Generational Dynamics
Fourth Turning Forum Archive


Popular links:
Generational Dynamics Web Site
Generational Dynamics Forum
Fourth Turning Archive home page
New Fourth Turning Forum

Thread: US elections, 2016 - Page 114







Post#2826 at 03-10-2016 05:10 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
03-10-2016, 05:10 PM #2826
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Quote Originally Posted by pbrower2a View Post
Hillary Clinton vs. Marco Rubio



Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump



30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

White -- tie or someone leading with less than 40%.
I think if Hillary gets PA, OH and VA, it's over. Those plus Democratic safe states (including MI, MN, and New Mexico for sure against Trump) equals 272 votes. Add Wisconsin and that's 282.
Last edited by Eric the Green; 03-10-2016 at 05:17 PM.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#2827 at 03-10-2016 05:50 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
03-10-2016, 05:50 PM #2827
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

One thing to remember: Rubio is the only candidate left to challenge Trump who has a positive horoscope score to be elected president of the USA. That's not a certain indicator of a nominee (nominees can have bad scores), but it increases the likelihood that if Rubio is knocked out Tuesday, Trump will be the nominee. He has the highest score among Republicans, of course.

Trump still leads Rubio in Florida polls by varying amount; the smallest margin is 7 points.
Last edited by Eric the Green; 03-10-2016 at 07:00 PM.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#2828 at 03-10-2016 06:00 PM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
03-10-2016, 06:00 PM #2828
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

PPP did poll Ohio. Updated with some polls from Marist -- Florida, Illinois, and Ohio. 67 electoral votes. Illinois is no surprise.

I doubt that the donnybrook in Chicago helped Donald Trump, although I have no prior polls to establish how Illinois was before the nastiness.

Do you know what "Favorite Son" means? The effect is worth about 10%, and it generally applies to winners except in max-out situations (Massachusetts for Kerry in 2004 and Obama in Illinois in 2008 or 2012) and to losers. So long as the Presidential nominee has a positive image in a State (which rules out Rick Santorum in Pennsylvania) it is real. Losers? 1972 was the only year in which South Dakota was more Democratic than the US as a whole since WWII. McGovern was thought of rather highly on many issues -- but apparently not on foreign policy and the Vietnam War.

But it looks like more than 10% in Ohio.

Cruz, Rubio, and Trump are really awful candidates, which may exaggerate the effect.

Bernie Sanders vs. Ted Cruz




Bernie Sanders vs. John Kasich




Bernie Sanders vs. Marco Rubio


Bernie Sanders vs. Donald Trump



30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

White -- tie or someone leading with less than 40%.
Last edited by pbrower2a; 03-13-2016 at 02:37 PM. Reason: update with new polls
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."


― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters







Post#2829 at 03-10-2016 06:04 PM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
03-10-2016, 06:04 PM #2829
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
One thing to remember: Rubio is the only candidate left to challenge Trump who has a positive horoscope score to be elected president of the USA. That's not a certain indicator of a nominee (nominees can have bad scores), but it increases the likelihood that if Rubio is knocked out Tuesday, Trump will be the nominee. He has the highest score among Republicans, of course.

Trump still leads Rubio is Florida polls by varying amount; the smallest margin is 7 points.
Kasich absolutely must win Ohio (likely); he becomes a solid challenge to Trump should he win Florida.

...I think that Rubio is done. He has faltered badly, and I see no chance of a speedy recovery. He is quite possibly the emptiest suit since Sarah Palin.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."


― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters







Post#2830 at 03-10-2016 07:02 PM by herbal tee [at joined Dec 2005 #posts 7,115]
---
03-10-2016, 07:02 PM #2830
Join Date
Dec 2005
Posts
7,115

Quote Originally Posted by pbrower2a View Post
...I think that Rubio is done. He has faltered badly, and I see no chance of a speedy recovery. He is quite possibly the emptiest suit since Sarah Palin.
He's likely done in more ways than one. After al, he gave up his Senate seat in this quixotic quest. But maybe his internal polling suggested that he stand down. Consider that he ''won'' his Senate seat in the Tea Party year of 2010, when the opposition party voters did not turn out. In addition, his run was aided by the fact that a third party run split that vote that went against him, yet still was elected with less than 50%.

But hey, he's young, photogenic and there's always room for one more flamed out GOPper on Fox News.







