Support NeoGAF

[BSsBrolly]

people who say that Hilary is further to the right than Obama need to get their memory re-jogged because Hillary was almost more left leaning when it came to healthcare and education that Bams

Obama catered to the health insurance industry and delivered health INSURANCE reform not healthcare reform.

And about Wall Street: BOTH have the same friends on Wall Street. it's not like Hillary is more cozy with them than Obama. Obama chose that Ram Emanuel strategy guide and surrounded his financial team with ex Goldman Sachs people.

The only department that Hillary may be more Right leaning than Obama is on foreign affairs not domestic

Hilary wanted obamacare before Obama. I believe he wanted single payer before he got elected.

 

[gutter_trash]

Hilary wanted obamacare before Obama. I believe he wanted single payer before he got elected.

I remember the 2008 exchanges. Obama ran on health INSURANCE reform not healthcare

 

[teruterubozu]

I remember the 2008 exchanges. Obama ran on health INSURANCE reform not healthcare

The dagger was when Kennedy said fuck Hillarycare and went with Obamacare.

 

[BSsBrolly]

I remember the 2008 exchanges. Obama ran on health INSURANCE reform not healthcare

Hmm, I seem to remember that differently. Gonna have to research this to be sure.

Edit: yep, Obama wanted universal healthcare before he realized that was impossible.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jul/20/barack-obama/obama-flip-flops-requiring-people-buy-health-care/

It's why I voted for Obama over Clinton in the primaries, if I'm remembering right.

 

[benjipwns]

It's selfish in the sense that one of the main motivations in voting for a minor third party candidate is to protest the headline candidates for not championing issues you find important. ... For people in this category, their main motivation was maintaining self-righteous purity and solidarity with a movement. To those people, yes, they were selfish.

Or perhaps they wanted to vote for the person who closest represented their views rather than feeling they owe their vote to some corporation.

Yea, one is throwing their vote away on third parties. Vote democrat and hope for the best. It's literally your best option.

No matter how you vote, the outcome will not change.

I remember the 2008 exchanges. Obama ran on health INSURANCE reform not healthcare

people who say that Hilary is further to the right than Obama need to get their memory re-jogged because Hillary was almost more left leaning when it came to healthcare and education that Bams

Obama catered to the health insurance industry and delivered health INSURANCE reform not healthcare reform.

This is Obama on Hillary's plan:

Let’s break down what she really means by a mandate. What’s meant by a mandate is that the government is forcing people to buy health insurance and so she’s suggesting a parent is not going to buy health insurance for themselves if they can afford it. Now, my belief is that most parents will choose to get health care for themselves and we make it affordable.

Here’s the concern. If you haven’t made it affordable, how are you going to enforce a mandate. I mean, if a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house. The reason they don’t buy a house is they don’t have the money. And so, our focus has been on reducing costs, making it available. I am confident if people have a chance to buy high-quality health care that is affordable, they will do so. That’s what our plan does and nobody disputes that.

He supported a public option:

any American will have the opportunity to enroll in the new public plan or an approved private plan, and income-based sliding scale tax credits will be provided for people and families who need it.

– In the 2008 Obama-Biden health care plan on the campaign’s website, candidate Obama promised that “any American will have the opportunity to enroll in [a] new public plan.” [2008]
— During a speech at the American Medical Association, President Obama told thousands of doctors that one of the plans included in the new health insurance exchanges “needs to be a public option that will give people a broader range of choices and inject competition into the health care market.” [6/15/09]
— While speaking to the nation during his weekly address, the President said that “any plan” he signs “must include…a public option.” [7/17/09]
— During a conference call with progressive bloggers, the President said he continues “to believe that a robust public option would be the best way to go.” [7/20/09]
— Obama told NBC’s David Gregory that a public option “should be a part of this [health care bill],” while rebuking claims that the plan was “dead.” [9/20/09]

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2009/12/22/74682/obama-repeatedly-touted-public/

 

[Flo_Evans]

It's selfish in the sense that one of the main motivations in voting for a minor third party candidate is to protest the headline candidates for not championing issues you find important. It sounds good in theory, but what ended up happening is that Bush won and undid much of the progress I'm sure many of those Nader voters would've claimed to of cared about. For people in this category, their main motivation was maintaining self-righteous purity and solidarity with a movement. To those people, yes, they were selfish.

