# The Gaming Den

Welcome to the Gaming Den.

Skip to content

## Election 2016

Mundane & Pointless Stuff I Must Share: The Off Topic Forum

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply

- Print view

3239 posts

- Page 1 of 130
  - Jump to page:
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- …
- 130
- Next

Ancient History
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 12708
  Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:57 pm

### Election 2016

- Quote

Post by Ancient History » Mon Mar 10, 2014 11:28 pm

C'mon, I'm not the only one thinking it.
http://nationalinterest.org/article/the ... ?page=show
Long story short:
1) The Republicans are still scared spitless of Hillary Clinton running. To the point that if the Democrats nominate anyone else, they're not going to know what to do.
2) The Republicans have nothing even remotely resembling a front-runner. If anything, the field looks broader and sillier than last time. There's nothing like a consolidated strategy or platform yet.
Prediction!
We're going to have two primary battles; the Republicans are going to go full clown-car with their terrible herd of candidates, and the Democrats are going to have a much smaller and mostly bloodless contest so that the winner can consolidate and build their warchest.
Deep Cuts In A Lovecraftian Vein
Top

Koumei
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 13796
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: South Ausfailia

###

- Quote

Post by Koumei » Tue Mar 11, 2014 12:07 am

Thanks to an insane hard-right Catholic taking power in Ausfailia, frothy-mixture thinks he has another chance at taking presidency. That could at least be kind of funny to watch, I guess.
Do you think the Dems will bring out the powerhouse or actually go for the "Hahaha, fooled you, now you're completely unprepared!" approach?

> Count Arioch the 28th wrote:There is NOTHING better than lesbians. Lesbians make everything better.

Top

Ancient History
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 12708
  Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:57 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Ancient History » Tue Mar 11, 2014 12:17 am

I expect, unless she has a serious health issue in the next two years, Hillary will probably run. I don't think she'll be unopposed, but I don't have a clue who the other Democratic candidate(s) may be. In a way, that's a strength of the Democratic party - a shorter run-up to the primary means less time scrutinizing the players, whereas the GOP presidential wannabes are failing all over themselves two years in advance.
If the GOP can't gel behind a single candidate fast enough, we're probably looking at a rehash of 2012, only with worse demographic numbers for the GOP - because if the Dems can get their primary under their belt in short order, they'll have more money for the campaign, and if the Republicans have a bloody primary they'll be ragged and underfunded when it comes time for the main fight.
But I don't think it'll be a straight replay of 2012. I think enough of the money people have done the numbers and seen how badly they blundered with "unskewed polls" and crap; it's still possible for the behind-the-scenes guys to solidly back somebody like Jeb Bush, because they're unimaginative and still think a white guy that's part of a dynasty can form a coalition in the party. But the demographics are against them in 2016, and they have to know that; the country is only getting browner and more liberal.
Deep Cuts In A Lovecraftian Vein
Top

Lago PARANOIA
  Invincible Overlord
  Posts: 10555
  Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

###

- Quote

Post by Lago PARANOIA » Tue Mar 11, 2014 12:18 am

I don't think that 2016 is going to be a cakewalk for Clinton. Right now, her popularity doesn't seem to be anchored to anything stable and she's still vulnerable to attacks from her left -- that Obama wasn't as left-leaning as his supporters projected doesn't really change that. Her strategy seems to pretty much be 'bask in celebrity, quietly accumulate money, intimate people into not running, guilt liberals into silence by imploring people to Think Of the Coattails!' which didn't work for her in 2008 and has less of a chance in 2012 to work with the Democratic Party becoming more proportionately progressive. Cuomo or Hickenlooper or Schweitzer or even Gillibrand probably don't stand a chance short of her fainting while giving a speech. Only a DeBlasio-style insurgent can really beat her in a fair fight.
That said, you can't beat something with nothing. I can see three candidates, in increasing order of plausibility, taking her on and winning the nomination without having to resort to black swans like a sudden health problem or a scandal.
[*] Martin O'Malley. He has real liberal accomplishments and has shown something of an interest. Unfortunately, this guy is boring as dirt and is also kind of a dope. He had a big Anchormanesque teleprompter gaffe the other day and was the inspiration for Carcetti in The Wire in much the same way Harry Reid was that for Casino.
[*] Elizabeth Warren. She has three things going for her: netroots, can give a great speech, and she's a great fundaraiser. Unfortunately, she's old, isn't experienced with campaigning, and doesn't have an established political base among elected politicians. The first two she can overcome, the third will really bite her. There's also the fact that she practically had to be drafted to do her Senate run and I'd bet a thousand dollars that short of some existential crisis in 2015-16 she wouldn't run even if Clinton wasn't running.
[*] Sherrod Brown. This guy has pretty much everything lined up for him. He's Kennedy-style liberal with accomplishments to match, has the support of the netroots, has proven himself in tough elections, is a good fundraiser, and has an established political base in Ohio. The only thing he doesn't really have going for him is that he said rather empathically in a Chris(t) Matthews interview that he doesn't plan on running in 2016. I don't believe that he's not going to run as hard as I believe that Warren isn't going to run, but if the current political situation stays the way it is I bet that he won't really feel a reason to.
Last edited by Lago PARANOIA on Tue Mar 11, 2014 12:25 am, edited 5 times in total.

> Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
> In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.

Top

Redshirt
  Apprentice
  Posts: 95
  Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2013 2:55 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Redshirt » Tue Mar 11, 2014 1:05 am

Edit: derp, completely missed a name Lago posted. Nothing to see here.
Last edited by Redshirt on Tue Mar 11, 2014 1:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top

Dean
  Duke
  Posts: 2059
  Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 3:14 am

###

- Quote

Post by Dean » Tue Mar 11, 2014 1:29 am

My assumption is that it will be Mitt 2.0 against Hillary. I don't see Mitts career as having ended with the Obama defeat. He's very active in the media, he's still garnering attention and attempting to cobble together the likeable guy image he seemed to lack.
Hillary is coming, it's hard to deny it but I don't see anyone else in the Republican lineup that would stop Mitt from coming out again and winning over with a combination of name recognition and infinity dollars.

> DSMatticus wrote:Fuck you, fuck you, fuck you, fuck you. I am filled with an unfathomable hatred.

Top

MisterDee
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 816
  Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 8:40 pm

###

- Quote

Post by MisterDee » Tue Mar 11, 2014 2:38 am

> Lago PARANOIA wrote:intimate people into not running

Eeeeew.
On topic: barring health issues or black swans, Clinton will run.
As of now, there isn't a clear challenger that could beat her. There are a couple of younger, leftier Democrats who might want to take a shot, and Biden and a couple of establishment candidates will probably try as well, but in all likelihood she'll get the nomination.
On the Republican side, with Christie effectively out of the running, it's basically Jeb Bush, Rand Paul, a few interchangeable WASP nutjobs. and two or three token minority Republicans that counter their non-whiteness with being a cliché far-right Republican on every other front.
Jeb Bush will only run if he's sure to win the primary cleanly - he's not going to poison his presidential run in the crazy Republican primaries. If the establishment Republicans manage to return the party to something that can look at least vaguely sane and presentable in dodgy lighting, that might be in 2016, but my gut feeling is that he'll wait until 2020.
Top

Lago PARANOIA
  Invincible Overlord
  Posts: 10555
  Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

###

- Quote

Post by Lago PARANOIA » Tue Mar 11, 2014 3:14 am

I still want to know why people think Clinton is so unbeatable for the 2016 Presidential nomination this far out. Maybe if it was 2016 or even late 2015, but right now? She seems to be popular in the same way that Gore or (especially) Dukakis was popular; people aren't swooning over her actual positions or accomplishments but because of the bandwagon. What's more, her weaknesses (viewed as a vascilating shill, too close to Wall Street, is too close to the DSCC/SNC) aren't going to go away any time soon. The only thing she really has going for her is that she's a woman, which isn't going to be all that helpful for her in the Democratic Party primary.
If your advantages are ephemeral and your weaknesses are baked in, I have a very hard time seeing how you get 'in' short of a collapse of internal and external opposition. If Perry didn't make a fool out of himself and/or Santorum was able to consolidate the field before South Carolina, the 2012 U.S. Presidential Candidate wouldn't have been Romney.

> Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
> In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.