Post#2831 at 03-10-2016 10:02 PM by Marx & Lennon [at '47 cohort still lost in Falwelland joined Sep 2001 #posts 16,709]
---
03-10-2016, 10:02 PM #2831
Join Date
Sep 2001
Location
'47 cohort still lost in Falwelland
Posts
16,709

Quote Originally Posted by herbal tee View Post
... But hey, he's young, photogenic and there's always room for one more flamed out GOPper on Fox News.
No, I see him joining the lobbying clan. It pays better and pays for a lot longer.
Marx: Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.
Lennon: You either get tired fighting for peace, or you die.







Post#2832 at 03-11-2016 12:22 AM by herbal tee [at joined Dec 2005 #posts 7,115]
---
03-11-2016, 12:22 AM #2832
Join Date
Dec 2005
Posts
7,115

Left Arrow And he's still got his Flo-da connections. Natch.

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon View Post
No, I see him joining the lobbying clan. It pays better and pays for a lot longer.
Yeah, I get it.

''Got a tenth amendment issue holding up your project? Let Marco and his partners make federalism work for YOU on Capitol Hill!!!''
[/sarcasm]







Post#2833 at 03-11-2016 11:22 AM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
03-11-2016, 11:22 AM #2833
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

Quote Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon View Post
No, I see him joining the lobbying clan. It pays better and pays for a lot longer.
It's also where the power is in politics.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."


― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters







Post#2834 at 03-12-2016 04:42 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
03-12-2016, 04:42 PM #2834
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Republican primary polls, most-recent polls and March averages:

AZ Trump 37 Cruz 23

CT Trump 24.7 Rubio 14 Kasich 10

FL Trump 42 Rubio 23.5 Cruz 21
March average: Trump 39.9 Rubio 25.7 Cruz 17.8

IN Trump 26 Rubio 17 Cruz 17

MD Trump 34 Cruz 25 Kasich 18 Rubio 14

MO Trump 36 Cruz 29

NJ Trump 38 Rubio 11 Cruz 10

NM Cruz 25 Trump 24

NY Trump 45 Rubio 18 Kasich 18

NC Trump 48 Cruz 28
March average: Trump 40.3 Cruz 27

OH Kasich 34 Trump 29 Cruz 19
March average: Trump 36.5 Kasich 34 Cruz 16.3

PA Trump 36 Rubio 19 Cruz 17 Kasich 10

RI Trump 43 Rubio 25 Kasich 14

UT Rubio 24 Cruz 22 Trump 18

WV Trump 40 Cruz 20 Rubio 15

WI Trump 30 Rubio 20 Cruz 19

First place states: Trump 13, Kasich, Rubio, Cruz: 1 each
Second place states: Rubio 8, Cruz 6, Trump 2

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statew...rimaries,_2016
Last edited by Eric the Green; 03-12-2016 at 05:12 PM.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#2835 at 03-12-2016 05:11 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
03-12-2016, 05:11 PM #2835
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Weighted average nationwide

Trump 34
Cruz 17.6
Rubio 15.3
Kasich 11.3

Using: % totals of latest polls,
x3 in CA, FL and NY
x2 in AZ, IN, IL, MD, MO, NJ, NC, OH, PA, WI
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#2836 at 03-13-2016 02:42 PM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
03-13-2016, 02:42 PM #2836
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

Adding some polls for Florida, Illinois, and Ohio:

Hillary Clinton(D) vs. Ted Cruz (R)




Hillary Clinton vs. John Kasich




Hillary Clinton vs. Marco Rubio



Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump



30% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 3% or less
40% -- lead with 40-49% but a margin of 4% or more
60% -- lead with 50-54%
70% -- lead with 55-59%
90% -- lead with 60% or more

White -- tie or someone leading with less than 40%.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."


― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters







Post#2837 at 03-13-2016 02:48 PM by pbrower2a [at "Michigrim" joined May 2005 #posts 15,014]
---
03-13-2016, 02:48 PM #2837
Join Date
May 2005
Location
"Michigrim"
Posts
15,014

Example of polls that I use:





http://maristpoll.marist.edu/313-tru...n-fl-il-and-oh


Savor the polling involving Marco Rubio if you like him or the results. I expect him to drop out after he loses the Florida primary, and I expect to make no further maps involving him starting on Wednesday. Stars? No. Probability and statistics.

...I use the latest polls because

(1) I lack the mathematical power for weighted averages, and
(2) at this point, events can make recent polling irrelevant.
Last edited by pbrower2a; 03-13-2016 at 03:01 PM.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."


― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters







Post#2838 at 03-13-2016 03:40 PM by Dan '82 [at joined Mar 2014 #posts 349]
---
03-13-2016, 03:40 PM #2838
Join Date
Mar 2014
Posts
349








Post#2839 at 03-13-2016 07:53 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
03-13-2016, 07:53 PM #2839
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

It looks like Sanders has the chance to do in Illinois and perhaps Ohio what he did in Michigan, according to the latest polls.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#2840 at 03-14-2016 08:53 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
03-14-2016, 08:53 PM #2840
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

To be accurate in the Democratic primary, media should be clear that Hillary's delegate lead includes about 440 superdelegates, and that these delegates could switch sides away from her as they did in 2008, if Sanders catches up and passes her in elected delegates.

Right now real clear policies lists the delegate count as 1235 for Hillary Clinton and 580 for Sanders. If you subtract 440 from Hillary's total, you get only about 800, to over 600 for Sanders. So Sanders just needs to narrow the gap by something over 200 to have a chance to convert half the superdelegates and half the 227 uncommitted delegates to his cause. Trump leads Cruz by 90, although he's poised to double that lead tomorrow.
Last edited by Eric the Green; 03-14-2016 at 11:24 PM.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#2841 at 03-14-2016 09:10 PM by MordecaiK [at joined Mar 2014 #posts 1,086]
---
03-14-2016, 09:10 PM #2841
Join Date
Mar 2014
Posts
1,086

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
It looks like Sanders has the chance to do in Illinois and perhaps Ohio what he did in Michigan, according to the latest polls.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/
And Missouri. It's going to be an interesting set of elections. Because according to CNN, quite a few Democrats in Ohio are switching to Republican to vote for Trump. Trump knows what he's doing when he antagonises protesters. He cements the authoritarian vote. Which by the way is the vote that put and kept Bill Clinton in the White House in the 1990s and was the reason why Bill Clinton was so tough on crime and welfare.







Post#2842 at 03-14-2016 09:47 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
03-14-2016, 09:47 PM #2842
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Latest Republican primary polls

AZ Trump 37 Cruz 23 Kasich 15 Rubio 12
CA Trump 38 Cruz 22 Kasich 20 Rubio 10
CT Trump 25 Rubio 14 Kasich 10 Cruz 6
CO Rubio 19 Trump 17 Cruz 14 Kasich 1
FL Trump 44 Rubio 26 Cruz 18 Kasich 10
IL Trump 38 Cruz 34 Kasich 16 Rubio 11
IN Trump 26 Cruz 17 Rubio 17 Kasich 1
MD Trump 34 Cruz 25 Kasich 18 Rubio 14
MO Trump 36 Cruz 29 Rubio 9 Kasich 8
NJ Trump 38 Rubio 11 Cruz 10 Kasich 8
NM Cruz 25 Trump 24 Rubio 19 Kasich 4
NY Trump 45 Rubio 18 Kasich 18 Cruz 11
NC Trump 44 Cruz 33 Kasich 11 Rubio 7
OH Kasich 44 Trump 38 Cruz 12 Rubio 2
PA Trump 36 Rubio 19 Cruz 17 Kasich 10
RI Trump 43 Rubio 25 Kasich 14 Cruz 10
UT Rubio 24 Cruz 22 Trump 18 Kasich 4
WV Trump 40 Cruz 20 Rubio 15 Kasich 6
WI Trump 30 Rubio 20 Cruz 19 Kasich 8

My fun weighted average:
CA x4
NY FL x3
AZ IL IN MD MO NC NJ OH PA WI x2

Trump 33.2
Cruz 19.5
Rubio 15.2
Kasich 12.9

Note: I also used averages for several late polls in CA, FL, IL, NC and OH.
Last edited by Eric the Green; 03-14-2016 at 11:23 PM.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#2843 at 03-14-2016 09:58 PM by XYMOX_4AD_84 [at joined Nov 2012 #posts 3,073]
---
03-14-2016, 09:58 PM #2843
Join Date
Nov 2012
Posts
3,073

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
Latest Republican primary polls

