Iowa Caucuses Thread

[T.Lex]

Scott Brown is endorsing Trump

No one knows how to win New Hampshire like Scott Brown. Not even Scott Brown.

Well, this will help Trump win NH. Not that he needs it. It'll also help Brown with the VP race. Which is becoming ever more crowded.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

I'm not listening, but apparently Rush is back to singing the praises of Rubio and Cruz.

Oddly turned away from the Trump CJ he's been hosting for the past few months.


Edit: Detailed account of how Cruz won Iowa from National Review:

Ted Cruz’s Long Road to Iowa Victory


Edit 2: Isn't it funny how once this election stuff starts, you completely forget that we still have a President (I think his name's Obama)? It's like he disappeared!

 

[pudly]

Edit 2: Isn't it funny how once this election stuff starts, you completely forget that we still have a President (I think his name's Obama)? It's like he disappeared!

That's called wishful thinking.

 

[Expat]

I don't get to listen to Rush as often as I would like, but my impression was he was mostly enjoying the way Trump was ticking off the establishment Republicans and the media.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

The only good thing to come out of Clinton's "speech"

 

[Lowe0]

I don't get to listen to Rush as often as I would like, but my impression was he was mostly enjoying the way Trump was ticking off the establishment Republicans and the media.

Doing something or supporting someone/something just because it annoys someone else seems kind of childish to me.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Here's a visual rep of the betting odds after last night

 

[Expat]

Doing something or supporting someone/something just because it annoys someone else seems kind of childish to me.

When you have 10-20,000,000 listeners let me know.

 

[jamil]

Oy vey. Check out European multi-party elections for a flavor of how that would work. Or, even better, think about who California and New York would chose for [strike]senator[/strike] president.

Now, if we want to re-revolutionize elections, let's go back to the original way of determining senators.

Well, hold on. I'm not talking about the crappy thing that the UK does. In fact, I don't think ranked voting is used in Europe other than in some city elections. Austrailia uses instant-runnoff, which is a kind of ranked voting but not what I would want to do. With ranked voting, on your ballot you rank all candidates in the order of your preference from favorite to least. If it's done in a transitive way (every candidate must be ranked) the winner may not be the candidate who gets the most first place votes, but it guarantees the top candidate will be the one most people like.

Our system really sucks because most people must choose between the least evil. And, similar to the outcome with the UK voters, with the current staged primary/caucus elections in the US the misrepresentation error is very high. Indiana has a disproportionately low say in the primaries and Iowa has a disproportionately high representation.

In this system, everyone's votes will count. The conservatives in California's rural communities would get a say, which they don't get with the electoral college. I imagine in a ranked voting system most Californians would rank the most socialist candidates the highest, but when munged with the rankings overall they might have less influence than they do now.

Our "first past the post" system isn't very representative.

We found out the hard way that this doesn't work worth a damn. As a vice-president elected under this method, Jefferson was virtually excluded from government while Adams was president.

Anyone who can collect a requisite number of signatures can be on the general election ballot as it is, and if they can't then it is very easy to argue that they have no chance whatsoever thus justifying their exclusion from the ballot. After all, in Indiana with less than 10K signatures, I could be on the ballot.

What difference does that make? The vice president is often excluded as it is now. As it is now, the VP is a figure head, cheerleader, a stand-in, and rarely, a tie breaker.

I just want to break the two party system and ranked voting would do it, while at the same time ensuring the lowest representation error and giving people more than a choice between two evils.

 

[jamil]

There is a lot of time between beach babes. Only about 1 in 4 should be wearing a bikini anyway. A couple could do with a harpoon.

Pictures or it didn't happen. The ones that *should* be wearing a bikini, please.

Doing something or supporting someone/something just because it annoys someone else seems kind of childish to me.

I think there's more to it than just that. But you probably understand that.

 

[Lowe0]

When you have 10-20,000,000 listeners let me know.

The entertainment industry is full of people proving that being childish sells, and sells well. I just think that our civic duty to elect our leaders calls for a little more maturity than an episode of "Jackass."

