1. #14681
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    Okay... let’s imagine some circles...

    1... a circle that represents Biden supporters.
    2... a circle that represents Bernie supporters.
    3... a circle that represents everyone else.

    How do you think these 3 circle, overlap?
    I think there's a misconception by establishment Dems that people who consider themselves independent means they are moderate. While that was the case 20 years ago, I don;t think that's the case anymore. I think with social media and the information blitz things have changed and the majority of the people that claim to be independent do so because they are fatigued, not moderate. They want something different to break what they believe is the crippling status quo. That's why they went Trump in 2016. It is why they'd go Warren or Bernie in 2020....but they won't vote in primaries.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    Okay... let’s imagine some circles...

    1... a circle that represents Biden supporters.
    2... a circle that represents Bernie supporters.
    3... a circle that represents everyone else.

    How do you think these 3 circle, overlap?

    - - - Updated - - -



    But, none of it really makes sense. If you think there is a greater pool of available voters outside democrats, to support Bernie, why is Trump still running against Bernie? You want to make an argument that Bernie, is a side choice for Biden? There are a lot of people who watch the Super Bowl for commercials............

    You are not actually listing any reasons, other than phantom Bernie voters, that were not registered democrats.
    No I did and it makes plenty of sense. What doens;t make sense is comparing a primary to general election.
    When I despair, I remember that all through history, there have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they seem invincible.
    But in the end, they always fall. Always.- Mahatma Gandhi


  2. #14682
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    Why do you believe that the general would be different?
    Bernie couldn't get
    A) Registered establishment Democrats to vote for a progressive outside
    Or
    B) Progressive outsiders to register as Democrats in order to vote for him in the primary.

    His entire schtick was about appealing to unaffiliated and disaffected would-be-progressive voters, and winning then over to his cause. Without an appearance in the general, he has never had an opportunity to do so, and claiming he couldn't (or guaranteed would have, for that matter) is disingenuous as it has never been tested.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Woods View Post
    LOL never change guys. I guess you won't because conservatism.
    Quote Originally Posted by pathora44 View Post
    Frogs are the real threat because they will kill us by drowning us just because we stabbed them with our poisonous stingers.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ghostpanther View Post
    I do care what people on this forum think of me.
    VOTE

  3. #14683
    Void Lord Felya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    solve coagula
    Posts
    52,746
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodakane View Post
    I think there's a misconception by establishment Dems that people who consider themselves independent means they are moderate.
    No, that the majority of the independent will be moderate. Which is apt...

    While that was the case 20 years ago, I don;t think that's the case anymore.
    Why?

    I think with social media and the information blitz things have changed and the majority of the people that claim to be independent do so because they are fatigued, not moderate. They want something different to break what they believe is the crippling status quo. That's why they went Trump in 2016. It is why they'd go Warren or Bernie in 2020....but they won't vote in primaries.
    This is illogical... social media doesn’t change the nature of what extreme and moderate means. Trump won the GOP primaries in 2016... neither Warren or Bernie won DNC...

    No I did and it makes plenty of sense. What doens;t make sense is comparing a primary to general election.
    If they make sense, feel free to answer anything I asked. When was the last time a president won, without winning his primary?
    As above, so below.
    Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
    The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
    That which is Below corresponds to that which is Above, and that which is Above corresponds to that which is Below, to accomplish the miracle of the One Thing.

  4. #14684
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    No, that the majority of the independent will be moderate. Which is apt...



    Why?



    This is illogical... social media doesn’t change the nature of what extreme and moderate means. Trump won the GOP primaries in 2016... neither Warren or Bernie won DNC...



    If they make sense, feel free to answer anything I asked. When was the last time a president won, without winning his primary?
    Its not illogical. Social media absolutely changes things and its frankly batshit fcuking bananas to say it doesn't. Trump won his primary because republicans are easily duped. What does that have to do with anything?

    This is what I'm saying, you guys keep pretending that primaries are the same as generals and you do it without explaining in what ways they are the same.

