Presidential Election 2016

Introductions - Urban Issues - Miscellaneous News, Topics, Interests
mulad
Moderator
Posts: 2753
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 6:30 pm
Location: Saint Paul
Contact:

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby mulad » July 23rd, 2016, 12:23 pm

I can't bring myself to vote for Hillary due to my anti-dynasty stance I've outlined before, though I'm planning to evaluate the option of writing in Tim Kaine's name for president and someone else for VP.

Didier
Capella Tower
Posts: 2512
Joined: June 3rd, 2012, 10:11 am
Location: MSP

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby Didier » July 23rd, 2016, 12:39 pm

It's becoming clear that many Trump supporters view Hillary the same way many of us view Trump, and it's not entirely delusion. So after watching Kaine's introduction today, I can't help but wonder what the polls would look like if his name was atop the ticket.

After the RNC the table is set for a positive, inclusive tone at the DNC, but I question whether Hillary can convince anybody not already on board.

EOst
Capella Tower
Posts: 2428
Joined: March 19th, 2014, 8:05 pm
Location: Saint Paul

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby EOst » July 23rd, 2016, 1:12 pm

Clinton's task is to convince those who right now say that they'll vote for Johnson to vote for her instead, because the danger of an authoritarian Putin-backed Trump is too great. It's pretty convincing to me.

User avatar
Tiller
Foshay Tower
Posts: 965
Joined: January 17th, 2015, 11:58 am

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby Tiller » July 23rd, 2016, 1:16 pm

Still feelin' the Bern - - thank you very much - - , but Trump's RNC speech and Pence terrify me.

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7760
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby mattaudio » July 25th, 2016, 8:30 am

view Hillary the same way many of us view Trump, and it's not entirely delusion.
Sure, Trump scares me a little more than Clinton. That said, I'm assuming you've all googled "Clinton Body Count" to see the dozens of Clinton associates who have mysteriously died over the last few decades?

amiller92
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1984
Joined: October 31st, 2014, 12:50 pm

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby amiller92 » July 25th, 2016, 9:05 am

Sure, Trump scares me a little more than Clinton. That said, I'm assuming you've all googled "Clinton Body Count" to see the dozens of Clinton associates who have mysteriously died over the last few decades?
The internet is hard sometimes, so please tell me that is sarcastic.

twinkess
Target Field
Posts: 543
Joined: November 26th, 2012, 10:46 am

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby twinkess » July 25th, 2016, 9:08 am

I'm assuming it is

David Greene
IDS Center
Posts: 4617
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby David Greene » September 9th, 2016, 4:13 pm

So the DFL is trying to get Trump/Pence off the ballot because the Republicans violated state law by not selecting alternate electors at their convention.

I'm torn about this. On the one hand, I think it's important to follow the law, especially where elections are concerned and the DFL is certainly well within its rights to file a lawsuit and might even win.

On the other hand, this could blow up in their faces really badly. Nothing drives turnout like a perception that the other side is trying to "cheat" and/or "disenfranchise" voters.

This is of course not really about the presidential election but rather downballot races.

Thoughts?

User avatar
Nick
Capella Tower
Posts: 2727
Joined: May 30th, 2012, 9:33 pm
Location: Downtown, Minneapolis

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby Nick » September 9th, 2016, 4:18 pm

It.................................seems like a bad idea.
Nick Magrino
[email protected]

User avatar
Tiller
Foshay Tower
Posts: 965
Joined: January 17th, 2015, 11:58 am

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby Tiller » September 9th, 2016, 7:51 pm

I like the Idea of Trump/Pence not being on the ballot (and I bet the minor parties on the ballot would love it, things like the Libertarian/Green parties getting closer to federal matching funds, etc.), but we sorta really need to take back the house.

Speaking of third parties, over/under on the Libertarians and Greens (respectively) breaking 5% this year?

David Greene
IDS Center
Posts: 4617
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby David Greene » September 9th, 2016, 7:55 pm

Is that over/under for Minnesota or the whole country?

