+- Carlton Supporters Club (http://new.carltonsc.com)
+-- Forum: Social Club (http://new.carltonsc.com/forum-6.html)
+--- Forum: Blah-Blah Bar (http://new.carltonsc.com/forum-23.html)
+--- Thread: Trumpled (Alternative Leading) (/thread-2312.html)
Pages:
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
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - Mav - 09-05-2016
There are only 2. None of the others has any chance of winning. The most they might achieve is to syphon off enough votes to swing a particular state from Trump to Clinton or vice-versa. Arguably, Ralph Nader took enough votes away from Gore in Florida in 2000 to give Bush the presidency.
Only Johnson has a chance of meeting the 15% threshold in opinion polls necessary to qualify for the 3 debates but the odds are against him.
You could argue that this is unfair and every candidate should be covered but that's not necessarily what the public wants nor what is ideal. Using our own system as a comparison, just how much do we really need to hear from Lambie, Hanson and Lleyonholm? Their "policies" and views are on the net if you have any interest, just as Americans can read up on the Libertarian Party, Greens and the Never Trump guy McMullin (?).
PS: On reflection, the analogy with Hanson et al isn't quite right. The way the preference system works here means they have a chance to win seats in the Senate and hold greater power than their paltry support would justify. But would we really want to hear too much about some motley crew who put up candidates in every seat without having any prospect of winning any?
That's the big difference between our 2 political systems. There are no 2nd prizes in the US Presidential election. The loser may end up with 200 or more electoral college votes but that means bugger all. With our representative system, an independent winning a seat in the House of Reps might make him or her a kingmaker in a hung parliament or give him or her the swing vote in the Senate. A few 3rd party candidates in Presidential elections have won the electoral votes in one or more states but that has only entitled them to a brief footnote in history.
Even worse, splintering the electoral college vote could lead to mayhem in the US. Imagine if Clinton ends up with 269 Electoral College votes and Trump lags behind with 230, the others going to 3rd party candidates. That would mean the House of Representatives would appoint the President. And that means the Republicans select the new President given the gerrymander they currently enjoy. Imagine if they appoint Trump. In effect, they would be giving the votes of the other candidates to Trump even though some may belong to a Never Trump candidate. Civil unrest would be guaranteed. Until the Constitution is amended to give the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most electoral college votes rather than the one who obtains a majority, splintering the vote is a nightmare scenario that the press shouldn't foster.
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - Lods - 09-08-2016
Trump says he has a plan to stop ISIS
Trump says he (Trump) knows more about ISIS than the Generals.
Trumps plan to stop ISIS is to give the Generals 30 days to come up with a plan to stop ISIS ???
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/07/donald-trump-said-he-had-a-secret-plan-to-defeat-isis-as-of-now-hes-not-planning-to-use-it/
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - Mav - 09-08-2016
Surprise, surprise
)The problem for Clinton is that Trump can be the lightning rod for frustration over the Middle East and terrorism. That his "policies" are BS isn't the point. There's an appetite for knocking over the chess board and starting over. Of course, such a simplistic strategy doesn't work well in practice. The US knocked over the chess board in Afghanistan and Iraq but things didn't work out so well. Trump likes to limit the issue to defeating ISIS militarily. Sure, the US can invade ISIS territory and "win" fairly quickly but what happens then?
Why in hell would they make Matt Lauer the moderator? That's like getting Kochie or Stefanovic to moderate a national security debate.
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - cookie2 - 09-08-2016
(09-08-2016, 01:27 AM)Lods link Wrote:Trump says he has a plan to stop ISIS
Trump says he (Trump) knows more about ISIS than the Generals.
Trumps plan to stop ISIS is to give the Generals 30 days to come up with a plan to stop ISIS ???
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/07/donald-trump-said-he-had-a-secret-plan-to-defeat-isis-as-of-now-hes-not-planning-to-use-it/
Wonder how the Trump plan would deal with the Syrian situation and subsequently Iran/Pakistan? Bad as ISIS is, the latter are now greater potential threats in terms of conflict escalation.