    Your question is stupid. Half the primary winners win the POTUS.
    When I despair, I remember that all through history, there have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they seem invincible.
    But in the end, they always fall. Always.- Mahatma Gandhi


  5. #14685
    Void Lord Felya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    solve coagula
    Posts
    52,746
    Quote Originally Posted by Antiganon View Post
    His entire schtick was about appealing to unaffiliated and disaffected would-be-progressive voters, and winning then over to his cause. Without an appearance in the general, he has never had an opportunity to do so, and claiming he couldn't (or guaranteed would have, for that matter) is disingenuous as it has never been tested.
    The timing is simply wrong... democrats are playing defense, while progressive want an offensive. In the end, both progressives and conservatives are attacking them as an extreme version of their reflection. They want shouting matches and entertaining headlines, pushing ideological boundaries in government. While most people want everyone to shit the fuck up and get back to normal... it’s like I keep pointing out, we have progressives bitching that democrats don’t expand Medicare for All, while Trump is promising to defund social security and Medicare. There is a major disconnect here...
    As above, so below.
    Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
    The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
    That which is Below corresponds to that which is Above, and that which is Above corresponds to that which is Below, to accomplish the miracle of the One Thing.

  6. #14686
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    The timing is simply wrong... democrats are playing defense, while progressive want an offensive. In the end, both progressives and conservatives are attacking them as an extreme version of their reflection. They want shouting matches and entertaining headlines, pushing ideological boundaries in government. While most people want everyone to shit the fuck up and get back to normal... it’s like I keep pointing out, we have progressives bitching that democrats don’t expand Medicare for All, while Trump is promising to defund social security and Medicare. There is a major disconnect here...
    Dems are ALWAYS playing defensive. That's the point. They vote in primaries based on who they think will win predicated on an outdated strategy. independents aren't mostly moderate anymore and even if they are Warren and Bernie are closer to moderate than Trump.
    When I despair, I remember that all through history, there have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they seem invincible.
    But in the end, they always fall. Always.- Mahatma Gandhi


  7. #14687
    Merely a Setback cubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    29,163
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodakane View Post
    It is not objective evidence. It is a primary. Primaries are as far from objective as you can get. In fact they are very much subjective. Its like assessing the effectiveness of a medical trial that didn't have a control group.

    There is no reason to think a primary is indicative of anything that will happen in a general election, let alone a general election with an electoral college. I don't mean disrespect, but this is madness.
    It's ok, you are objectively wrong, and at this point it's obvious you're grasping for whatever straws come your way. You haven't shown any proof of your claim outside your "feels" inregards to your point that somehow, someway, if a candidate doesn't increase turnout in a primary, then somehow they will in a General Election. Your stated reason is "because they are different".

    Please provide some evidence of how enthusiasm vis a vis turnout is "different" between primaries and elections. And remember - we're not talking about groups of people, we're talking about increased numbers in any group of people.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bodakane View Post
    Again, the voting is different, the audience is different, the thought process is different, the results are different......everything is different between a primary and a general other than the word vote.
    Again - doesn't matter. We're talking about any of the subjective areas of primary voting vs general election voting - we're talking about turnout. Whomever turns out for the primaries, did not do so in larger numbers because Bernie was on the ballot. Objectively, if they aren't doing that for the primaries, there is no reason to think they will turn out for Bernie in the General Election.

    Your reasoning for the opposing position continues to be "because they are different". But you continue to fail to apply that opinion with any objective facts.


    Quote Originally Posted by Bodakane View Post
    Winning the POTUS is about winning the people who DO NOT vote in primaries so using primaries as a barometer is pointless. If Warren, Bernie, Pete, etc. won the nomination would you still be voting for them? Yes, of course. Now what about the small handful of people that actually won it for Trump in the swing states who vote for the "not same old same old" pick? Are they more likely to vote Biden or Warren? Bernie? Of course its not Biden, if they thought Biden was a sexy pick they would have thought Hillary was too. That's why covid just may save this election for Biden.
    The point isn't relevant. See above.
    Last edited by cubby; 2020-09-20 at 01:28 AM.