AZ Trump 37 Cruz 23 Kasich 15 Rubio 12
CA Trump 38 Cruz 22 Kasich 20 Rubio 10
CT Trump 25 Rubio 14 Kasich 10 Cruz 6
CO Rubio 19 Trump 17 Cruz 14 Kasich 1
FL Trump 44 Rubio 26 Cruz 18 Kasich 10
IL Trump 38 Cruz 34 Kasich 16 Rubio 11
IN Trump 26 Cruz 17 Rubio 17 Kasich 1
MD Trump 34 Cruz 25 Kasich 18 Rubio 14
MO Trump 36 Cruz 29 Rubio 9 Kasich 8
NJ Trump 38 Rubio 11 Cruz 10 Kasich 8
NM Cruz 25 Trump 24 Rubio 19 Kasich 4
NY Trump 45 Rubio 18 Kasich 18 Cruz 11
NC Trump 44 Cruz 33 Kasich 11 Rubio 7
OH Kasich 44 Trump 38 Cruz 12 Rubio 2
PA Trump 36 Rubio 19 Cruz 17 Kasich 10
RI Trump 43 Rubio 25 Kasich 14 Cruz 10
UT Rubio 24 Cruz 22 Trump 18 Kasich 4
WV Trump 40 Cruz 20 Rubio 15 Kasich 6
WI Trump 30 Rubio 20 Cruz 19 Kasich 8
I highlighted some ones where Trump is already in trouble or could face a late change of heart from voters. Of course even some of the others could surprise us.
==========================================

#nevertrump







Post#2844 at 03-14-2016 11:20 PM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
03-14-2016, 11:20 PM #2844
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Quote Originally Posted by MordecaiK View Post
And Missouri. It's going to be an interesting set of elections. Because according to CNN, quite a few Democrats in Ohio are switching to Republican to vote for Trump. Trump knows what he's doing when he antagonises protesters. He cements the authoritarian vote. Which by the way is the vote that put and kept Bill Clinton in the White House in the 1990s and was the reason why Bill Clinton was so tough on crime and welfare.
Interesting, although I disagree with your last sentence. He was tough on crime and welfare because he was a centrist trying to win re-election in the age of Reaganomics and culture-war dog whistles.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#2845 at 03-14-2016 11:36 PM by MordecaiK [at joined Mar 2014 #posts 1,086]
---
03-14-2016, 11:36 PM #2845
Join Date
Mar 2014
Posts
1,086

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
I think if Hillary gets PA, OH and VA, it's over. Those plus Democratic safe states (including MI, MN, and New Mexico for sure against Trump) equals 272 votes. Add Wisconsin and that's 282.
Democrats are crossing over to vote for Trump IN THE PRIMARY! And that's "Reagan Democrats", the kind of Dems who supported Hillary over Obama 8 years ago, not Sanders Dems. Trump appeals to authoritarians more than Hillary does.
At the end of the day, Hillary is a 3T candidate running in a 4T election. Hillary's best chance was probably 2004, especially given how close that election was and how John Kerry almost won. In 2004, Hillary would have represented something mainstream and something accepted. In 2004, her support for the Iraq War would have been an asset, not a liability. She might even have been able to win a second term in 2008, perhaps leaving Barack Obama for 2012 or even 2016. Her warlike ways would not have been the danger to the country in 2004 that they are today.
I don't think Hillary could carry Ohio in the general election. Too many authoritarians in southern Ohio and too many people who have been hurt by free trade in Ohio. Bernie MAY be able to carry Ohio against Trump in the general election, but his opposition to coal mining and fracking will hurt him there. Even in Virgnia, the overall turnout for Republicans in the primary election was higher than turnout for the Democrats. Pennsylvania, again is coal and now gas country, though of the three states, Hillary would have her best shot in Pennsylvania.







Post#2846 at 03-15-2016 12:08 AM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
03-15-2016, 12:08 AM #2846
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Quote Originally Posted by MordecaiK View Post
Democrats are crossing over to vote for Trump IN THE PRIMARY! And that's "Reagan Democrats", the kind of Dems who supported Hillary over Obama 8 years ago, not Sanders Dems. Trump appeals to authoritarians more than Hillary does.

At the end of the day, Hillary is a 3T candidate running in a 4T election. Hillary's best chance was probably 2004, especially given how close that election was and how John Kerry almost won. In 2004, Hillary would have represented something mainstream and something accepted. In 2004, her support for the Iraq War would have been an asset, not a liability. She might even have been able to win a second term in 2008, perhaps leaving Barack Obama for 2012 or even 2016. Her warlike ways would not have been the danger to the country in 2004 that they are today.
Hillary would not have been elected in 2004, according to my astrological system, which indicates at the least that the tides would not have favored her. People with a Saturn Return coming are rarely elected; although a few get elected and then die, get saddled with a horrible war, or in the rare best-case scenario are not re-elected. Bush himself was one of those, but Hillary would have been more-directly affected. In addition, the incumbent was favored to win in 2004. 2008 was a good year for her, but Obama stole her chance. He could have waited until 2016.

