Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Ciro wrote:

jesseriley wrote:

Yes, I don’t think we can flip Arkansas.

Many of you are completely missing the point that both the right & center couldn’t care less about people.

Exhibit A: the impeachment. How people benefit from a dictator is beyond me. Where were the “conservatives” & “moderates?”

Plenty of billionaires do benefit from trump.

And the Bernie or bust crowd couldn’t care less about child in cages, the rule of law, dreamers and their families, victims of the the Muslim ban or who controls the Supreme Court.

No I get it, if you don’t get absolutely every single thing you want, stamp your feet and let Trump and Stephen Miller have absolutely everything they want. That will end well.

This makes absolutely no sense at all and is blatant fear mongering to get people to coerce to the party line. You should at least be honest like that other guy and admit that Bernie, like Trump, won't get 1% of their stupid sh!t policies passed by Congress.

Again, you’re missing the point that centrism failed because it didn’t motivate a lot of dem voters, who need a politician who has their back.

However, HRC could be nominated out of a brokered convention & probably win now, sadly.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Trollminator wrote:

I think that's an exaggeration about Bernie supporters. This is not 2016. However, neglecting the interests of those die hard supporters would be a serious mistake.

That 53% number doesn't make sense. On a political football field Bernie is around the 20 yard line. Why would his supporters run over 30 yards downfield and vote for Trump. Anyone that supports Bernie is going to have an intense hatred for Trump and is not likely to vote for an independent.

Read the article and data. You’ve misinterpreted it completely.

agip wrote:

https://twitter.com/RadioFreeTom/status/1227432887307440128?s=20

That's the most important set of numbers, and the most terrifying to most Dems.

The primary system is failing so far...it is choosing the hard left candidate even though the hard left is a small portion of the Dem party.

Part of this is that primaries attract extremists and part is that the moderate vote is split many ways.

I have no idea how this is going to resolve any better than now...BBerg is going to be on the ballot soon and that will split things yet another way.

Bernie has lost a lot of support from 2016 but since he is essentially the last lefty standing, he wins.

Truly the US has an awful voting scheme.

None of that matters much right now. Iowa and New Hampshire are very white, very old, and not representative of Democrats as a whole.

Everything gets reshuffled on Super Tuesday anyway. I think anyone able to make it that far has a fighting chance.

So after Super Tuesday we will see where the Democratic electorate really is.

Yeah, bernie wins a small state & paranoia reigns. Not too biased.

Racket wrote:

Ciro wrote:

And the Bernie or bust crowd couldn’t care less about child in cages, the rule of law, dreamers and their families, victims of the the Muslim ban or who controls the Supreme Court.

No I get it, if you don’t get absolutely every single thing you want, stamp your feet and let Trump and Stephen Miller have absolutely everything they want. That will end well.

This makes absolutely no sense at all and is blatant fear mongering to get people to coerce to the party line. You should at least be honest like that other guy and admit that Bernie, like Trump, won't get 1% of their stupid sh!t policies passed by Congress.

It’s not fear monger in fat all.

No Democratic candidate would have implemented the Muslim travel ban.

No Democratic candidate would have ended DACA.

No Democratic candidate would have had so many associates in prison for corruption.

No Democratic candidate will replace Supreme Court judges with conservatives, tilting the balance for a generation.

Election have consequences and it seems four years wasn’t enough and many liberals will need to learn the lesson the very hard way. Or maybe none of the real issues I’ve mentioned and am genuinely passionate about impact you or your family or friends directly.

it sorta does matter...if you look at polls, SC and super tuesday states are being changed by IA and NH results. Namely, biden is going down the toilet. Or sorry, the outhouse since we are talking about confederate states.

JUST KIDDING Y'ALL! about the outhouses.

but seriously, many voters are trend followers and don't want to waste a vote on a biden if he is going downhill fast.

plus, donors are probably abandoning biden because he seems to be a lost cause. I mean winning in red states is not a great feature I think.

agip wrote:

single wing wrote:

This is a tautology. The preferred candidate always gets the most votes. There is no other way to measure the preferred candidate.

In other words, it is nonsense.

ok. Point is that the candidate who won (HRC) represented the largest ideological blocks of voters in the Dem Party, she was not aided by a split vote, etc.

It was a clean primary. Centrism vs. leftism, and centrism won, resoundingly. The process worked.

Actually, it didn't work at all.

HRC lost and gave us the most dangerous and disgusting president in history.

jesseriley wrote:

Again, you’re missing the point that centrism failed because it didn’t motivate a lot of dem voters, who need a politician who has their back.

However, HRC could be nominated out of a brokered convention & probably win now, sadly.

No, the point is the issues I’ve raised don’t impact you directly. For those who are impacted it matters.

"Four more years!"

KAG2020

Stupid autocorrect.

It’s not fear-mongering at all*

Actually, these issues don’t affect you, or you wouldn’t be so paranoid about bernie.

jesseriley wrote:

Actually a brokered convention could he a great thing.

