2016 Presidential Race

Status
Not open for further replies.


For the record, that one doesn't apply to my bet. I'm talking about the party (DNC) or the other candidates filing suit. There will always be nut jobs that sue for any reason (some of them are even Attorneys). If the DNC and the other (major) candidates don't file suit and Cruz is the general election (R) candidate, I'll donate $50.00

You're right - the senate resolution had no legal standing and could've easily been challenged. However, it was a symbolic gesture which clearly demonstrated that the resolution's authors (among whom were both Clinton and Obama) did not want to get dragged into an ugly controversy. Democrat party unity is running high right now, and so I'm wagering that any democrat entertaining the idea of raising the issue will probably get shot down very quickly. Clinton might deploy that tactic in order to divert attention away from the email controversy, but I don't think it's very likely.

Side note - McCain was born on an OCONUS US military base, which is American soil by definition just like the embassies. There's no valid question about whether he is a natural born citizen that would pass legal muster.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Side note - McCain was born on an OCONUS US military base, which is American soil by definition just like the embassies. There's no valid question about whether he is a natural born citizen that would pass legal muster.
I totally agree. It was a stupid controversy from the very outset, just like the Obama birther controversy. We're in agreement there. I think it's still significant, however, because of instead of using the controversy to score easy political points, they instead chose to say "This is stupid and distracting. Let's put it to rest, like, right now." That's not to say that liberals always take the high road, but when it comes to the birth issue they have at least one data point showing that they are. That's all.
 
Man I could edit together video of people doing all sorts of stupid shit.

No doubt, but people signing petitions and saying "yeah I don't care what its for" or supporting 100+ year dead dude for VPOTUS? That's some dumbass people right there, regardless how you swing on politics.
 
I like Cruz, if for no other reason than his willingness to stick it to the establishment.
D2/2 He's better than Dewhurst
 
I'm pulling for Sanders because I think the Republicans can beat him. I support Hillary for a felony conviction.
 
Hillary cannot even tell fantasy from reality!!!

(CNN)Hillary Clinton declared victory early Tuesday morning in a razor-thin contest against Bernie Sanders in Iowa. But Democratic party officials have not yet declared a winner.

"Hillary Clinton has won the Iowa Caucus," the Clinton campaign said. "After thorough reporting -- and analysis -- of results, there is no uncertainty and Secretary Clinton has clearly won the most national and state delegates."

The state party indicated in a separate statement that it was not ready to make a call.

"The results tonight are the closest in Iowa Democratic caucus history," Iowa party chairman Andy McGuire said. "We will report that final precinct when we have confirmed those results with the chair."

Iowa caucus results: Ted Cruz wins, Hillary Clinton declares victory - CNNPolitics.com
 
NYT embedded a reporter in Iowa for an entire year to track the shifting caucuses over time. The reporter, Trip Gabriel, gave a very interesting interview on NPR about a week ago. His comments really contextualized Iowa for me and I recommend that you give it a listen.

Embedded In Des Moines: A 'Times' Reporter's Year Covering The '16 Campaign

Some highlights:
-Iowa has a large percentage of caucusers who are evangelical (somewhere around 25%)
-However, that doesn't really matter: Huckabee won the 2008 Iowa caucus, and Santorum squeezed out a win in 2012 (by a super slim margin over Romney)
-The democrat's caucus process is really weird and dumb
-But Iowa's democrats have consistently chosen the party's nominee, going back to 1992 when they chose Tom Harkin

What I took from this:
-A Cruz win was practically guaranteed, but that really doesn't mean anything
-Trump and Rubio were neck and neck, with Rubio taking key urban areas
-Because he couldn't secure a decisive Iowa victory, Cruz is very unlikely to be the nominee
-Hillary's coronation is on hold, for now. Sanders has eaten away at her lead with gusto
-But Sanders' strong showing may only be due to the fact that the Democrats have a two-horse race
-I really have no idea how the Democrat race will play out! New Hampshire will be the real fight

I'm definitely looking forward to next week!
 
NYT embedded a reporter in Iowa for an entire year to track the shifting caucuses over time. The reporter, Trip Gabriel, gave a very interesting interview on NPR about a week ago. His comments really contextualized Iowa for me and I recommend that you give it a listen.

It was, you know, a pretty good, you know, article. I made it, you know, about maybe halfway and while it was interesting something, you know, made it kind of hard, you know, to read.
 
A coin toss...Hillary's pumped about a win determined by a coin toss, beating a guy who was a billion points out of the lead a few months ago.

Bill Belichick approves.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top