Top

Username17
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 29894
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Username17 » Tue Mar 11, 2014 8:05 am

Clinton has one huge power that no one else in the country has right now: everyone on both sides thinks that Hilary can win and become president. The fact that she is neither an unknown nor a joke in any circles means that she can raise cash and deliver turnout in a way that no other candidate can.
In poll after poll, Clinton puts up the highest numbers against your choice of Republican. And one of the driving factors of that is that when you ask people if they are a likely voter in a race between Clinton and X, they are more likely to say "yes" than if you ask them if they are likely to cast a vote in a race between X and Y.
With enough marketing and money, pretty much anyone can get to the level of "serious candidate" that Clinton has right now. But Clinton gets it for free. She already is considered a viable and likely candidate by everyone. Anyone else, Republican or Democrat, essentially starts millions of dollars behind.
2016 is two years from now. Long enough that Clinton could have health problems or Kamala Harris or Corey Booker could make it big. But if the election were being held this year, Hilary Clinton would be able to put her cards on the table, grab the nomination, win the general election, and walk away with the presidency. It's going to take a lot of money and carefully crafted messaging to dent that narrative.
-Username17
Top

OgreBattle
  King
  Posts: 6819
  Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:33 am

###

- Quote

Post by OgreBattle » Tue Mar 11, 2014 8:19 am

Are there any Latino dudes or ladies in the Republican party that could be raised to run against Hilary?
Top

Username17
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 29894
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Username17 » Tue Mar 11, 2014 8:25 am

> OgreBattle wrote:Are there any Latino dudes or ladies in the Republican party that could be raised to run against Hilary?

Good luck with that.
-Username17
Top

MisterDee
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 816
  Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 8:40 pm

###

- Quote

Post by MisterDee » Tue Mar 11, 2014 2:27 pm

Clinton isn't unbeatable by any stretch of the imagination. She was supposed to be unbeatable six years ago, after all.
That said, she has lots of governmental experience in both executive and legislative roles, she's got an amazing network of contacts and ressources, she's got name recognition... all of those are significant, non-ephemeral assets.
As to the downsides she has... they're relatively insignificant. Waffling on some issues only matter if the issues are important in that election (and can't be handwaved away with a simple "yeah, I changed my mind once, adults do that when they're wrong"), she might be close to Wall Street but she wasn't splashed in the various scandals (besides, the stigma of "close to Wall Street" isn't hard to bear when it comes with "Wall Street money"), and the Democrats don't have the Tea Party problem so being an establishment candidate isn't the kiss of death it currently is in the Republican primaries.
Now, if there's a serious challenge to Hillary, it'll come from the younger, leftier side of the party. Hillary will eat Biden and other assorted old WASP Democrats for lunch. But another Obama-style firebrand could steal the show again.
Top

Dean
  Duke
  Posts: 2059
  Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 3:14 am

###

- Quote

Post by Dean » Tue Mar 11, 2014 6:29 pm

I don't think she's anything close to unbeatable but if she did win I would be very excited. Hillary has been running for president since she was a pre-teen. She's spent her entire life dreaming about it, planning it, fantasizing about it. I would be excited to see what her presidency looked like. It would be like seeing a film someone had worked on for 50 years. Maybe she'd disappoint and I'd just become more bitter and cynical but I would be openly optimistic about the results I think Hillary would get as President.

> DSMatticus wrote:Fuck you, fuck you, fuck you, fuck you. I am filled with an unfathomable hatred.

Top

Ancient History
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 12708
  Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:57 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Ancient History » Wed Mar 12, 2014 1:06 am

Re: the media advantage that the Republican Party has - I think part of it is the "no bad publicity" angle. Republicans are often and consistently saying and doing appalling shit. Ann Coulter's made a career out of it, Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann make bank off of it. And as much as the intelligent members of the party might want to play down the racism and ignorance and fundamentalist bullshit that flows forth in an eternal river, I think it's also what keeps the Republicans consistently in the public consciousness.
I mean, look at this nutter:
http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/j ... inent-baal
That is insane. But does it actually hurt the GOP's chance of election? Or is it basically a free commercial reminding the voting public that Republicans exist?
Deep Cuts In A Lovecraftian Vein
Top

Lago PARANOIA
  Invincible Overlord
  Posts: 10555
  Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

###

- Quote

Post by Lago PARANOIA » Wed Mar 12, 2014 2:53 am

Well, on second thought after reading this thread, I have to admit that being able to be taken seriously enough to fundraise without having to speak out on certain issues is a pretty damn huge advantage for Clinton. Barring some kind of grievous scandal or health problem she can pretty much coast for two years and avoid the unforced errors that stabbed Rubio/Cruz/Paul/etc. in the buttocks.

> Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
> In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.

Top

Ancient History
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 12708
  Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:57 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Ancient History » Mon Mar 23, 2015 9:59 pm

It has begun...the Gathering...
Deep Cuts In A Lovecraftian Vein
Top

Lago PARANOIA
  Invincible Overlord
  Posts: 10555
  Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

###

- Quote

Post by Lago PARANOIA » Mon Mar 23, 2015 10:08 pm

Not much has really changed since the last year, other than Walker being floated as a serious contender. And already stumbling out of the gate. That said, I think that he recovers enough to be the conservative consensus choice but Jeb Bush still beats him.
I still think that O'Malley can beat Hillary Clinton if the netroots stop dicking around with Sanders and Warren and coalesce around him during the summer. The early calender of Iowa + New Hampshire + South Carolina + Nevada is very favorable to him; the only even slight wrinkle is New Hampshire and I'd say that he would still have the edge. I know that sites like DailyKos and Mother Jones and Washington Monthly aren't representative of the Democratic Base, but the super-leftists are surprisingly resistant to the idea of Hillary Clinton in her current form. But then again, they seem adamant on supporting Warren even if she comes with her own largely unexamined set of weaknesses.

> Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
> In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.

Top

Ancient History
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 12708
  Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:57 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Ancient History » Mon Mar 23, 2015 10:28 pm

Well, Ted Cruz officially announced his candidacy in front of a captive audience today, so the clown car has begun.
Deep Cuts In A Lovecraftian Vein
Top

erik
  King
  Posts: 5847
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by erik » Mon Mar 23, 2015 10:46 pm

Mike Pence (R-Tea Party), Governor of Indiana is seriously thinking about running for president, which strikes me as ego since there's no way he's getting elected. To work with his Republican super-duper majority in our state congress and his Tea Party (Koch) backers he has to be a social conservative douchebag and sign stupid laws that will get struck down by the supreme court and do nothing but cost our state money as they waste resources supporting it in court. Anyway, Pence is a joke looking for a punchline.
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/poli ... /22759821/
http://www.indystar.com/story/news/poli ... /70336706/
Top

Morat
  Journeyman
  Posts: 118
  Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 4:36 am

###

- Quote

Post by Morat » Tue Mar 24, 2015 12:41 am

> MisterDee wrote:Clinton isn't unbeatable by any stretch of the imagination. She was supposed to be unbeatable six years ago, after all.

By this point in that cycle (i.e. March 2007), the polls were running roughly Clinton 30-40%, Obama 20-25%. Now it's Clinton 55-70%, Warren or Biden 10-15%. There's a huge difference between being 10 points back and 50 points back.
And then Obama had been the consistent second place for months and was trending upwards over time. Biden sure as hell can't beat Clinton. Warren...well, outside the small number of lefties that actually vote in Democratic primaries, where is her surge of support going to come from?
Clinton isn't unbeatable, but she's a hell of a lot closer to that than probably any non-incumbent in a generation.
Top

Prak
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 17329
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Prak » Tue Mar 24, 2015 1:42 am

Does Warren even want to run? Last I heard she was saying she wasn't interested, there were just a bunch of people who want her to.
Cuz apparently I gotta break this down for you dense motherfuckers- I'm trans feminine nonbinary. My pronouns are they/them.

> Winnah wrote:No, No. 'Prak' is actually a Thri Kreen impersonating a human and roleplaying himself as a D&D character. All hail our hidden insect overlords.

> FrankTrollman wrote:In Soviet Russia, cosmic horror is the default state.
> You should gain sanity for finding out that the problems of a region are because there are fucking monsters there.