  8. #14688
    Void Lord Felya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    solve coagula
    Posts
    52,746
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodakane View Post
    Its not illogical. Social media absolutely changes things and its frankly batshit fcuking bananas to say it doesn't.
    Oh it does... but, it appeals to extremes and those that are on it are too deep in to recognize it. Oh and leftist just royally suck at it...

    Trump won his primary because republicans are easily duped. What does that have to do with anything?
    It implies that democrats were not duped in voting Biden.............

    This is what I'm saying, you guys keep pretending that primaries are the same as generals and you do it without explaining in what ways they are the same.
    Strawman... everyone is saying it’s an indicator... there were two of them... your indication is social media. Do you really want me to argue that you think social media is an indicator of general elections? Where you around during the GDPR release on here? Do you remember how many proud Americans became “deleted”? That’s social media...

    Your question is stupid. Half the primary winners win the POTUS.
    Yes, a man who types the bold, is someone whose intellect is so great, that being called stupid is a mark I won’t wash off soon... Da faq? That’s your list of people who won the president, without primary? Fart noise...
    As above, so below.
    Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
    The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
    That which is Below corresponds to that which is Above, and that which is Above corresponds to that which is Below, to accomplish the miracle of the One Thing.

  9. #14689
    Quote Originally Posted by cubby View Post
    It's ok, you are objectively wrong, and at this point it's obvious you're grasping for whatever straws come your way. You haven't shown any proof of your claim outside your "feels" inregards to your point that somehow, someway, if a candidate doesn't increase turnout in a primary, then somehow they will in a General Election. Your stated reason is "because they are different".

    Please provide some evidence of how enthusiasm vis a vis turnout is "different" between primaries and elections. And remember - we're not talking about groups of people, we're talking about increased numbers in any group of people.




    Again - doesn't matter. We're talking about any of the subjective areas of primary voting vs general election voting - we're talking about turnout. Whomever turns out for the primaries, did not do so in larger numbers because Bernie was on the ballot. Objectively, if they aren't doing that for the primaries, there is no reason to think they will turn out for Bernie in the General Election.

    Your reasoning for the opposing position continues to be "because they are different".




    The point isn't relevant. See above.
    Oh bullshit. I'm providing logic you guys are providing feels. Why are the same? Please explain why the vastly different processes of primary and general elections are same other than your guys bullshit feelings?
    When I despair, I remember that all through history, there have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they seem invincible.
    But in the end, they always fall. Always.- Mahatma Gandhi


  10. #14690
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    The timing is simply wrong... democrats are playing defense, while progressive want an offensive. In the end, both progressives and conservatives are attacking them as an extreme version of their reflection. They want shouting matches and entertaining headlines, pushing ideological boundaries in government. While most people want everyone to shit the fuck up and get back to normal... it’s like I keep pointing out, we have progressives bitching that democrats don’t expand Medicare for All, while Trump is promising to defund social security and Medicare. There is a major disconnect here...
    I don't understand what you are on about.

    Bernie appeals to Progressives. Progressives by and large don't vote in Democratic primaries. Thus Bernie's base is unable to secure him a Democratic primary victory.

    That is the beginning and the end of relevant commentary on his ability to turn out voters.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Woods View Post
    LOL never change guys. I guess you won't because conservatism.
    Quote Originally Posted by pathora44 View Post
    Frogs are the real threat because they will kill us by drowning us just because we stabbed them with our poisonous stingers.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ghostpanther View Post
    I do care what people on this forum think of me.
    VOTE

  11. #14691
    Void Lord Felya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    solve coagula
    Posts
    52,746
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodakane View Post
    Dems are ALWAYS playing defensive. That's the point. They vote in primaries based on who they think will win predicated on an outdated strategy. independents aren't mostly moderate anymore and even if they are Warren and Bernie are closer to moderate than Trump.
    That’s illogical... the majority of independents are moderate... that’s basic logic. If your argument is that the left extreme has splintered off from democrats, to the point they don’t vote democrats in the general election... then expect democrats to keep pushing for more reliable voters. Not that it matters... the left not voting for democrats, is the reason why Trump’s initial reaction to Bernie dropping out, was to tell leftists that democrats don’t represent them... while telling his supporters, far leftists are the evil controlling moderate democrats.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodakane View Post
    Oh bullshit. I'm providing logic you guys are providing feels. Why are the same? Please explain why the vastly different processes of primary and general elections are same other than your guys bullshit feelings?
    Your logic is the feeling you get from social media.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Antiganon View Post
    I don't understand what you are on about.