No, they are not personally responsible, but I would like to think that everyone learned from that lesson. If you're a progressive, a vote for the Green Party might as well be a vote for a Republican. We don't live in a parliamentary system where minor candidates can get representation, Even movements like the Tea Party aren't crazy enough to leave the GOP tent for this reason. You don't change parties, you change the party. To do this you pay attention during the primaries.

Yeah good thing the democrats aren't even holding a primary eh?

Fuck that. I'll vote for who I want. You don't get to blame people for your own political failures.

Hilary needs to convince me she is a good candidate not "the other guy is worse".

 

[benjipwns]

Yeah good thing the democrats aren't even holding a primary eh?

Fuck that. I'll vote for who I want. You don't get to blame people for your own political failures.

Hilary needs to convince me she is a good candidate not "the other guy is worse".

NO THE WORLD IS LITERALLY AT STAKE YOUR SINGLE VOTE COULD SAVE THE PLANET

VOTE HILLARY OR YOUR SELFISHNESS IS TO BLAME

 

[slit]

It's selfish in the sense that one of the main motivations in voting for a minor third party candidate is to protest the headline candidates for not championing issues you find important. It sounds good in theory, but what ended up happening is that Bush won and undid much of the progress I'm sure many of those Nader voters would've claimed to of cared about. For people in this category, their main motivation was maintaining self-righteous purity and solidarity with a movement. To those people, yes, they were selfish.

No, they are not personally responsible, but I would like to think that everyone learned from that lesson. If you're a progressive, a vote for the Green Party might as well be a vote for a Republican. We don't live in a parliamentary system where minor candidates can get representation, Even movements like the Tea Party aren't crazy enough to leave the GOP tent for this reason. You don't change parties, you change the party. To do this you pay attention during the primaries.

No you don't know if that's why. Gore ran a campaign that tried to appeal to conservatives. From his stances on censorship and religious influence to the pick for his running mate. If you want to blame someone, blame him. It seemed he wanted to be Bush in a lot of ways just to win the presidency and to suggest that people have to kowtow to the sometimes downright stupidity of the Democratic Party fly's in the face of the democratic process. Both parties are not the same but sometimes you can only go so far in bending your values for the "greater good."

 

[Cheebo]

It's not going to Jeb on the Republican side guys. The base doesn't trust him at all. Scott Walker is easily the man to beat. He is ahead in polls nationally as well as in the early primaries.

 

[PhoenixDark]

It's not going to Jeb on the Republican side guys. The base doesn't trust him at all. Scott Walker is easily the man to beat. He is ahead in polls nationally as well as in the early primaries.

I just don't see a scenario where Jeb can win Iowa or NH. If I had time right now I'd look through past GOP and democrat primary seasons to see if any candidate has won the nomination without winning or doing well in the first couple primaries. He's sure as he not going to win South Carolina, and NH could be a loss as well (lots of young libertarians there). A potential 0-4 start...

The advantage Bush has is money, which means he can stay in the race for a prolonged period of time. If he can make it past the early primaries he could theoretically catch up in the later winner-take-all contests. But by then the front runner might be securing important endorsements. According to the Washington Post, Mitt Romney doesn't want Bush to be the nominee; he feels Bush is a weak candidate. If for instance Scott Walker wins a couple early states, Romney could endorse him.

I expect this to boil down to Walker, Bush, a conservative, and a fringe candidate. Everybody else will bow out before winner-take-alls begin IMO.

