Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-06-2014, 08:32 AM
 
3,201 posts, read 4,408,008 times
Reputation: 4441

Advertisements

hillary clinton is a partial republican? what does this mean?

and since some genius has predetermined who votes for who then why bother with an election... would save alot of time and money to just place the selections into the designated spots and let them govern

also i assume that the 30% of hispanics, women, and the 5% of blacks will be "voting against their own self interests"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-06-2014, 08:36 AM
 
Location: north central Ohio
8,665 posts, read 5,842,780 times
Reputation: 5201
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponderosa View Post
Hillary Clinton will get 70% of women (maybe more. Women correctly believe that most of the problems in this country are because men are running it) and Hispanics and 95% of blacks. There is no way the Republicans can beat her. She may even bring the House along with her. She may not even have primary opposition, so she can define herself right up the middle of the electorate. This could be the largest landslide in US history.

What about her "list of losers?

Hillary's "momentum" heading into 2016....

Now I don't think she even has a chance,plus I always have thought Benghazi would be too big of an obstacle for her to overcome.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2014, 08:37 AM
 
Location: WY
6,260 posts, read 5,066,250 times
Reputation: 7994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakin View Post
Let's see how much Obama screws up the next 2 years. That will make all the difference.
I was on Youtube yesterday watching some of the older and then newer speeches and press conferences by Obama. What's really interesting after listening to him is to go back and watch them again with the volume turned down. Extreme agining in only a few years aside, it is interesting to watch the mans' body language. And the eyes. He is a very tired and angry man nowadays.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_i0bDbYUUhY


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmEatwuxH2M
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2014, 08:38 AM
 
Location: Portland, OR
8,802 posts, read 8,894,702 times
Reputation: 4512
Quote:
Originally Posted by i_love_autumn View Post
In an electorate that overwhelmingly favored Republicans, Democrats said they managed to boost the number of ballots cast over 2010 in key states like New Hampshire, North Carolina and Colorado.

And there is little evidence that the GOP made major inroads among women, minorities and young voters, who will be key to winning the White House in 2016.
A look at voter turnout suggests 2016 won't be easy for Republicans

The approval rating for Congress is ONLY 22%!

The people will be even sicker of them after 2 more years of the SAME-O,SAME-O!
I have actually heard the opposite. Democrats' reliance on demographics over actual content cost them the election. Additionally, it remains to be seen how dedicated the Obama coalition is to the democrats
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2014, 08:39 AM
 
Location: Sonoran Desert
39,072 posts, read 51,199,205 times
Reputation: 28313
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace_TX View Post
hillary clinton is a partial republican? what does this mean?

and since some genius has predetermined who votes for who then why bother with an election... would save alot of time and money to just place the selections into the designated spots and let them govern

also i assume that the 30% of hispanics, women, and the 5% of blacks will be "voting against their own self interests"
It's called political science. We can predict how certain groups are likely to vote with quite a bit of accuracy. Clinton, particularly if she has no primary opposition of significance, will be able to go right up the middle of American politics appealing to the moderate majority. Women will take a huge amount of satisfaction in voting for the first woman president in history as did blacks with Obama. She is a transformational candidate as was Obama, but she knows her stuff too, is strongly connected politically, and above all, qualified. The question will not be whether she wins, but if she can get the House back too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2014, 08:41 AM
 
Location: St. Louis
7,444 posts, read 7,011,224 times
Reputation: 4601
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponderosa View Post
Hillary Clinton will get 70% of women (maybe more. Women correctly believe that most of the problems in this country are because men are running it) and Hispanics and 95% of blacks. There is no way the Republicans can beat her. She may even bring the House along with her. She may not even have primary opposition, so she can define herself right up the middle of the electorate. This could be the largest landslide in US history.
Drinking a wee bit early today are we?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2014, 08:42 AM
 
Location: Sonoran Desert
39,072 posts, read 51,199,205 times
Reputation: 28313
Quote:
Originally Posted by MUTGR View Post
Drinking a wee bit early today are we?
No, but you should be if Clinton runs. It's over before it even starts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2014, 08:44 AM
 
Location: north central Ohio
8,665 posts, read 5,842,780 times
Reputation: 5201
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTHokieFan View Post
I have actually heard the opposite. Democrats' reliance on demographics over actual content cost them the election. Additionally, it remains to be seen how dedicated the Obama coalition is to the democrats
Well from what I've heard people say,they don't blame the Democratic 'party' for the failings of Obama as a President,but they have a huge number of the GOP 'party' to blame for their low 22% approval of Congress!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2014, 08:48 AM
 
Location: St. Louis
7,444 posts, read 7,011,224 times
Reputation: 4601
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponderosa View Post
It's called political science. We can predict how certain groups are likely to vote with quite a bit of accuracy. Clinton, particularly if she has no primary opposition of significance, will be able to go right up the middle of American politics appealing to the moderate majority. Women will take a huge amount of satisfaction in voting for the first woman president in history as did blacks with Obama. She is a transformational candidate as was Obama, but she knows her stuff too, is strongly connected politically, and above all, qualified. The question will not be whether she wins, but if she can get the House back too.
Political science meets political reality. Clinton is an aging women with serious baggage. While certainly bright, she's not the least bit glib or charismatic on her feet like her husband was, or young, hip and black like Obama. She's also prone to gaffes as we've seen. The more she was out in the public, the lower her approval ratings became.

The demographic game dems play so well with young, uninformed voters is a two way sword. The Clinton name will mean nothing to that demographic. Also, democrats have really developed into the party of the cult of personality. Worked with Bill Clinton, worked with Obama - you roll out a 67 year old pear-shaped Hillary Clinton - good luck. Dem turnout is great when a single leader excites the base - but lousy otherwise.

I am in no way predicting a GOP victory, but I'm not sure Clinton will even be the dem nominee. Frankly, I'd expect dems to find one of your more promising and younger Hispanic candidates to run. Plus - Hillary will have to twist herself in pretzels distancing herself from Obama's disastrous policies while not distancing herself from Obama the democratic cult figure. She was, you know, a part of his administration. Benghazi ring any bells?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2014, 08:48 AM
 
Location: DFW
40,952 posts, read 49,155,879 times
Reputation: 55000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponderosa View Post
No, but you should be if Clinton runs. It's over before it even starts.
Not if Obama keeps doing what he's been doing. This could easily spill over to 2016 and hurt Hillary.

It will be interesting to see Dems in Congress support Obama or look into the future of 2016.
They may have to make a choice.

More importantly, she's too old. The last 3 Presidents have been in their 40's and that's what it takes to get the youth vote.
She will be about 70 years old by the time we vote in 2016.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:38 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top