Top

Lago PARANOIA
  Invincible Overlord
  Posts: 10555
  Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

###

- Quote

Post by Lago PARANOIA » Tue Mar 24, 2015 5:55 am

As stated earlier, I think Clinton's polling lead is ephemeral. It's not tied to anything. Her favorability ratings have been collapsing despite her double-digit polling lead, which makes me think that it's not her that's individually strong so much as the fact that she's the non-Obama face of the Democratic brand.
Regardless, I think that what really gives O'Malley a chance is the 2016 Primary Calendar. Until March the primaries/caucuses are in order Iowa, New Hampshire, Colorado, Minnesota, New York, Utah, Nevada, North Carolina, South Carolina, then Michigan. Out of all of those states the only place where Hillary Clinton isn't at a structural disadvantage compared to O'Malley (assuming that she plans to run as an internationally aggressive, economic centrist that doesn't have strong racial minority cred) is New Hampshire and Utah.
All this is predicated on whether O'Malley can break above his pathetic notability ratings by summer. I think he will if he keeps going on his economic populist jags and keeps pounding his strong pro-Latino record.

> Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
> In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.

Top

Username17
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 29894
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Username17 » Tue Mar 24, 2015 7:28 am

Clinton's numbers have held pretty steady for a long time. She runs about 10% above hypothetical Republican opposition and more than 55% of the population wants her to be their president. Obviously it's going to end up being closer than that after a multi-billion dollar extremely ugly and divisive campaign, but holy crap. Those are Ronald Reagan numbers.
Now she could still lose obviously. She could kill and eat a man. Or have some kind of actual scandal rather than the nothing burgers that people are clutching their pearls about now. She could have health problems and drop out. Someone could come in and energize the nation about some issue or another. A year and a half is a long time.
But if the election were held tomorrow, Hillary Clinton's vote share against the democratic field would beat the entire vote share of all Republican contenders combined. It's going to take a lot of Koch money to move that dial.
-Username17
Top

Maxus
  Overlord
  Posts: 7645
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Maxus » Tue Mar 24, 2015 7:39 am

It's gonna move. The Republicans are going to sustain their Koch addiction.
Which is a crying shame. I find myself wish the Kochs would suffer a sudden major non-fatal hardware fault or financial insolvency, because it's be interesting to see JUST HOW MANY Koch-funded ventures drop off the radar, and for the Republicans to be unable to get the megabucks no matter how much ancient plutocratic cock they suck.
But as it is, the Kochs are going to throw their money machine at the Republicans, decide what candidates run, and keep the Republican party relevant for a few more elections. I'm not sure if that makes their dick taste any better to the Republicans, but, eh, the Repubs probably got calluses on their tongues by now, to go with the friction burns from all the public masturbation in the House. (How many votes to Repeal Obamacare has the House had now? Has it hit triple digits?)
Last edited by Maxus on Tue Mar 24, 2015 7:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
Top

DrPraetor
  Duke
  Posts: 1289
  Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 3:17 pm

###

- Quote

Post by DrPraetor » Tue Mar 24, 2015 3:03 pm

The political science literature doesn't support that. Since this is just about the only encouraging finding in recent political science literature, I tend to remember it: Roughly speaking, ever *order of magnitude* by which you outspend your opponent in a general election is (extrinsic of other factors related to fund-raising, such as the fund-raising being a reflection of the level of support you have from your constituents who are giving you money) worth 0.5% of the vote.
Are the Koch brothers going to outspend the Dems by 100-fold? Because that would be enough to move the popular vote 1%, and Hillary still wins the election.
Now *primary* elections are an entirely different affair. Primary elections can generally be bought, which is one of the reasons that both political parties in the US are hot garbage.
Chaosium rules are made of unicorn pubic hair and cancer. --AncientH
When you talk, all I can hear is "DunningKruger" over and over again like you were a god damn Pokemon. --Username17
Fuck off with the pony murder shit. --Grek
Top
Post Reply

- Print view

Display:
Sort by:
Direction:

3239 posts

- Page 1 of 130
  - Jump to page:
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- …
- 130
- Next

Return to “MPSIMS”

Jump to

- Main
- ↳ About the Gaming Den
- ↳ In My Humble Opinion...
- ↳ I Gave the Mouse a Cookie...
- ↳ In The Trenches
- ↳ It's My Own Invention...
- ↳ MPSIMS