 

[Cheebo]

I just don't see a scenario where Jeb can win Iowa or NH. If I had time right now I'd look through past GOP and democrat primary seasons to see if any candidate has won the nomination without winning or doing well in the first couple primaries. He's sure as he not going to win South Carolina, and NH could be a loss as well (lots of young libertarians there). A potential 0-4 start...

The advantage Bush has is money, which means he can stay in the race for a prolonged period of time. If he can make it past the early primaries he could theoretically catch up in the later winner-take-all contests. But by then the front runner might be securing important endorsements. According to the Washington Post, Mitt Romney doesn't want Bush to be the nominee; he feels Bush is a weak candidate. If for instance Scott Walker wins a couple early states, Romney could endorse him.

I expect this to boil down to Walker, Bush, a conservative, and a fringe candidate. Everybody else will bow out before winner-take-alls begin IMO.

Jeb Bush is this cycle's Rud Guillani. The guy everyone who really doesn't follow the election closely assumes will be then nominee by default despite it being obvious that the base would never pick him. Bush is an extremely weak candidate in the primaries. He is going nowhere.

The base loves Walker and sees him as one of their own while at the same time view him as electable (I am not saying he is electable, but the base clearly believes he is). That's a hard combination to beat. Not to mention the fact Walker leads all the important polls already despite Jeb's far stronger name recognition. Jeb is going nowhere fast.

 

[HylianTom]

Think Virginia is basically blue. Nova, Richmond, and Norfolk trounce the rurals.

We'll see a lot of her near me in Fairfax/Loudoun areas in 2016. Money here and need for those 13 swing EVs.

Yup.

Though it's early and I want more numbers (always more!), while polls have shown tightening of the race in other swing states, Virginia appears to be staying stubbornly in Hillary's column. If this holds through to the later part of this year, I'd go out on a limb and say it's as much a "swing state" as Pennsylvania is. Which means both sides will say it is and act like it is, but we all really know which way it'll go. No one will be shocked when it's called.

It's only 13EVs, but it'd be huge for the Dems to have another medium-sized state in their leaning column. Palin knew what was happening in the DC suburbs of North Virginia back in 2008, calling the rest of the state "real Virginia." Now we get to see the electoral effects of 8 more years of population growth.

Bob Scheiffer asked Rance Preibus about the Democrats' built-in advantage on the map yesterday on Face the Nation. I was a bit shocked; usually the media likes to pretend all along that these races are going to be tight-as-a-tick (thanks, Dan Rather!). Watching returns on Election Night 2012 was fun, just to see how the networks tried to create an atmosphere of suspense..

 

[Volimar]

eh, she's not having anything approaching a hard time with this state unless Kasich is on the ticket somehow

I could see Portman on a ticket to try to get Ohio.

 

[The Technomancer]

Karl Rove is a scrub. Dick Morris da MVP:

I love the red Minnesota there. Like, barring some kind of weird catastrophe Minnesota aint going red

 

[The Technomancer]

No you don't know if that's why. Gore ran a campaign that tried to appeal to conservatives. From his stances on censorship and religious influence to the pick for his running mate. If you want to blame someone, blame him. It seemed he wanted to be Bush in a lot of ways just to win the presidency and to suggest that people have to kowtow to the sometimes downright stupidity of the Democratic Party fly's in the face of the democratic process. Both parties are not the same but sometimes you can only go so far in bending your values for the "greater good."

Do you know how we got the Tea Party? Because instead of forming some "third party" that wouldn't gain any traction they planted themselves smack dab in the middle of the existing Republican party. That's what we need in a progressive movement if we really care about "overhauling politics"

 

[TheLostBigBoss]

Karl Rove is a scrub. Dick Morris da MVP:

I think NASA should investigate, they could be stuck in an alternate reality that's constantly colliding with ours.

It's the only explanation.

 

[BertramCooper]

I could see Portman on a ticket to try to get Ohio.