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - Mav - 09-08-2016
Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party nominee, has just made a major gaffe during an MSNBC interview. He was asked what he thought of Aleppo. In a variation of Hanson's "Please explain", he asked, "What is Aleppo?" He must have thought he was a contestant on Jeopardy. The guy who asked the question looked like Johnson had vomited on the table as he explained it is the city at the epicentre of the war in Syria.
David Axelrod tweeted that this was probably a good time to use the "Sorry, I was high" card (he favours legalisation of marijuana and says he smokes it but he's promised not to do so in the White House).
Probably, this will help Clinton. Trump does better in debates when he has more than 1 opponent whereas Clinton wants to zero in on Trump. Johnson requires an average of 15% in certain polls to qualify for the debates. He was sitting on only 9% and dropped slightly below that over the last week. The opinion pollsters are shifting from polling registered voters to polling likely voters and the thinking is that this will work against him. This unforced fumble will compound his problems.
The other benefit to Clinton is that Johnson is likely to take votes from her rather than Trump. Republicans who dislike Trump may feel better about voting for a Libertarian than Clinton. If he self-destructs, those voters may go to Clinton. On the other hand, it's not likely that Johnson was ever going to lure voters who like Trump.
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - madbluboy - 09-09-2016
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/09/08/opinion/donald-trump-is-lying-in-plain-sight.html
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - Bear - 09-09-2016
(09-08-2016, 02:08 AM)cookie2 link Wrote:Wonder how the Trump plan would deal with the Syrian situation and subsequently Iran/Pakistan? Bad as ISIS is, the latter are now greater potential threats in terms of conflict escalation.
Assuming he has a plan is pretty generous.
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - DJC - 09-09-2016
John Cassidy's article in the New Yorker is an interesting read and I'll reproduce his concluding paragraph:
Quote:It should be noted that numbers like these have seldom, if ever, been seen before in a U.S. Presidential election. To many Americans, the election has come down to a choice between the unpalatable and the unthinkable. But in this strange and dystopian contest, Clinton retains a distinct advantage. In the weeks ahead, which will see three Presidential debates and, almost certainly, more surprises, we will find out if she can maintain it all the way to the finish line.
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - Mav - 09-09-2016
The phoney war is finally over. Labor Day was last Monday in the US and that is the time that voters start to concentrate on the campaign. There are 60 days left and that's actually longer than most of our Federal election campaigns.
Voting starts in Minnesota in exactly 2 weeks and other states have various dates for early voting. The 1st debate takes place on 26 September - a fortnight from next Monday. Votes may be cast or minds made up within 3 weeks from now.
Re: US Presidential Election 2016 - Thryleon - 09-09-2016
(09-08-2016, 11:45 PM)Mav link Wrote:Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party nominee, has just made a major gaffe during an MSNBC interview. He was asked what he thought of Aleppo. In a variation of Hanson's "Please explain", he asked, "What is Aleppo?" He must have thought he was a contestant on Jeopardy. The guy who asked the question looked like Johnson had vomited on the table as he explained it is the city at the epicentre of the war in Syria.
David Axelrod tweeted that this was probably a good time to use the "Sorry, I was high" card (he favours legalisation of marijuana and says he smokes it but he's promised not to do so in the White House).
Probably, this will help Clinton. Trump does better in debates when he has more than 1 opponent whereas Clinton wants to zero in on Trump. Johnson requires an average of 15% in certain polls to qualify for the debates. He was sitting on only 9% and dropped slightly below that over the last week. The opinion pollsters are shifting from polling registered voters to polling likely voters and the thinking is that this will work against him. This unforced fumble will compound his problems.
The other benefit to Clinton is that Johnson is likely to take votes from her rather than Trump. Republicans who dislike Trump may feel better about voting for a Libertarian than Clinton. If he self-destructs, those voters may go to Clinton. On the other hand, it's not likely that Johnson was ever going to lure voters who like Trump.
What an absolutely stupid question to ask.
No wonder American Politics is in the toilet. Most of the American people wouldnt know what Aleppo is either.