's possible that Kerry lost in 2004 because many disgusted progressives didn't bother to vote. (And, as I said in another post, this treatment of progressives by the Democratic insiders is nothing new. The same people did the very same thing to Dean twelve years ago. How much is enough? I've reached my tipping point.)
 
Last edited:
The Latinos that vote, sure. But voter turnout among Latinos is low. Boosting turnout among Latinos would potentially be huge to the point of turning Texas purple.
 
Dems want Julian Castro on the ticket because he's Latino, young, progressive, and from TX. While helpful now electorally, it's also a play for the future. Dems went to great lengths to torpedo Miquel Estrada because they wanted the first Latino Supreme Court Justice to be appointed by a Dem. HRC has problems with young progressives, but very few women voted for McCain purely because Palin was a proxy for Hillary. Dems only need another 28 EC votes, so they can build for the future while still winning today. Personally I'd prefer a Biden/Gillibrand ticket to HRC/Castro, but both tickets would be stronger at the bottom than the top. A younger Latina version of Elizabeth Warren would unite Dems best, but she apoarently doesn't exist.
 
JManslow said:
The weirdest thing about the GOP's anti-immigration stance is that Latinos would probably be voting for them otherwise. They skew conservative socially and the Latinos I know are all in on the American Dream.
Click to expand...

Yeah. They'd be more like Cubans who have a favorable immigration policy supported by Republicans. They'd do well with black voters on social issues if not for the opposition to civil rights.
 
Well, more politics later. I'm off to my son's house in Jamestown to drink a little beer, eat a little chili....and watch the Broncos' defense ruin a lot of posters' day. :)
 
How late is too late for a Biden/Gillibrand to develop should HRC be indicted? That ticket would approach 400 EV's.
 
bobknightfan said:
Hillary ain't in the same party with those three guys. Not really.

If you want my vote, give me Bernie. To paraphrase Howard Dean, Bernie represents the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party. Hillary represents Goldman Sachs......bought and paid for.
Click to expand...

Who the fuck do you think Rubio, Christie, and Kasich represent?

You are just lying to yourself in order to make yourself believe you are a principled person "avenging" 2003/4. That's it. But you are being far from a principled person here. You're being a hypocrite.
 
JManslow said:
The weirdest thing about the GOP's anti-immigration stance is that Latinos would probably be voting for them otherwise. They skew conservative socially and the Latinos I know are all in on the American Dream.
Click to expand...

This. I have been trying to tell my republican friends this for years. The Latino vote would favor conservatism if the republicans would just get out of their own way. It's maddening.
 
There is now a Twitter account, @RubioGlitch, dedicated to "Senator Rubio's" take on the events of the day, such as his assessment of the Super Bowl:

I'm glad the Broncos won but honestly this notion that Barack Obama doesn't know what he's doing is wrong. He knows exactly what he's doing.
​
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top