Not happening for a variety of reasons, including:

-Portman is up for reelection in the Senate. If he pulls out, Ted Strickland is virtually guaranteed to win it for the Dems.
-Portman has a gay son and supports same-sex marriage.
-In a poll released last week, 44 percent of Ohio voters said they had not heard enough about Portman to form an opinion of him. This is a guy who has been in the Senate for FIVE YEARS.

Portman is definitely not going to be in the discussion for veep.

 

[benjipwns]

Do you know how we got the Tea Party? Because instead of forming some "third party" that wouldn't gain any traction they planted themselves smack dab in the middle of the existing Republican party. That's what we need in a progressive movement if we really care about "overhauling politics"

You're dividing the party and creating a messy fight that could leave hurt feelings where people stay home, the most important thing is to be unified behind one surefire candidate whoever they are and let the Republicans beat themselves up while the uncontested candidate can sail through to victory.

Then once they get in office, for every ten glowing profiles you can write one slightly critical asking for a tiny bit more progressive policy.

Anything else would be selfish.

 

[teruterubozu]

The base loves Walker and sees him as one of their own while at the same time view him as electable (I am not saying he is electable, but the base clearly believes he is). That's a hard combination to beat. Not to mention the fact Walker leads all the important polls already despite Jeb's far stronger name recognition. Jeb is going nowhere fast.

The Tea Party likes Walker, but he's made such a mess out of Wisconsin's economy that many run-of-the-mill conservatives are doubting his financial acumen.

 

[slit]

Do you know how we got the Tea Party? Because instead of forming some "third party" that wouldn't gain any traction they planted themselves smack dab in the middle of the existing Republican party. That's what we need in a progressive movement if we really care about "overhauling politics"

Be that as it may, there is no progressive equivalent and there won't be because a lot of progressives are not sheep and some are not as committed. Sucks but that's the way it is. The Occupy Wall Street movement fell flat on it's face after a very short time. That tells me that a lot of people still have not woken up and won't unless things get much worse, but to say that it's time to fall in line because you are wishing on a star for that to happen is a waste of time.

 

[gutter_trash]

the Occupy Wall Street crowd are a loud vocal minority, when I mean minority, I mean a small number

every country has their ubber left wing crowd that is loud but have no political clout

 

[NeoXChaos]

"Democrats don’t have enough white voters to consistently hold the Senate or win the House, and Republicans don’t have enough minorities to win the presidency"


That about sums up the Republican chances.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/11/the_disunited_states_of_america_why_demographics_republican_obstructionism.html

 

[BSsBrolly]

Jeb Bush is this cycle's Rud Guillani. The guy everyone who really doesn't follow the election closely assumes will be then nominee by default despite it being obvious that the base would never pick him. Bush is an extremely weak candidate in the primaries. He is going nowhere.

The base loves Walker and sees him as one of their own while at the same time view him as electable (I am not saying he is electable, but the base clearly believes he is). That's a hard combination to beat. Not to mention the fact Walker leads all the important polls already despite Jeb's far stronger name recognition. Jeb is going nowhere fast.

Walker being ahead despite not having name recognition is a double edged sword. He's ahead BECAUSE his positions aren't known. Wait until people are exposed to the crazy pouring out of his mouth..

 

[PhoenixDark]

Jeb Bush is this cycle's Rud Guillani. The guy everyone who really doesn't follow the election closely assumes will be then nominee by default despite it being obvious that the base would never pick him. Bush is an extremely weak candidate in the primaries. He is going nowhere.

The base loves Walker and sees him as one of their own while at the same time view him as electable (I am not saying he is electable, but the base clearly believes he is). That's a hard combination to beat. Not to mention the fact Walker leads all the important polls already despite Jeb's far stronger name recognition. Jeb is going nowhere fast.

Honestly I think Christie is more like Guillani. Obviously Christie's numbers aren't as good as they were a couple years ago, but the point is that his brand simply won't work in early state primaries - just as Guiliani's didn't. That NY/NJ persona just turns people off, not to mention that both men aren't conservative enough for conservatives.