 

[Tombs]

The political discussion I had with my BIL over the holidays rendered an exceptional opportunity to peer into the psyche of at least one [STRIKE]avid[/STRIKE] rabid Hillary supporter. According to him, Bernie is more trustworthy and honest, but he doesn't have the skillset to lead the country. We need someone like Hillary to lead America in the right direction. Plus, America needs to elect the first woman president (apparently vagina's make a candidate more POTUS qualified somehow). So there's that.

And the email scandal? He says that's just [STRIKE]the Republicans and Fox News trying to discredit her just like with Benghazi[/STRIKE] a vast right wing conspiracy.

Did you inform your BIL of how sexist he is for thinking it's his duty to elevate women to a standard he apparently believes they could not otherwise achieve? That's called white knighting, and is sexist behavior. But the deeply racist democrat party, the party of the KKK, has always believed all minorities are inferior to themselves, so it's not surprising that we find that disgusting behavior among their supporters.

Her entire argument in the investigation has been that she herself didn't actually squander the classified documents, but staff members did, and she simply was unaware. If we are to believe what she said, if she can't even manage a hand full of staff members, how is she qualified to run the country, much less her current office?

If it's all just a "right wing conspiracy" you might want to ask your BIL how the blood of 4 Americans ended up on her hands. 4 people died as a result of her carelessness and her response was "What difference does it make, people die every day!" She then proceeded to lie to the families of those 4 Americans, laughing all the way.

In all my years walking this earth, she's the first person I've ever seen running for president who is indistinguishable from the people we're currently at war with.

 

[churchmouse]

Doing something or supporting someone/something just because it annoys someone else seems kind of childish to me.

Did you listen to what Rush said. I did. He was just explaining what was going on in his own words. I did not hear him supporting Trump.

And you are responding to something that you have no real understanding of.

Yes, I have been checking in on Rush and caught a lot of what he said in this concern.

Am I stuck on Rush......no. He is a source just like any other that you glean what you can from.

 

[churchmouse]

The entertainment industry is full of people proving that being childish sells, and sells well. I just think that our civic duty to elect our leaders calls for a little more maturity than an episode of "Jackass."[/QUO


Wow.

 

[Expat]

Did you inform your BIL of how sexist he is for thinking it's his duty to elevate women to a standard he apparently believes they could not otherwise achieve? That's called white knighting, and is sexist behavior. But the deeply racist democrat party, the party of the KKK, has always believed all minorities are inferior to themselves, so it's not surprising that we find that disgusting behavior among their supporters.

Her entire argument in the investigation has been that she herself didn't actually squander the classified documents, but staff members did, and she simply was unaware. If we are to believe what she said, if she can't even manage a hand full of staff members, how is she qualified to run the country, much less her current office?

If it's all just a "right wing conspiracy" you might want to ask your BIL how the blood of 4 Americans ended up on her hands. 4 people died as a result of her carelessness and her response was "What difference does it make, people die every day!" She then proceeded to lie to the families of those 4 Americans.

In all my years walking this earth, she's the first person I've ever seen running for president who is indistinguishable from the people we're currently at war with.

Good point on her management skills. I manage a small group of people and if I get an email that violates company policy much less the law, that would end immediately. They said one of the emails went back and forth 7 times. First time you would get a warning. Second time there would be severe consequences.

 

[churchmouse]

Pictures or it didn't happen. The ones that *should* be wearing a bikini, please.



I think there's more to it than just that. But you probably understand that.

No he does not. Or he is doing exactly what he is speaking against.

 

[Expat]

The entertainment industry is full of people proving that being childish sells, and sells well. I just think that our civic duty to elect our leaders calls for a little more maturity than an episode of "Jackass."[/QUO


Wow.

I think we got trolled :-)

 

[churchmouse]

I think we got trolled :-)

Yeah........I have so much to say here but Decorum prevents.
You guys hold up my end OK.........

 

[printcraft]

You guys hold up my end OK.........

I like you but.........

 

[Expat]

I like you but.........

you said but.... to his end....