I doubt most people today see Hillary as warlike, just because she voted for the Iraq War in 2002. But in 2004, having voted for it and supported it too long would have been a distinct liability for nomination. Democrats wanted an anti-war politician, and even though Kerry voted for the war too, he was famous for opposing the war in Vietnam and came out strongly against the Iraq war. Hillary's resume was still weak in 2004 too. She had no chance. Today, a stronger more-warlike candidate is more-likely to win, because of the fears aroused by the IS, Russia and the migrations. An activist foreign policy is needed today, whereas it was seen as destructive in 2004.

I don't think Hillary could carry Ohio in the general election. Too many authoritarians in southern Ohio and too many people who have been hurt by free trade in Ohio. Bernie MAY be able to carry Ohio against Trump in the general election, but his opposition to coal mining and fracking will hurt him there. Even in Virgnia, the overall turnout for Republicans in the primary election was higher than turnout for the Democrats. Pennsylvania, again is coal and now gas country, though of the three states, Hillary would have her best shot in Pennsylvania.
Voters in the Republican race are interested in the race, because of the media hype about Trump. It is a more exciting primary. This could change if Trump wraps it up tomorrow while Sanders gets stronger. The likelihood is that the Republican race will get less interesting and the Democratic race more interesting in the next 3 months. This won't matter in the general election. By opposing TPP, Hillary may have blunted the impact of such support she gave as first lady to free trade. Ohio is one of the two most critical and closest swing states in the nation. It is too close to call every year, and too hard to call based on generalizations like you have stated.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#2847 at 03-15-2016 01:22 AM by MordecaiK [at joined Mar 2014 #posts 1,086]
---
03-15-2016, 01:22 AM #2847
Join Date
Mar 2014
Posts
1,086

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
Interesting, although I disagree with your last sentence. He was tough on crime and welfare because he was a centrist trying to win re-election in the age of Reaganomics and culture-war dog whistles.
Precisely my point. Being a centerist MEANS appealing to authoritarians at least to some degree. And being a governor of a Southern state taught Bill Clinton the skills he needed to do so. Ironically, Trump, despite basing his appeal on authoritarians IS a Centerist too. He is just realistic enough to understand that the Center has turned against things like free trade and that given leadership that accepts this rather than leadership that, in fief to the Big Banks puts the questioning of neo-liberal free trade off limits, that he will have a major following in this 4T election.







Post#2848 at 03-15-2016 02:05 AM by MordecaiK [at joined Mar 2014 #posts 1,086]
---
03-15-2016, 02:05 AM #2848
Join Date
Mar 2014
Posts
1,086

Quote Originally Posted by Eric the Green View Post
Hillary would not have been elected in 2004, according to my astrological system, which indicates at the least that the tides would not have favored her. People with a Saturn Return coming are rarely elected; although a few get elected and then die, get saddled with a horrible war, or in the rare best-case scenario are not re-elected. Bush himself was one of those, but Hillary would have been more-directly affected. In addition, the incumbent was favored to win in 2004. 2008 was a good year for her, but Obama stole her chance. He could have waited until 2016.
Could rhymes with should, and I get the impression that you wish Obama HAD waited until 2016. Which brings up the interesting question of why Obama DIDN"T wait until 2016. I have a theory about that.
There have been a number of theories (some of which verging on birtherism) that show Barack Obama has having a background and upbringing tied to the CIA, but most conservatively, Stanley Dunham, Barack Obama's maternal grandfather DOES seem to have been OSS and later CIA Station Chief in Beirut during the 1940s and 1950s. And I am reasonably certain of this because the father of one of my professors was in the OSS and served with and was good friends with Stanley Dunham. And during Barack Obama's adolescence, Barack was raised by his maternal grandfather and grandmother in Hawaii after they retired from intelliegence work.
In 2008, the CIA had a problem and it was a serious one. Bill Clinton had attempted to downgrade and possibly even abolish the CIA by moving much of it's functions over to the FBI. While the Bush Administration for it's part made it quite clear that it wanted the CIA to tell it what it wanted to hear in the Mideast and hew to a neo-conservative line, which the CIA did in 2003 but rebelled against in it's 2007 intelligence estimate, which was highly critical of the Iraq War. John McCain would have been a continuation of the Bush Administration.
So faced with two alternatives that could be institutionally devastating to the CIA, the CIA perhaps chose a third, by encouraging an earnest freshman Senator from Illinois that under other circumstances it might have wanted to build into a senior Senatorial asset as his career progressed, to run for President. And Obama has delivered for the CIA by building the CIA into what is effectively another branch of the military. That's what his policy of appointing a former CIA Director to be Defence Secretary and General Petraeus to be DCI was all about. And expanding the CIA into drone warfare. Now that the CIA's position is improved, having someone sympathetic in the White House may not be the issue that it was 8 years ago.