Jeb has the money to matter. He'll come out the gate with 100mil, which might even be more than Hillary has. But I think we agree that he's going to bomb in the early states. Nobody raises 100mil to come in second or third place in multiple early states. Rand Paul probably has the infrastructure to win Iowa. Bush could win NH but I'd probably bet on Walker there, assuming he doesn't implode. South Carolina will be won by some extremist, maybe Cruz. Nevada could be Rand's as well. Basically if he doesn't win NH he's going to look really bad.

I think Jeb's plan is to basically outlast everyone. Florida's primary is in mid March, he's probably expecting a big win there. The problem is that March also includes a large amount of southern primaries - Tennessee, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi...I can't see Bush winning any of those states.

I just wonder whether conservative voters are going to screw up again and allow their vote to be split amongst 2-4 clowns. If they want to stop Jeb they need to pick one guy, maybe two.

 

[benjipwns]

Walker being ahead despite not having name recognition is a double edged sword. He's ahead BECAUSE his positions aren't known. Wait until people are exposed to the crazy pouring out of his mouth..

You guys keep saying this, but you're forgetting that this is the Republican primaries, not the general, he's not "saying crazy" to the bulk of The Party. If anything he's probably smackdab in the middle of The Party.

 

[Cheebo]

Walker being ahead despite not having name recognition is a double edged sword. He's ahead BECAUSE his positions aren't known. Wait until people are exposed to the crazy pouring out of his mouth..

This is the republican primary. They will agree with his crazy positions.

 

[The Technomancer]

Walker being ahead despite not having name recognition is a double edged sword. He's ahead BECAUSE his positions aren't known. Wait until people are exposed to the crazy pouring out of his mouth..

Bingo. Walkers record in Wisconsin hasn't been great either. I mean, not bad (like, not Brownback bad) but Walker can't walk into debates going "look what an economic powerhouse I turned Wisconsin into"

 

[Cheebo]

Bingo. Walkers record in Wisconsin hasn't been great either. I mean, not bad (like, not Brownback bad) but Walker can't walk into debates going "look what an economic powerhouse I turned Wisconsin into"

He'll just blame Obama and the federal government any time that comes up I suspect.

 

[DuffDry]

Honestly, all I know about Walker was the 2011 Wisconsin protests and that made him seem pretty deplorable.

Plus that phone conversation where he thought he was talking to David Koch. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBnSv3a6Nh4)

 

[benjipwns]

Honestly, all I know about Walker was the 2011 Wisconsin protests and that made him seem pretty deplorable.

Plus that phone conversation where he thought he was talking to David Koch. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBnSv3a6Nh4)

Please don't forget when he killed democracy and ended America: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jy8FSyI_Djg

 

[HylianTom]

"Democrats don’t have enough white voters to consistently hold the Senate or win the House, and Republicans don’t have enough minorities to win the presidency"


That about sums up the Republican chances.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2014/11/the_disunited_states_of_america_why_demographics_republican_obstructionism.html

Pretty much.

I'm pretty resigned that we won't see much progressive legislation from DC until the next decade, but securing the courts in the meantime while demographic changes creep in the background might be the best we can hope for.

At some point, I'd love for a high-profile Democrat to tell voters, "look, we know we're not always saints ourselves and leave a lot to be desired, but the only way voters will get two sane-looking parties to choose from is to give the GOP a shellacking that they won't forget - no more of this anti-science, theocracy, Kardashian tax cut, legitimate rape stuff. It's the only way they'll learn."

 

[jamesinclair]

How about we talk about a real map?

You know what makes this map special? It's based off actual real-world popular vote for the executive position in the most recent elections.

Not the house, which no one gives a shit about. Not the senate with their confusing election cycle, but the real governing position people actually care to pay attention to.

Remember the Obamacare lies?
Remember governemnt shut down?
Remember tax cuts for prosperity?
Remember zero investment in infrastructure?
Remember continued obstruction?
Remember bat shit crazy?
Remember hating gay people?
Remember killing immigration reform?
Remember shifting demographics?

