Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
![]()
![]()
Do note that I said the Clinton campaign should have fallen in line as well, in the event of Sanders winning the primary.
I mean, its a good thing that the Democratic base isn't as servile as the other side, but it has its downside.
edited 14th Apr '17 5:31:46 PM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.Before this heats up, can we stop re-litigating the primary? Yes, the specific subset of the Sanders camp that fits the definition of Bernie Bro and the r/ESS camp have been rather unhelpful by pissing-off anybody in the other side of the Democrat camp by treating anybody who supports the other candidate as the worst stereotype of the [other candidate]-voter, and digging up all the (real or made up) dirt on the candidate they disliked at every chance they got.
And yes, in this case the Bernie side (again, that specific subset of them) is more responsible of causing problems by virtue of being the sore losers here, before anyone starts accusing me of golden mean fallacy.
BUT THE FUCKING PRIMARY IS OVER. So if someone from the other side starts something, it's on you to cut it: debate them when they make an argument, but if no one else is doing it, don't start with a pithy remark about "they don't get to 'x' with the responsibility they have for this mess" or "if they followed my side everything would be perfect now".
Also, venting is OK (unless mods say otherwise), but please make it clear it's venting.
1 2 We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be. -KVThree Tales from Atlanta
Polls show runoff is likely in Georgia special election
A WSB-TV poll released Friday shows Ossoff with 45 percent of the vote, below the majority mark he needs to hit on Tuesday to avoid a June 20 runoff, and gives Handel a comfortable lead over fellow Republicans.
An Opinion Savvy poll conducted for Fox 5 Atlanta shows a similar dynamic: Ossoff at about 42, Handel at 21 and the rest of the field lagging far behind.
“Moody is undoubtedly the surprise: we fully expected him to crest north of 15 percent, but older voters have largely thrown their support behind more ‘establishment’ candidates, such as Hill and Handel,” said Matt Towery, who heads Opinion Savvy.
Rountree said that the three have been hurt not only by Handel’s high name recognition – she waged unsuccessful campaigns for governor and U.S. Senate – but also feuds with each other.
“Gray, Moody and Hill have been trying to pull her down but they also snipe at each other,” he said. “They act like crabs in a pot and end up pulling each other down.”
Some other findings from the polls:
- The WSB poll shows Ossoff is winning millennial voters by wide margins, though Rountree noted they are also “the least reliable voting bloc in the electorate.” Handel is doing the best with senior citizens – arguably the most reliable voting bloc.
- The Fox poll shows Ossoff leading Handel by 2 points in a hypothetical head-to-head matchup, with another 13 percent voters undecided. That should raise alarm bells in the Handel camp, Towery wrote.
- Rountree’s research finds that there are 77,000 voters in the district who cast ballots in the last two GOP primaries. On the Democratic side, that number is just 17,000. “It tells you that Republicans have a huge potential upswing,” he said. “But so far Democrats are battling hard to get their votes out and are having reasonable success.”
- Towery’s poll shows that Ossoff has a commanding 63 percent lead among early voters, though his sample size was small.
Republicans catch up to Democrats in Georgia special election early voting
Nate Cohn, the New York Times polling expert, tweeted that roughly 42 percent of the 46,000 or so early ballots cast are from Democratic-leaning voters, while Republican-leaning voters have cast 41 percent of the ballots. He predicted Republicans will take the lead on Friday, the final day of early voting.
The early voting numbers are far from fool-proof, but they are considered an indicator of voter enthusiasm.
Ossoff told students at Georgia Tech on Thursday that his internal polling and early voting numbers show the race still give him an opening to win the 18-candidate race outright on Tuesday and avoid a head-to-head matchup against a Republican on June 20.
“The early voting numbers and our internal polling continue to demonstrate that this is winnable on Tuesday,” he said, “but it’s only winnable if we sprint through the finish line with more intensity, more passion and less sleep than any other campaign out there.”
Pro-Trump candidate in Sixth makes late White House trip
Le Vell, who headed Trump’s diversity coalition, did not return with an endorsement from the president or any overt sign of his support. The White House is said to be closely monitoring the Tuesday vote but hasn’t yet waded into the messy race, which features 11 Republicans on the 18-candidate ballot.
The risk with a "hindsight is 2020" slogan is that you only get the people who regret choosing Trump over Clinton. It brings up the smears against Clinton again.
It rules out any chance of getting voters who don't regret choosing Trump over Clinton but are willing to choose [New Democrat Candidate] over Trump.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranHow about Vote Democrat If You Want to Live?
edited 14th Apr '17 6:42:33 PM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.![]()
Too both. And please no "you were wrong and we were right" or "I told you so" style slogans (for example: pretty much all the slogans from last page, mine included), that's so smug it may just push undecideds to be contrarian.
You need something optimistic and as you're trying to pick up the disappointed Trump voters unifying. "Together for a brighter future", "uniting the nation", "tomorrow, together", "forward, united".
It's can't be about making a dig at Trump, it has to be about who the Dem candidate is good, not how Trump sucks, Trump does his own negativity, the Dems need to focus on their positivity.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranHow about an old classic? "United we stand, divided we fall"
edited 14th Apr '17 9:59:13 PM by MorningStar1337
has gone up 5 points in the past 2 weeks.
The people have spoken and they like warmongering Trump a bit more.
A thing is that none of the other pollsters are showing a jump like that- elsewhere we're looking a one of two point improvement, if that. Which is not to say what Gallup's saying should be dismissed- there certainly does appear to have been a shift in his favour since the bombing- but, y'know, take it in context.
He's still unprecedentally unpopular, in any case- Gerald Ford in the only other post-WWII president who dipped below 50 this early, and his minimum for this period has been Trump's maximum.
Basically all of the increase happened before the Syria strikes and probably a more mundane case of regressing to the mean since gallup was showing him a bit lower then the average pollster. Since the strikes his approval ratings have been surprisingly consistent, in the past nine days it's been 40% every day except one.
The fact that the slogan is ruined, would be a point against it. At best it might get a Hitler Ate Sugar or Association Fallacy stigma that a good presidential nominee could overcome, but at worse it might become a symbol of the alt-right and populism that dooms a campaign before it even starts, or it might cause people to think that the candidate using that slogan shares the same ideology as Trump.
edited 15th Apr '17 5:28:38 AM by MorningStar1337

Yes, the other guys are worse, therefore you should stick with me. Because that works wonders as campaign strategy? Dems in general didn't turn out as well as they could have done. Republican horribleness can not be blamed for every instance of dems lack of enthusiasm for the election.