    Bernie appeals to Progressives. Progressives by and large don't vote in Democratic primaries. Thus Bernie's base is unable to secure him a Democratic primary victory.

    That is the beginning and the end of relevant commentary on his ability to turn out voters.
    The point being, that there is no magical left that will replace the moderate independent. It’s why Trump is using the idea of the magical extreme left puppeteering moderate Democrats. It’s burning a candle from both ends...

    Edit: Just to make it clear, I do agree that democrats decorum bullshit is frustrating. I’m not a regular watcher, so don’t give me too much shit, but he is right:

    Last edited by Felya; 2020-09-20 at 01:38 AM.
    As above, so below.
    Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
    The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
    That which is Below corresponds to that which is Above, and that which is Above corresponds to that which is Below, to accomplish the miracle of the One Thing.

  12. #14692
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    Oh it does... but, it appeals to extremes and those that are on it are too deep in to recognize it. Oh and leftist just royally suck at it...
    And? Are you really saying many non democratic or republican diehards aren't fatigued? Really?


    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    It implies that democrats were not duped in voting Biden.............
    Again and? I didn't argue that they were. You're the fool that thought Trump winning his primary was relevant to my point. Dems didn't;t vote for Biden because they thought he best represented liberal values or plans they voted for him because they thought independents = moderate and being moderate he;'d have the best chance to beat Trump.

    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    Strawman... everyone is saying it’s an indicator... there were two of them... your indication is social media. Do you really want me to argue that you think social media is an indicator of general elections? Where you around during the GDPR release on here? Do you remember how many proud Americans became “deleted”? That’s social media...
    Its not a strawman at all. Saying turnout in a primary is an indicator of turnout in the general is the straw man since they aren't fucking related and none of you sanctimonious sycophants have explained why they believe its an indicator. Especially when independents don't fucking vote in primaries. Jesus Christ.

    And no i don;t want to argue that social media is an indicator of election, which is why I never made that point. But thanks anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    Yes, a man who types the bold, is someone whose intellect is so great, that being called stupid is a mark I won’t wash off soon... Da faq? That’s your list of people who won the president, without primary? Fart noise...
    There's two primaries in every election. Only half the ones that win their respective primaries win the election. its a stupid, stupid, stupid fucking point that means nothing. So stupid you don;t really have the footing to belittle anyone else's intelligence.
    When I despair, I remember that all through history, there have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they seem invincible.
    But in the end, they always fall. Always.- Mahatma Gandhi


  13. #14693
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    That’s illogical... the majority of independents are moderate... that’s basic logic. If your argument is that the left extreme has splintered off from democrats, to the point they don’t vote democrats in the general election... then expect democrats to keep pushing for more reliable voters. Not that it matters... the left not voting for democrats, is the reason why Trump’s initial reaction to Bernie dropping out, was to tell leftists that democrats don’t represent them... while telling his supporters, far leftists are the evil controlling moderate democrats.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Your logic is the feeling you get from social media.
    Arguing that because one team is blue and the other is red, most of the people not affiliated with either team must be purple, is a fallacy.

    They could be purple, or green, or ultraviolet, and you don't have verifiable data on them to know one way or the other.

    The whole point was to appeal to unlikely voters, young people who have never voted before, people who haven't voted in decades, etc.