Remember how all that was going to kill the GOP - forever?

And then remember what actually happened during the last election?

See map above.

The Democrats couldn't get beat Governor Voldemort - twice.
The Democrats put up Martha Choakley - twice.
The Democrats lost fucking Maryland and Illinois.

And some of you expect chicken-hawk Clinton to stroll into office?

Please.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

How about we talk about a real map?

You know what makes this map special? It's based off actual real-world popular vote for the executive position in the most recent elections.

Not the house, which no one gives a shit about. Not the senate with their confusing election cycle, but the real governing position people actually care to pay attention to.

Remember the Obamacare lies?
Remember governemnt shut down?
Remember tax cuts for prosperity?
Remember zero investment in infrastructure?
Remember continued obstruction?
Remember bat shit crazy?
Remember hating gay people?
Remember killing immigration reform?
Remember shifting demographics?

Remember how all that was going to kill the GOP - forever?

And then remember what actually happened during the last election?

See map above.

The Democrats couldn't get beat Governor Voldemort - twice.
The Democrats put up Martha Choakley - twice.
The Democrats lost fucking Maryland and Illinois.

And some of you expect chicken-hawk Clinton to stroll into office?

Please.

lol

You know what makes this map special? It's based off actual real-world popular vote for the executive position in the most recent elections.

voting for gov and president are two separate things dude.

MA, MD, IL, NJ to go red? Are you insane?

 

[PhoenixDark]

Bingo. Walkers record in Wisconsin hasn't been great either. I mean, not bad (like, not Brownback bad) but Walker can't walk into debates going "look what an economic powerhouse I turned Wisconsin into"

His record is what republicans want though. He has slashed taxes, slashed the budget, cut higher education spending, and killed unions. And while the economy isn't great in Wisconsin...their unemployment rate is low. He'll be touting his record all day, and I think republican voters will be impressed.

Walker's advantage over most of the 2016 field is that he has actually accomplished things. Cruz, Rand, Rubio, etc are running with no record outside of opposing Obama. Worse yet, failing to stop Obama from doing a whole variety of things. Bush can run on a record from a decade ago, but primary voters are more interested in the present.

 

[jmizzal]

Nice soon it will be time

 

[LyleLanley]

This new Ted Cruz ad, that specifically mentions Hillary, sure is something.

https://twitter.com/BestBergerEver/status/587644233949040640/video/1

 

[jamesinclair]

MA, MD, IL, NJ to go red? Are you insane?

Yeah, the people of those states would never check off the R box.

OH WAIT THEY KEEP DOING IT.

Jersey voted for Chris Chris Christie not once, but TWICE. You don't think they'd vote for Jeb?

In the last 12 PRESIDENTIAL elections, both NJ and Illinois voted Republican 50% of the time.

Stop living in denial.

 

[Crisco]

The 2012 Rove map wasn't that bad, it was basically the only plausible GOP path to victory. Yeah, he threw a couple troll wins in there, but OH/FL/VA are the ones they had to have.

 

[Cheebo]

Yeah, the people of those states would never check off the R box.

OH WAIT THEY KEEP DOING IT.

Jersey voted for Chris Chris Christie not once, but TWICE. You don't think they'd vote for Jeb?

In the last 12 PRESIDENTIAL elections, NJ voted Republican 50% of the time.

Stop living in denial.

You are acting crazy, seriously. This is the talk of a insane person. Voting for governor and President are DRASTICALLY different things. And have never once been a metric to predict elections. Not once.

 

[NeoXChaos]

Yeah, the people of those states would never check off the R box.

OH WAIT THEY KEEP DOING IT.

Jersey voted for Chris Chris Christie not once, but TWICE. You don't think they'd vote for Jeb?

In the last 12 PRESIDENTIAL elections, NJ voted Republican 50% of the time.

