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 01-02-2016, 02:55 PM
 
2,025 posts, read 4,185,253 times
Reputation: 2540

Advertisements

it's not the "republicans" or the "democrats", it's the party establishments that have completely lost touch with the people they "represent" and instead have become entities unto themselves, self perpetuating behemoths who fund themselves and have no interest in the voters. Unfortuantely the parties are hard to get rid of, but for the good of the country it may be time to unelect eveybody, chase the moneychangers from the temple and start over, with new parties. More than just the 2.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-02-2016, 02:58 PM
 
Location: Chicago
94 posts, read 76,583 times
Reputation: 110
I find it odd that someone who claims to want the Republican Party to go down in flames would dislike Trump so much. Trump is in the process of trying to dramatically change the Republican Party. There's a reason why the Establishment Republicans hate the idea of him as President.


Most of the current Republican candidates would just be more of the same nonsense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2016, 03:01 PM
 
Location: Planet Telex
5,902 posts, read 3,913,602 times
Reputation: 5859
Quote:
Originally Posted by censusdata View Post
A question just as fair is why the Democrats - the part of diversity - is stuck with a field of candidates that consists of 4 White guys and 1 White woman, the 2 frontrunners are both old. Meanwhile the Republican field included 1 woman, 1 Indian America, 1 Black American, and 2 Cuban Americans. D's gets a vast majority of minority votes but seem to be lacking in future exciting minority candidates.
Even the minority Republican presidential candidates are failing to generate any real excitement. Let's be honest, we all know that a woman and a black man isn't going to capture the GOP nomination. With the Democrats, at least a diversity candidate did. And won the presidency...twice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2016, 03:02 PM
 
34,289 posts, read 19,415,673 times
Reputation: 17261
Huntsmen was too close to a centrist candidate, and could not survive the primaries, I suspect he would have won the presidency. I was impressed by him. ron paul was too...different for many. I respected him a great deal. his son is similar, but is missing the commitment to beliefs that his father had.

McCain wasn't bad either, until he doomed himself with Palin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2016, 03:05 PM
 
1,676 posts, read 948,152 times
Reputation: 800
This election is not about Democrats vs Republicans---anyone who thinks that way has fallen into the establishment's trap. It's about We The People vs the Establishment. There's no difference between "electable" candidates like Jeb!, Rubio, or even Fiorina and Cruz (outsiders who are bought and paid for). And Hillary is a bit better than any of the GOPe, mostly because she cares more about the rights of women and the LGBT people than they do.

The "electable" candidates this time are people like Sanders, Carson and of course, The Donald. People love them. The People's Billionaire is saying what everyone knows to be true (about illegals, Muslims, etc), but doesn't want to admit because of their special interests, or wanting more votes. THAT is what scares the establishment, RINOs, and liberals. We FINALLY have a candidate who is speaking the truth and is openly proud of America and wants to bring it back from the brink.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2016, 03:10 PM
 
12,045 posts, read 6,594,383 times
Reputation: 13985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retroit View Post
There is no way in hell Hillary or Bernie will be the next President. .
I'm not so sure if it ends up coming down to Trump and Hillary.

Trump is a loose canon and a pathological narcissist with no self-control.
And although Hillary is a pathological liar, a total political opportunist, deeply corrupt and incompetent, she will have the majority of the media and entertainment industry on her side. Most voters will be low on information and end up swayed by vast media coverage of Hillary's best moments and Donald's worst moments over and over and over again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2016, 03:21 PM
 
Location: On the Chesapeake
45,552 posts, read 60,795,283 times
Reputation: 61172
Republicans can't win:


Post WW II, the "Modern Era:


1948 Truman, D 4 years
1952 Eisenhower, R 8 years
1960 Kennedy/Johnson, D 8 years
1968 Nixon/Ford, R 8 years
1976 Carter, D 4 years
1980 Reagan, R 8 years
1988 Bush, R 4 years
1992 Clinton, D 8 years
2000 Bush, R 8 years
2008 Obama, D 8 years




Notice a pattern?


Here's the math since 1948


Democratic Presidents 32 years, 8 terms
Republican Presidents 36 years 9 terms


The Democrats had two 1 term Presidents (Truman, Carter) while the Republicans had 1 (GHW Bush).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2016, 03:25 PM
 
52,430 posts, read 26,707,608 times
Reputation: 21097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmitri95 View Post
This election is not about Democrats vs Republicans---anyone who thinks that way has fallen into the establishment's trap.......
Well said.

But day after day people foolishly fight this pointless battle.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2016, 04:35 PM
 
998 posts, read 666,694 times
Reputation: 979
Quote:
Originally Posted by North Beach Person View Post
Republicans can't win:


Post WW II, the "Modern Era:


1948 Truman, D 4 years
1952 Eisenhower, R 8 years
1960 Kennedy/Johnson, D 8 years
1968 Nixon/Ford, R 8 years
1976 Carter, D 4 years
1980 Reagan, R 8 years
1988 Bush, R 4 years
1992 Clinton, D 8 years
2000 Bush, R 8 years
2008 Obama, D 8 years




Notice a pattern?


Here's the math since 1948


Democratic Presidents 32 years, 8 terms
Republican Presidents 36 years 9 terms


The Democrats had two 1 term Presidents (Truman, Carter) while the Republicans had 1 (GHW Bush).
I don't think you can pick an arbitrary starting date and then conclude that Democrats must win in order to create equilibrium (or whatever). What I notice is that people have short memories, and each time they make the foolish choice of electing a Democrat to occupy the White House for eight years, they eventually become so fed up that a Republican will win by default. Obama is the most leftist and divisive president in the history of this country, so the pendulum is going to swing hard to the right this time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-02-2016, 04:42 PM
 
Location: On the Chesapeake
45,552 posts, read 60,795,283 times
Reputation: 61172
Quote:
Originally Posted by PuddingPops View Post
I don't think you can pick an arbitrary starting date and then conclude that Democrats must win in order to create equilibrium (or whatever). What I notice is that people have short memories, and each time they make the foolish choice of electing a Democrat to occupy the White House for eight years, they eventually become so fed up that a Republican will win by default. Obama is the most leftist and divisive president in the history of this country, so the pendulum is going to swing hard to the right this time.

The equilibrium is what I showed, or what you called the pendulum swing.
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 12:00 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