• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Hillary Clinton will win. You can bet on it.

Part of it's the media's fault. Gone are the days with dazzle them with brilliance... now it's baffle them with bull****.

In Dan Brown's novel, Angels and Demons, Hassassin is asked why he is speaking to the TV reporter about the Vatican hostages and he replies, "The media is the right arm of anarchy".

And it is.
 
Well one thing's for sure: it wont be Bernie. ;)

That's not obvious, either. If the Republican establishment throws out Mitt Romney as an Independent like he's openly talking about now, Ted Cruz runs as Reform or some other right-wing party or else straight Independent, and the Libertarians will be getting a huge surplus of voters because the libertarian faction of the Republicans largely seem to hate Trump, if anyone (or better, if all) of those happen, Sanders could very well run Green party. And if he did, I suspect that it's not at all out of the realm of possibility that he could win.

But to be honest, ignoring Jill Stein and Gary Johnson, I'd be shocked if we didn't have 3 to 4 well-financed, well-run candidates by the time summer ends.
 
I have not seen this myth in print. "ONLY" used as an adverb, right? Please give me a link if you can.

LOLZ

"Hi, I'm kanabco. I'm new. I like pina colodas, long walks on the beach, and mindlessly arguing semantics when the point I was actually trying to make gets pwnd."

Welcome aboard, dude.

:roll:
 
LOLZ

"Hi, I'm kanabco. I'm new. I like pina colodas, long walks on the beach, and mindlessly arguing semantics when the point I was actually trying to make gets pwnd."

Welcome aboard, dude.

:roll:

Ok... I apologize. When you said, "Yet this myth that only uneducated, back woods, high school drop outs support the guy seems to persist." I thought you meant, "Yet this myth that only uneducated, back woods, high school drop outs support the guy seems to persist."
I had to read it again.
 
That's not obvious, either. If the Republican establishment throws out Mitt Romney as an Independent like he's openly talking about now, Ted Cruz runs as Reform or some other right-wing party or else straight Independent, and the Libertarians will be getting a huge surplus of voters because the libertarian faction of the Republicans largely seem to hate Trump, if anyone (or better, if all) of those happen, Sanders could very well run Green party. And if he did, I suspect that it's not at all out of the realm of possibility that he could win.

But to be honest, ignoring Jill Stein and Gary Johnson, I'd be shocked if we didn't have 3 to 4 well-financed, well-run candidates by the time summer ends.

LOL Sanders joins the Greens and becomes POTUS? I'd love to know whatever it is that youre smoking. :lamo
 
LOL Sanders joins the Greens and becomes POTUS? I'd love to know whatever it is that youre smoking. :lamo

Polls for months now have said that in a three-way race with Sanders, a major third-party Democratic candidate (then Bloomberg), and Trump (or Cruz), Sanders would win even within statistical error. You can call it stupid or be skeptical of the polling, but the evidence is what it is.
 
Well not exactly. Tell me if you are a registered voter and which state you live in, and we can see if it even matters if you vote for president. However if your vote is useful to me in any way I'd be happy to help you out with facts :peace

Pennsylvania but every vote matters. While my particular vote may not change the outcome of this election it still matters.

If I vote 3rd party because I know I cant change the outcome between the 2 party system I could show that more people are willing to support a 3rd party. It doesn't take much to get something started or the snowball rolling. Especially the way the 2 parties are supporting the 1% over the wishes and needs of the people.

The 1% can only keep us divided and run this country as long as we are stupid enough to let them. :(

One day We the People may actually become smart enough to fund and support our own candidate instead of being content to vote for the lesser of 2 evils that the rich and powerful own and provide for us.:thumbs:
 
Last edited:
"Wonks like Nate Silver"

I pooped a little. :rofl
 
Polls for months now have said that in a three-way race with Sanders, a major third-party Democratic candidate (then Bloomberg), and Trump (or Cruz), Sanders would win even within statistical error. You can call it stupid or be skeptical of the polling, but the evidence is what it is.

I'd like to see that poll. Even assuming that it exists, if Sanders can't even Beat Clinton, what in the world makes you think he can beat Clinton AND Trump??

Most likely result in that scenario, none of the 3 get to 270 delegates, the decision for president then goes to the house, who selects Trump.
 
I'd like to see that poll. Even assuming that it exists, if Sanders can't even Beat Clinton, what in the world makes you think he can beat Clinton AND Trump??

Most likely result in that scenario, none of the 3 get to 270 delegates, the decision for president then goes to the house, who selects Trump.

First off, please read my post and correctly note what I said. Secondly, here's the poll; notice that Sanders gets 53% of the vote, which means one should expect that he ought to get roughly over the 270 delegates in our supremely undemocratic presidential "election" system.