Stop living in denial.

In either extenuating circumstances, midterms and the power of incumbency. I bet you if 2010 and 2014 were held in 2008 conditions, ALL those Governor seats would be Democratic right now. Besides, MA had a Republican Governor from 1991-2007.

 

[Vestal]

Yeah, the people of those states would never check off the R box.

OH WAIT THEY KEEP DOING IT.

Jersey voted for Chris Chris Christie not once, but TWICE. You don't think they'd vote for Jeb?

In the last 12 PRESIDENTIAL elections, both NJ and Illinois voted Republican 50% of the time.

Stop living in denial.

Yeah that's why Mitt Romney is President right now??


Oh wait. Lets see we had a wave election in 2010 and Bams still defecated all over Romney and the GOp in 2012.

But hey keep the hope alive.

 

[Cheebo]

By his logic Romney would have won 2012. GOP had far more governers in office than democrats going into the 2012 election.

 

[Stumpokapow]

james: what is the largest cash bet you would make that Massachusetts will vote Republican at the presidential level in 2016?

 

[shinra-bansho]

What percentage of the time did NJ and IL vote Republican in the last 6 presidential elections?

 

[jamesinclair]

Yeah that's why Mitt Romney is President right now??


Oh wait. Lets see we had a wave election in 2010 and Bams still defecated all over Romney and the GOp in 2012.

But hey keep the hope alive.

Obama was the incumbent.

Remember what happened in 2000?

8 years of prosperity. Global peace. Insane economic growth.

A decade where the Democrats were strong, and Newts Republicans were stumbling all over themselves.

And we got Bush.

Hillary is no Al Gore. If shes on the ballot, it won't be left to hanging chads, she'll be making her concession speech for the 11pm news.

james: what is the largest cash bet you would make that Massachusetts will vote Republican at the presidential level in 2016?

Baker is proving to be a class A idiot, so hopefully Massachusetts will have buyers remorse and try a different letter out next time theyre at the ballot box.

Same with NJ. I am confident that Chris Christie damaged the R brand for a good 3 years.

But theres the flip side. I dont know whats going on in Virginia, but maybe their D governor is poisoning the D well? I dont follow their politics though so I couldnt say.

Edit: How could I forget fucking Cuomo.

After all the damage hes done to NY, I would NOT be surprised if NY votes R. The fact that hes so much like Hillary could potentially torpedo her.

Seriously, Fuck Cuomo. he is worse than Christie.

 

[Cheebo]

james: what is the largest cash bet you would make that Massachusetts will vote Republican at the presidential level in 2016?

My favorite is he thinks republicans will win MA and democrats will win West Virginia. Hilarious.

 

[morningbus]

Thinking Massachusetts will vote for a Republican president in even the next 4 presidential elections is so insane it has to be trolling.

 

[NeoXChaos]

What percentage of the time did NJ and IL vote Republican in the last 6 elections?

None. Going by his logic, Kansas, Arizona, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Wyoming were gonna go blue in 2004 because in 2002 Democrats won their governorship's. States in bolded that haven't gone Democratic since 1964 and even in that case it was a landslide.

 

[Trouble]

james: what is the largest cash bet you would make that Massachusetts will vote Republican at the presidential level in 2016?

I would place literally any sized bet that MD will not go red in 2016. I would mortgage my condo, drain the 401k, etc. I'm not even kidding.

 

[Crisco]

Obama was the incumbent.

Remember what happened in 2000?

8 years of prosperity. Global peace. Insane economic growth.

A decade where the Democrats were strong, and Newts Republicans were stumbling all over themselves.

And we got Bush.

Hillary is no Al Gore. If shes on the ballot, it won't be left to hanging chads, she'll be making her concession speech for the 11pm news.

Yeah but ..... he lost the actual vote. Honestly, if citing 2000 is the best ya'll got, then the GOP is in even more trouble than I thought. Literally their only shot is <50% turnout, which is simply not going to happen.