I guess the theory is that if Trump isn't on the ballot more R's will stay home and depress turnout for the downballot races. I think it'll do the opposite, not just because it's already pissed people off but also because suddenly those downballot races are the focus of those turning out.

VAStationDude
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 764
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:30 am

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby VAStationDude » September 9th, 2016, 8:30 pm

Republicans who care about the down ballot races will vote regardless. A small number of republicans turn out only in non presidential years. Trump will turn out a non zero number of white men who rarely vote. They might stay home without a presidential candidate. It'll be a net positive for the dfl in close districts out state and second ring suburbs.

User avatar
Tiller
Foshay Tower
Posts: 965
Joined: January 17th, 2015, 11:58 am

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby Tiller » September 9th, 2016, 10:42 pm

Whole country, but it can be both. I'd bet the Libertarian party does and the green party doesn't, nationally.

Didier
Capella Tower
Posts: 2512
Joined: June 3rd, 2012, 10:11 am
Location: MSP

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby Didier » September 10th, 2016, 7:30 am

Isn't Gary Johnson polling around 10 percent nationally right now?

mattaudio
Stone Arch Bridge
Posts: 7760
Joined: June 19th, 2012, 2:04 pm
Location: NORI: NOrth of RIchfield

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby mattaudio » September 10th, 2016, 10:51 am

Seems like the legal mechanism when a major party fails to meet state law should be a fine or some other sanction, not removing a name from a ballot in a national race.

mulad
Moderator
Posts: 2753
Joined: June 4th, 2012, 6:30 pm
Location: Saint Paul
Contact:

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby mulad » September 10th, 2016, 6:03 pm

To me, the most straightforward outcome (if the MN Supreme Court decides to do anything) would be to invalidate those ten alternate electors. That only has any damaging impact if Trump wins the state and any of the primary electors are unable to show up. It's unlikely that Trump would win Minnesota, but the court should really consider the candidates to have an equal chance of winning. If he were to win, there's a decent chance that at least one elector would be unable to do their duty, but certainly the party would work hard to ensure that as many show up as possible. It's unlikely that a missing elector or two would have any real effect on the national outcome, as much as it would cause political pundits and Veep scriptwriters to salivate at the thought.

Makes me wonder if there's still a provision in MN statutes somewhere to have the state legislature pick electors if need be.

Of course, this all points again to the fact that the Electoral College should be replaced with a more modern, proportionate, and/or direct method of voting for the president.

amiller92
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1984
Joined: October 31st, 2014, 12:50 pm

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby amiller92 » September 12th, 2016, 12:00 pm

I guess the theory is that if Trump isn't on the ballot more R's will stay home and depress turnout for the downballot races.
That's the only coherent theory I've heard, but I'm with you in being skeptical. Seems like almost everyone who is both motivated to vote for Trump and aware he's not on the ballot is going to go write in. The larger effect would seem to me to be the voter who is less informed and only learns that Trump's not a non-write in option when they get the ballot. That person seems likely to vote for Johnson or some other non-Hillary candidate, thus increasing the chance of a minor party getting to 5%.

Anyway, I can see the greens or Libs making this challenge, as I think they will benefit if Trump/Pence isn't there. I don't see much upside for the DFL, not least because I don't think judge is going to order Trump/Pence off the ballot when the SoS has ruled them valid just because the central committee and not the convention selected the alternate electors.

Does make the mnGOP look stupid, though.

xandrex
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1384
Joined: January 30th, 2013, 11:14 am

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby xandrex » September 12th, 2016, 1:14 pm

I've always thought the DFL figured they'd lose this, but they get to waste the GOP's time (and cash) fighting this instead of out campaigning.

David Greene
IDS Center
Posts: 4617
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby David Greene » September 12th, 2016, 2:26 pm

How much is this really costing the GOP though?

Remember, it's also costing the DFL.

VAStationDude
US Bank Plaza
Posts: 764
Joined: June 1st, 2012, 10:30 am

Re: Presidential Election 2016

Postby VAStationDude » September 12th, 2016, 2:52 pm

Dfl challenge has been dismissed. Trump will be on the ballot.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 38 guests