I disagree. I think a brokered convention could be disastrous. There is no way to have a brokered convention without disenfranchising large swaths of the Democratic party.

It would severely hurt the GOTV effort because you need enthusiastic volunteers to pull it off. Getting people to the polls will be the whole ballgame in November.

agip wrote:

. You aren't addressing the split vote question or racket's plurality/majority point.

Only happened twice in the modern primary system. Humphrey got slightly more votes than McGovern (which can only vaguely be included in the modern primary system) and Obama got less votes than Clinton in 2008. I'd say the democrats system worked just find in that one.

Honestly both of these were tiny differences in the total votes.

But since nominations are a party process, I defer to the parties and as indicated, think they are free to embrace whatever allocation system they want in their nominating contests. I'm honestly fine with smoke-filled rooms if that is what the party wants to do. So, I don't think the plurality/majority point is a problem.

Fat hurts wrote:

agip wrote:

ok. Point is that the candidate who won (HRC) represented the largest ideological blocks of voters in the Dem Party, she was not aided by a split vote, etc.

It was a clean primary. Centrism vs. leftism, and centrism won, resoundingly. The process worked.

Actually, it didn't work at all.

HRC lost and gave us the most dangerous and disgusting president in history.

point is that the 2016 primary system produced the nominee supported by a majority of dems and who represented the largest ideologocal block of dems. it was a good match.

dems failed by not realizing how good a campaigner trump was and how much trump could activate hatred of HRC.

Ciro wrote:

Trollminator wrote:

I think that's an exaggeration about Bernie supporters. This is not 2016. However, neglecting the interests of those die hard supporters would be a serious mistake.

The data in the article is from January of THIS year nothing to do with 2016.

Where are you seeing the 53% figure? From the below, only 16% said they not vote for the nominee if it's not Sanders. I thought the last sentence was more interesting - seems like Yang is the new Sanders and Sanders has started to crystallize as a preferred candidate for many more voters than in 2016. The other interesting point is that voters are fickle. Only 47% of Bernie supporters from 2016 still support him... that is very telling that anything can happen.

"Seventy-two percent (72%) of Democratic primary voters plan to vote for the Democratic nominee even if their candidate does not receive the nomination. Thirteen-percent (13%) say they will not vote for the Democratic nominee if their chosen candidate does not win, while 15% say it will depend on who the nominee is. Five-percent (5%) Biden supporters say they will not vote for someone else as the Democratic nominee, while 9% say it would depend on who the nominee is. Among Sanders supporters, 16% will not vote for the nominee if Sanders doesn’t win, while 30% say it depends on the nominee. No Warren supporters say they will definitely not vote for the nominee if she does not win the nomination, but 10% say it will depend on who the nominee is. Forty-two percent (42%) of Yang supporters say they will not vote for anyone else as the Democratic nominee, while 9% say it depends on the nominee."

"Among voters who supported Hillary Clinton in 2016, Biden holds a large lead with 49% support, followed by Sanders and Warren with 14% each, and Bloomberg with 8%. Looking at voters who supported Sanders in 2016, 47% still support him, 13% support Yang, and 12% support Biden and Warren."

jesseriley wrote:

Actually, these issues don’t affect you, or you wouldn’t be so paranoid about bernie.

You’re absolutely wrong with that claim, I do know people impacted by DACA. I lived in Texas for a long time.

By the way if Bernie wins the presidency I’ll be delighted.

I’m talking about people who don’t get their preferred candidate and therefore do not vote at all, assisting Trump and hurting all of the groups I mentioned.

Ciro wrote:

agip wrote:

https://twitter.com/RadioFreeTom/status/1227432887307440128?s=20

That's the most important set of numbers, and the most terrifying to most Dems.

The primary system is failing so far...it is choosing the hard left candidate even though the hard left is a small portion of the Dem party.

Part of this is that primaries attract extremists and part is that the moderate vote is split many ways.

I have no idea how this is going to resolve any better than now...BBerg is going to be on the ballot soon and that will split things yet another way.

Bernie has lost a lot of support from 2016 but since he is essentially the last lefty standing, he wins.

Truly the US has an awful voting scheme.

Very interesting and I think telling data.

What does it tell?

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Anyone that supports Bernie is going to have an intense hatred for Trump . . .

That wasn't true in 2016, when just about one in eight who voted for Sanders in the primary voted for Trump in the general. (Yes, enough to tip the election.)

As others have observed, a significant percentage of Bernie people just wanted to *bust things up*. Bernie didn't get the nomination, so they went with Donald. This jibes perfectly with the recent observations that a lot of Sanders supporters wouldn't commit to supporting a different Dem in the general.

Random somewhat-related question: Wouldn't it make sense for the Democrats to nominate someone who's *actually a Democrat* (which Bernie Sanders is not)?