I doubt most people today see Hillary as warlike, just because she voted for the Iraq War in 2002. But in 2004, having voted for it and supported it too long would have been a distinct liability for nomination. Democrats wanted an anti-war politician, and even though Kerry voted for the war too, he was famous for opposing the war in Vietnam and came out strongly against the Iraq war. Hillary's resume was still weak in 2004 too. She had no chance. Today, a stronger more-warlike candidate is more-likely to win, because of the fears aroused by the IS, Russia and the migrations. An activist foreign policy is needed today, whereas it was seen as destructive in 2004.
So you think that this country has at least one more Mideast war in it. Maybe so. Americans have a hard time saying no to getting involved in wars.
Frankly, this is one time when an activist foreign policy is NOT needed and in fact may be quite dangerous. Now is a time when we need to question some of our basic assumptions that made sense in 1945 but now may be dangerous. Such as carrying the defence needs of Europe and Japan and allowing them to remain largely disarmed at our expense. Because fiscally and militarily the US needs strong allies now and dosen't have them the US is in a position in which it is likely to get in over it's head in the Mideast and North Africa. Too many commitments and not enough resources to meet those commitments. And no desire on the part of Americans for the kind of REAL war sacrifices that a draft and higher taxes would entail. Jihadis know very well now that the maximum number of troops the US can field at any one time is 185,000, even including rotated National Guard units. Probably a lot less due to sequestration and attrition of the National Guard since the Iraq War. So how activist a foreign policy and at what cost are Americans REALLY willing to support? And for how long?


Voters in the Republican race are interested in the race, because of the media hype about Trump. It is a more exciting primary. This could change if Trump wraps it up tomorrow while Sanders gets stronger. The likelihood is that the Republican race will get less interesting and the Democratic race more interesting in the next 3 months. This won't matter in the general election. By opposing TPP, Hillary may have blunted the impact of such support she gave as first lady to free trade. Ohio is one of the two most critical and closest swing states in the nation. It is too close to call every year, and too hard to call based on generalizations like you have stated.
Yes, I can see Sanders start to pull some support away from a Trump who has the nomination wrapped up. Because Sanders is saying the same thing Trump is in a basically more sane manner on trade and defence. And because voters see Sanders as more trustworthy than either Trump OR Hillary.
I don't think Hillary can blunt the support she gave to NAFTA, which has really hurt people, by opposing TPP. I think few people believe that Hillary will continue to oppose TPP if elected. For that matter, Hillary cannot be trusted to continue to oppose Keystone XL, particularly in the face of a NAFTA suit by Canada that is in the offing. A President Hillary can always find something to like about TPP and a treaty reason to go along with Keystone XL. And everybody knows it.
What I fear most happening (but which I assume your horoscopes have ruled out) is that Trump or Sanders or both could be assassinated as Robert Kennedy and Huey Long (and almost FDR and Ronald Reagan) were. Such is often the fate of populists in this country.







