Support NeoGAF

[Box of Kittens]

Reminder to those who don't frequent PoliGAF that Gravis is a horrendously bad pollster. Take this poll with a grain of salt.

Yeah, Gravis is pretty terrible. Although this poll is showing a similar result to Marist, and they're relatively good. I'd love to see some more polls to see if there really has been movement towards Trump. With these kinds of numbers he could very well sweep all nine congressional districts, which would give him all of Indiana's delegates.

 

[EatinOlives]

Cruz and Kasich are such horrendous GOP candidates that I'm astounded they're even in the race still. They're the equivalent of a corpse being propped up by a stick on its back, putting sunglasses and a hat on it, and saying "hey everyone, he's totally still alive!" In any other election these two would've been out within month 3 of the primaries. The fact they refuse to drop out does not mean they're any stronger at all.

 

[Miles X]

I'm disappointed we've not had anything from PPP yet.

 

[Link]

Cruz and Kasich are such horrendous GOP candidates that I'm astounded they're even in the race still. They're the equivalent of a corpse being propped up by a stick on its back, putting sunglasses and a hat on it, and saying "hey everyone, he's totally still alive!" In any other election these two would've been out within month 3 of the primaries. The fact they refuse to drop out does not mean they're any stronger at all.

They haven't dropped out because they're banking on a brokered convention that will deny Trump the nomination. They figure if they're still in the race, they'll be the "legitimate" choice.

 

[Rentahamster]

That was... mindblowingly stupid. Any one of his college student supporters who has taken Econ 101 would immediately be able to see the flaws in that argument.

But the supporters eat that shit up. It is a noble goal though. I just want to know how he plans to pull it off.

He turned a complex issue into a anti-data, anti-research platitude on people that actually do have PhDs in Economics and spend their lives researching Trade. You highlighted exactly the problem: It appeals to a basic, misguided emotional sentiment instead of reason and logic.

Those jobs are never coming back and there's really no way to prevent companies from outsourcing. And that's before you get to tax shenanigans.

It also doesn't begin to touch on the benefits of the countries that get these jobs. The short version of that being that it's a great weapon against the sort of extreme poverty we've all but eliminated in the US.

It highlights that Bernie Sanders is flat out a shallow candidate. He's like a writer with many amazing ideas but no idea how to execute them, which btw makes for a bad writer.

And this is not even remotely one of his good ideas.

If you were running for the Democratic nomination, you would take a pro-outsourcing approach to campaigning? Or at least a "outsourcing isn't so bad, really" approach? "Outsourcing, bad!" has been a Democratic talking point for years now. President Obama stressed in the 2012 campaign that voting for Romney is voting for your jobs to be shipped overseas. If we're going to be talking about "chickens coming home to roost" over the shit that Donald Trump says and how it's the obvious coalescence of years of Republican rhetoric, this can just as well be an example on the Democratic side.

Heck, it's even still part of the official party platform:

https://www.democrats.org/party-platform

They [Republicans] argue that if we help corporations and wealthy investors maximize their profits by whatever means necessary, whether through layoffs or outsourcing, it will automatically translate into jobs and prosperity that benefits us all.

We need an economy that creates the jobs of the future and makes things the rest of the world buys—not one built on outsourcing, loopholes, or risky financial deals that jeopardize everyone, especially the middle class.

The American people will make a clear choice. They can vote for Republicans who opposed saving the auto industry, who favor a tax code that would actually encourage outsourcing, and whose plans would gut investments in federally financed labs and universities that build new American industries. Or they can elect Democrats who bet on the American worker, will reward those who create private-sector jobs here in America, and make the investments that strengthen the middle class.

But the Republican Party has nominated a man whose firm invested in companies that were pioneers of outsourcing—and whose plans would actually encourage outsourcing by eliminating all taxes on the foreign profits of U.S. companies.

The official party platform does not support the idea that it is beneficial domestically, promotes wealth abroad, and that it can't be stopped, even if you wanted it to.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

If you were running for the Democratic nomination, you would take a pro-outsourcing approach to campaigning? Or at least a "outsourcing isn't so bad, really" approach? "Outsourcing, bad!" has been a Democratic talking point for years now. President Obama stressed in the 2012 campaign that voting for Romney is voting for your jobs to be shipped overseas. If we're going to be talking about "chickens coming home to roost" over the shit that Donald Drumpf says and how it's the obvious coalescence of years of Republican rhetoric, this can just as well be an example on the Democratic side.

Heck, it's even still part of the official party platform:

https://www.democrats.org/party-platform









The official party platform does not support the idea that it is beneficial domestically, promotes wealth abroad, and that it can't be stopped, even if you wanted it to.

First, the party platform is rarely brought up. It's ceremonial at best.

Second, you don't campaign on outsourcing being good. You campaign on helping people affected by outsourcing. Campaigning on a protectionist line is like campaigning on fighting natural inflation or campaigning on stopping tornadoes. It's not feasible as a policy at all. Instead, you fight for those displaced by outsourcing through the opening of other industries (energy is a big one) and honestly, we as a nation need to start talking about basic income plans.

Those jobs we send overseas? They're never coming back. They'll be automated if the buildings themselves ever come back, so I don't see what the point is in arguing for that. You can't put the genie back in the bottle.

 

[Box of Kittens]

They haven't dropped out because they're banking on a brokered convention that will deny Trump the nomination. They figure if they're still in the race, they'll be the "legitimate" choice.

Cruz at least has an actual strategy that he's executing to accomplish this. He's been working to get delegates loyal to him selected at the state level so that he can be in the drivers seat for a second or third ballot. At this point it seems likely to fall short, and it may have backfired somewhat (some of the movement towards Trump in the polls is possibly due to the perception that Cruz is trying to steal the nomination from Trump), but at least it's a theoretically workable strategy.

Kasich's presence is completely pointless and has been for a while now. In the event that the establishment has the ability and desire to control the nomination process, they could give it to pretty much anyone they wanted. In that case why would they give it to Kasich, whom they don't particularly like and who would have to answer questions about why a distant third place finisher should be handed the nomination. I'd say Paul Ryan has a better shot of being the nominee than Kasich (and I don't think Ryan is likely to be the nominee).

 

[dramatis]

May primaries thread is up, migrate the Indiana discussion there.