    Arguing about what might have happened had Bernie win the primary is a fools errand. Could he have turned out independents disgusted with both major parties to oust Trump? Maybe. Could he have work as a socialist bogeyman for the Republicans, driving moderates into the arms of the far right? Also maybe. Could he have caused apathy among establishment Dems, who assume that a socialist can't beat the right wing, so they sit at home in election day? Also maybe
    There is no way of knowing, and it's pointless to speculate at this stage.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Woods View Post
    LOL never change guys. I guess you won't because conservatism.
    Quote Originally Posted by pathora44 View Post
    Frogs are the real threat because they will kill us by drowning us just because we stabbed them with our poisonous stingers.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ghostpanther View Post
    I do care what people on this forum think of me.
    VOTE

  14. #14694
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    That’s illogical... the majority of independents are moderate... that’s basic logic. If your argument is that the left extreme has splintered off from democrats, to the point they don’t vote democrats in the general election... then expect democrats to keep pushing for more reliable voters. Not that it matters... the left not voting for democrats, is the reason why Trump’s initial reaction to Bernie dropping out, was to tell leftists that democrats don’t represent them... while telling his supporters, far leftists are the evil controlling moderate democrats.
    Its not illogical its how things work now. You fucking people are trying to tell me, with every bit of arrogance you can muster, that MODERATES preferred Trump over Hillary. Do you guys follow your own logic?

    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    Your logic is the feeling you get from social media.
    Dafuq are you even talking about?
    When I despair, I remember that all through history, there have been tyrants and murderers, and for a time, they seem invincible.
    But in the end, they always fall. Always.- Mahatma Gandhi


  15. #14695
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    The point being, that there is no magical left that will replace the moderate independent. It’s why Trump is using the idea of the magical extreme left puppeteering moderate Democrats. It’s burning a candle from both ends...
    You can't know this, there is no data to support your claim.

    Apathetic disaffected unaffiliated unlikely voters aren't captured in polling data. You and Bodakane are both engaging in pure speculation. You are saying "Well he lost here, he obviously would have lost there, because he lost". He is saying "Well he only lost here, he obviously would have won there, the rules are different".

    The truth is that the rules ARE different, and no amount of arguing about it is going to make actual objective evidence appear to answer the question one way or another. It's an interesting thought experiment in abstract, and a fools errand when you start applying it to the current political climate.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Woods View Post
    LOL never change guys. I guess you won't because conservatism.
    Quote Originally Posted by pathora44 View Post
    Frogs are the real threat because they will kill us by drowning us just because we stabbed them with our poisonous stingers.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ghostpanther View Post
    I do care what people on this forum think of me.
    VOTE

  16. #14696
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    Okay... let’s imagine some circles...

    1... a circle that represents Biden supporters.
    2... a circle that represents Bernie supporters.
    3... a circle that represents everyone else.

    How do you think these 3 circle, overlap?

    Edit: It’s a paradox... the first circle is bigger than the second, the first completely overlaps the second, while the second has a sliver that doesn’t overlap. While the third faces a similar issue, but with the added bonus of convincing the largest circle of the 3, that the first two circles, are the same... the first is the puppet of the second.
    1) I don't think that's very accurate. Biden is not a candidate that people get excited about. He's there because he is perceived as the one that can beat Trump. It's a fair bet that most if not nearly all Biden voters would also come out for Sanders. If Bernie was the nominee though, Sanders supporters wouldn't be spilling pages and pages of digital ink trying to convince Biden people to come out and vote against Trump the way that we've been trying to convince Sanders' supporters to come out for Biden. Because the Biden vote IS by and large an anti-Trump vote

    2) The case for Sanders in a general versus primary had to do with the electorate that votes in each. Sanders does very well with Dem-leaning independents that are much less likely to participate in the primary process (and in many states, can't).
    "As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."
    -H.L. Mencken, 1920

  17. #14697
    Merely a Setback cubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    29,163
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodakane View Post
    Oh bullshit. I'm providing logic you guys are providing feels. Why are the same? Please explain why the vastly different processes of primary and general elections are same other than your guys bullshit feelings?
    I'm not arguing that point. Why do you think I am - I've never said that whatsoever. I agree that the Primary process is different from the General process. My point has always been that those differences are irrelevant when it comes to increased generic voter turnout. If a candidate is going to ignite voters, they will be ignited in the Primary. If they aren't, they certainly will not in the General.