Thirdly, why is that? It's because Sanders can do what neither Trump nor Hillary can do: He appeals to Independents. One of the most unreported stories (particularly in the mainstream media) is fact that most people are not a part of political parties and actually, as of last summer, a majority of Americans are Independents (And these have come largely come from the Democratic party, who for ages, as you can see in the early part of the graph from the website, was the majority party affiliation, which started flipping around the time Reagan took office). So the fact that Sanders lost isn't surprising, given that a huge swath of his supporters are not registered Democrats or couldn't re-register as Democrats for most of the primaries. This is the reason why Bernie Sanders is the strongest candidate. He has vastly stronger national support that either Trump or Clinton, who are only darlings in what remains of each party (who are now both small minorities in the country).

The reason people are leaving the Democratic party in droves? It's likely to do directly with the reason why those same Independents are flocking around Bernie in droves. Again, this isn't talked about in the mainstream news at all (or if it is, only since Bernie made it so public it had to be acknowledged, and even so, it's only condescendingly spoken about by CNN/MSNBC/Fox), but the Democratic party is currently being split in two. And the side that actually has the numbers to win in national election are unable to get the numbers to win during the primary election (and only barely, despite being wildly underrepresented due to closed primaries). This is one of the reasons why I suspect Trump may very well win the national election, because as far as Hillary's campaign is concerned, she doesn't have to deal with these voters and has shown little interest in holding back her mouth pieces (and herself) in slandering them them for months.
 
Last edited:
First off, please read my post and correctly note what I said. Secondly, here's the poll; notice that Sanders gets 53% of the vote, which means one should expect that he ought to get roughly over the 270 delegates in our supremely undemocratic presidential "election" system.

Thirdly, why is that? It's because Sanders can do what neither Trump nor Hillary can do: He appeals to Independents. One of the most unreported stories (particularly in the mainstream media) is fact that most people are not a part of political parties and actually, as of last summer, a majority of Americans are Independents (And these have come largely come from the Democratic party, who for ages, as you can see in the early part of the graph from the website, was the majority party affiliation, which started flipping around the time Reagan took office). So the fact that Sanders lost isn't surprising, given that a huge swath of his supporters are not registered Democrats or couldn't re-register as Democrats for most of the primaries. This is the reason why Bernie Sanders is the strongest candidate. He has vastly stronger national support that either Trump or Clinton, who are only darlings in what remains of each party (who are now both small minorities in the country).

The reason people are leaving the Democratic party in droves? It's likely to do directly with the reason why those same Independents are flocking around Bernie in droves. Again, this isn't talked about in the mainstream news at all (or if it is, only since Bernie made it so public it had to be acknowledged, and even so, it's only condescendingly spoken about by CNN/MSNBC/Fox), but the Democratic party is currently being split in two. And the side that actually has the numbers to win in national election are unable to get the numbers to win during the primary election (and only barely, despite being wildly underrepresented due to closed primaries). This is one of the reasons why I suspect Trump may very well win the national election, because as far as Hillary's campaign is concerned, she doesn't have to deal with these voters and has shown little interest in holding back her mouth pieces (and herself) in slandering them them for months.

The Dems are hurting themselves with closed primaries. Like you said, it doesn't allow independents to participate. The Superdelegates being reported by the News agencies as part of the delegate count allows the media to buddy up with the establishment.

Have you considered that the House could elect someone not running?

How about if "faithless electors" refuse to vote for who their constituency votes for?
 
Hillary Clinton wants to talk "Policy" but nobody wants to hear anything about "Policy" or from "Policy Wonks".

As soon as she opens her mouth, she is booed.

People want results and not apologies for mistakes.

People want "Single Payer" health care.

And the "Policy Wonks" are sidestepping the issue.

The problem with the internet is that millions and millions of folks have no access to the internet and many can't afford it. Views expressed here are from folks who can afford or have access to the internet.

I think that ignoring the millions without Social Media is at our peril and is not being considered properly as per polls etc.

These "Unheard" folks are like what Nixon called "The Silent Majority".

Calm
 
Last edited:
Hillary needs to figure out how to beat this old corpse first.

Good gosh, Bernie wins again, including a virtual win in Kentucky. A supposed front-runner shouldn't have less than a one point victory against a socialist who never received a paycheck until he was 40 in a state like Kentucky.
 
Polls for months now have said that in a three-way race with Sanders, a major third-party Democratic candidate (then Bloomberg), and Trump (or Cruz), Sanders would win even within statistical error. You can call it stupid or be skeptical of the polling, but the evidence is what it is.

Many fail to realize one important fact.
Conservatives have had 30 plus years to drive down Clinton's approval and have had no time to take on Sanders. So the polls that say what they say "now", not in November. Given the "socialist" moniker attached to Sanders the right will beat him to a pulp with a "communist" branding. I am not saying he would win or lose but Hillary cannot go anywhere but up in her favorables and Sanders cannot go anywhere but down.

Have you notice the original link? The professional gamblers around the world have not changed much since the OP. Hillary 1/3, Donald 5/2
2016 Presidential Election Odds | Next US President | Oddschecker
 
Hillary needs to figure out how to beat this old corpse first.

Good gosh, Bernie wins again, including a virtual win in Kentucky. A supposed front-runner shouldn't have less than a one point victory against a socialist who never received a paycheck until he was 40 in a state like Kentucky.

The old corpse is beaten. He's never been close. His wins are all/mostly virtual ties. Hillary has won an insurmountable lead in delegates. Millions more votes. Game over.

I understand why you'd want this to appear to be close though. You've got the same agenda as the media does. Making stories out of nothing.
 
Have you notice the original link? The professional gamblers around the world have not changed much since the OP.

OMFG REALLY? You mean that since you wrote this 5 days ago the polls haven't changed?

Jesus, you probably are on Clinton's dole. Seriously, at least try to earn the money she's paying you.

Many fail to realize one important fact.
Conservatives have had 30 plus years to drive down Clinton's approval and have had no time to take on Sanders.

Firstly, this is such a tired non-argument. I can counter the lack of criticism of Sanders with a simple question: have you read any news articles about Sanders in the last few months? Fox News has gone out of their way many times to attack Sanders; Sanders has probably received more coverage from Fox than he did MSNBC or CNN (That was certainly true in the first 7 months of the campaign, and only got very slightly better in the past 5), but his coverage has been overwhelmingly negative by Fox, CNN, and MSNBC. And contrary to your "argument," Sanders' approval has only increased the more name recognition he's gotten, and that same time of him gaining name recognition directly overlaps with the Clinton ad hominem machine attacking him.

Secondly, are you serious? What, you think that Fox News and the conservative AM radio hosts are, what, going to play patty-cakes with Hillary? They're going to call her a "communist," who's "playing the woman's card," and so on. And they're just revving up. This idea that Hillary just walks in and takes the 2016 election is not obvious, unless you live in the DC/LA/NYC bubble where you're rich and powerful and you expect everything to go the way that you and your country club dictates.

So the polls that say what they say "now", not in November. Given the "socialist" moniker attached to Sanders the right will beat him to a pulp with a "communist" branding. I am not saying he would win or lose but Hillary cannot go anywhere but up in her favorables and Sanders cannot go anywhere but down.

News Flash: They will do the same thing to Hillary. What you think Hillary is not going to get called a "communist" (she already has), every misogynistic name in the book, isn't going to be called a fairy-dust liberal who's trying to destroy you with taxes, and crooked?

I like that you admit that "her favorables" are complete piss when you incorrectly assert without even the slightest attempt at seriousness that they "can't go anywhere but up." Wrong, she's only at 55% disapproval. That number can go up by another 45%. I'm not even going to address your totally unserious bare assertion that Sanders "can't go anywhere but down." The establishment has been waiting for that for months; instead, people are still showing up at the polls --the Democratic base-- to vote down Hillary and vote up Sanders even though he has such a small chance at winning. That's how much she doesn't inspire people in her own base.

Given how much Americans at large seem to hate Trump and Hillary... I wouldn't be surprised at all that both Hillary and Trump aren't at wildly low favorables when November comes around. I think an election between Hillary and Trump is going to do nothing but lower both of their stats. And for good reason, they're both dishonest, self-serving pricks.
 
Sorry your brain tires so easily. Live some years. Learn some things.

Translation: I cannot refute what you say or add substantial commentary, so I will just act like you're young and stupid (Apparently you're a Republican now).

Message received, and the total inability to defend yourself was noted. Carry on.
 
The old corpse is beaten. He's never been close. His wins are all/mostly virtual ties. Hillary has won an insurmountable lead in delegates. Millions more votes. Game over.

I understand why you'd want this to appear to be close though. You've got the same agenda as the media does. Making stories out of nothing.

Yet, he keeps winning state after state.
 
Yet, he keeps winning state after state.

Not all states are equal, are they?
Or do you think your Texas vote is just as important as tiny Vermont and that Vermont should have an equal say in the Presidential election as Texas?

Making. Stories. Out. Of. Nothing.
 
You know, at this point I'm rooting for Trump just to finally shut these annoying Hillaryites up once and for all...
 
You know, at this point I'm rooting for Trump just to finally shut these annoying Hillaryites up once and for all...

Good for you. If your rooting for Sanders is any indication of your ability to predict the future then Hillary is in good shape.

There are about 100,000,000 people who haven't voted for Sanders and will vote in the general election. You #bernieorbust types can do whatever you want to do. There are bigger things to worry about than your hurt egos.
 
Good for you. If your rooting for Sanders is any indication of your ability to predict the future then Hillary is in good shape.

There are about 100,000,000 people who haven't voted for Sanders and will vote in the general election. You #bernieorbust types can do whatever you want to do. There are bigger things to worry about than your hurt egos.

I like how you automatically assume I am a Bernie supporter with no intrinsic evidence to go on.
Wave goodbye as your straw house blows away...
 
Back
Top Bottom