Post#2849 at 03-15-2016 02:24 AM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
03-15-2016, 02:24 AM #2849
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Could rhymes with should, and I get the impression that you wish Obama HAD waited until 2016. Which brings up the interesting question of why Obama DIDN'T wait until 2016. I have a theory about that.
There have been a number of theories (some of which verging on birtherism) that show Barack Obama has having a background and upbringing tied to the CIA, but most conservatively, Stanley Dunham, Barack Obama's maternal grandfather DOES seem to have been OSS and later CIA Station Chief in Beirut during the 1940s and 1950s. And I am reasonably certain of this because the father of one of my professors was in the OSS and served with and was good friends with Stanley Dunham. And during Barack Obama's adolescence, Barack was raised by his maternal grandfather and grandmother in Hawaii after they retired from intelligence work.
I'm sure none of this would matter today. Yes, in 2008 I thought both candidates were about evenly good, and I wanted Hillary to win only because she was older and he was younger. Now, if she wins in 2016 she might not run again in 2020. But, I voted Green anyway in 2008.
In 2008, the CIA had a problem and it was a serious one. Bill Clinton had attempted to downgrade and possibly even abolish the CIA by moving much of it's functions over to the FBI. While the Bush Administration for it's part made it quite clear that it wanted the CIA to tell it what it wanted to hear in the Mideast and hew to a neo-conservative line, which the CIA did in 2003 but rebelled against in it's 2007 intelligence estimate, which was highly critical of the Iraq War. John McCain would have been a continuation of the Bush Administration.
So faced with two alternatives that could be institutionally devastating to the CIA, the CIA perhaps chose a third, by encouraging an earnest freshman Senator from Illinois that under other circumstances it might have wanted to build into a senior Senatorial asset as his career progressed, to run for President. And Obama has delivered for the CIA by building the CIA into what is effectively another branch of the military. That's what his policy of appointing a former CIA Director to be Defence Secretary and General Petraeus to be DCI was all about. And expanding the CIA into drone warfare. Now that the CIA's position is improved, having someone sympathetic in the White House may not be the issue that it was 8 years ago.
I can't see that the CIA encouraged Obama to run, or would have made any difference if they had. I don't go for conspiracy theories, generally speaking.
So you think that this country has at least one more Mideast war in it. Maybe so. Americans have a hard time saying no to getting involved in wars.
No, an activist foreign policy doesn't necessarily mean another war (that answers your next paragraph too; no need to reply to it). As you know, I am predicting Hillary won't get us involved in another war. The Jupiter cycle argues strongly against it. You've seen my video by now I'm sure.

Hillary would pull some strings and shift support as needed to move things in the right direction, I think. She does have the aggressive streak that you say, as indicated in her horoscope. But I don't think the time is right for that to lead to a new war. And her background is not neo-con, but diplomacy backed by strength and resolve.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece







Post#2850 at 03-15-2016 02:37 AM by Eric the Green [at San Jose CA joined Jul 2001 #posts 22,504]
---
03-15-2016, 02:37 AM #2850
Join Date
Jul 2001
Location
San Jose CA
Posts
22,504

Quote Originally Posted by MordecaiK View Post
Yes, I can see Sanders start to pull some support away from a Trump who has the nomination wrapped up. Because Sanders is saying the same thing Trump is in a basically more sane manner on trade and defense. And because voters see Sanders as more trustworthy than either Trump OR Hillary.
It won't only be that, but as I said, the Democratic race could become more interesting because it may still be unresolved and Sanders may be gaining strength until the end. The question is how close he will come to actually winning. He has a 200-delegate gap in proportional primaries, with about half of them left to go. And Hillary has an advantage in New York. So I dunno, but we'll see.
I don't think Hillary can blunt the support she gave to NAFTA, which has really hurt people, by opposing TPP. I think few people believe that Hillary will continue to oppose TPP if elected. For that matter, Hillary cannot be trusted to continue to oppose Keystone XL, particularly in the face of a NAFTA suit by Canada that is in the offing. A President Hillary can always find something to like about TPP and a treaty reason to go along with Keystone XL. And everybody knows it.
She can't be trusted to do the right thing on those issues, but I don't assume that she won't either. I don't think Clinton's senate record is so clear on trade, and she's generally good on global warming and environmental issues. What she did or said as first lady is not so relevant.
What I fear most happening (but which I assume your horoscopes have ruled out) is that Trump or Sanders or both could be assassinated as Robert Kennedy and Huey Long (and almost FDR and Ronald Reagan) were. Such is often the fate of populists in this country.
Reagan was not a populist, of course, and Trump is only partly one. But no I don't think that is in the stars. I don't have a certainty about assassinations during campaigns though. I can only say I don't think the horoscopes of Sanders or Trump indicate such a thing. Trump has Mars rising, but in harmonious aspect. The planetary positions now don't indicate such a thing happening to him, FWIW.

I do see by the way that an offensive against the IS is due to begin in a month or two, and probably some other hot spots will explode.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive,

Eric A. Meece
-----------------------------------------