    What you are failing to see is that your entire premise is "elections are different". So show us - where has enthusiasm vis a vis voter turnout increased from a Primary to a General because the same person who lost the primary was in the General.

    Do you now see how untenable your position is?

  18. #14698
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya View Post
    That’s illogical... the majority of independents are moderate... that’s basic logic.
    This is factually untrue, however. Even self-described "moderates" are all over the map, too.

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...dle-is-a-myth/
    "As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."
    -H.L. Mencken, 1920

  19. #14699
    Void Lord Felya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    solve coagula
    Posts
    52,746
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodakane View Post
    And? Are you really saying many non democratic or republican diehards aren't fatigued? Really?
    Extremes are not the norm, it’s why they are extremes... fatigued from what? Extremes of Trump? The extremes that Trump keeps showing as representation of the far left? You think Biden isn’t selected because of this fatigue and the return to normalcy? You do remember I said just that in replying to you?

    Again and? I didn't argue that they were. You're the fool that thought Trump winning his primary was relevant to my point. Dems didn't;t vote for Biden because they thought he best represented liberal values or plans they voted for him because they thought independents = moderate and being moderate he;'d have the best chance to beat Trump.
    You asked... /facepalm... independents = majority are moderate... not independents = moderate... one of those is a strawman...

    Its not a strawman at all. Saying turnout in a primary is an indicator of turnout in the general is the straw man since they aren't fucking related and none of you sanctimonious sycophants have explained why they believe its an indicator. Especially when independents don't fucking vote in primaries. Jesus Christ.
    No, it isn’t... you saying that people are arguing that primaries is the same as elections, that’s a strawman. If you want to argue a fallacy, I used causation to imply correlation. Not that it matters... since you obviously have no clue what you are talking about and are just a reactionary.

    And no i don;t want to argue that social media is an indicator of election, which is why I never made that point. But thanks anyway.
    You keep bringing up social media because? Reactionary...

    There's two primaries in every election. Only half the ones that win their respective primaries win the election. its a stupid, stupid, stupid fucking point that means nothing. So stupid you don;t really have the footing to belittle anyone else's intelligence.
    No, this is a second nonsense reply, because you simply can’t google and don’t want to state your assumption... 0... stop being a reactionary. Edit: This is where you should scream fallacy... if you knew wtf you are talking about.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Gestopft View Post
    This is factually untrue, however. Even self-described "moderates" are all over the map, too.

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...dle-is-a-myth/
    I’m literally arguing against this:

    These tropes conjure up a particular image: a pivotal bloc of reasonable “independent” voters sick of the two major parties, just waiting for a centrist candidate to embrace a “moderate” policy vision.
    What does “being all over the map mean”? That more will reside closer to the center, than both edges? Think about it... I’m not arguing that they can form a single mind party... I’m arguing that majority are not extremes. If it’s randomly divided, the only way that the extremes rival what surrounds the middle, is if you combine both the right and left extremes of independent voters.
    As above, so below.
    Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
    The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
    That which is Below corresponds to that which is Above, and that which is Above corresponds to that which is Below, to accomplish the miracle of the One Thing.

  20. #14700
    Quote Originally Posted by cubby View Post
    If a candidate is going to ignite voters, they will be ignited in the Primary. If they aren't, they certainly will not in the General.
    That isn't necessarily true though. Many people who would support an outsider candidate in the general election are simply barred from participating in the primary process in the first place, as closed primaries are very common. This is true on both sides.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy Woods View Post
    LOL never change guys. I guess you won't because conservatism.
    Quote Originally Posted by pathora44 View Post
    Frogs are the real threat because they will kill us by drowning us just because we stabbed them with our poisonous stingers.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ghostpanther View Post
    I do care what people on this forum think of me.
    VOTE

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •