|
|
Â
|
| Quote: |
| Fox News, which is hosting the first debate next Thursday in Cleveland, says that they will include the top 10 candidates from an average of the five most recent national polls. But Fox News isn’t saying which polls they will use to calculate their average, leaving the rest of us to play a guessing game. [...] Who's In According to an ABC News analysis of five recent major national polls on July 27 ... Donald Trump, Jeb Bush, Scott Walker, Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Mike Huckabee and Ben Carson. Who's Out Another three candidates are almost certainly going to miss the mark. Carly Fiorina, George Pataki and Lindsey Graham [...] Chris Christie and Rick Perry currently hold the last two spots on the debate stage. John Kasich, who just announced his candidacy last week, misses the debate stage by just two-tenths of a percentage point. Rick Santorum and Bobby Jindal are close behind, but still watching from home on Aug. 6. FULL STANDINGS (as of July 27): 1. Trump – 18 percent 2. Bush – 14 percent 3. Walker – 11 percent 4. Rubio – 6 percent T5. Paul – 6 percent T5. Cruz – 6 percent 7. Huckabee – 6 percent 8. Carson – 5 percent 9. Christie – 3.0 percent 10. Perry – 2.2 percent 11. Kasich – 2.0 percent 12. Santorum – 1.6 percent 13. Jindal – 1.4 percent 14. Fiorina – 0.8 percent 15. Pataki – 0.6 percent 16. Graham – 0.2 percent [...] |
Republican voters determined that Trump, Cruz, and Carson should have a platform - and that Perry, Santorum, and Graham need to take a backseat.
If anything people should be thankful that Fox/RNC made the cutoff at 10 candidates, which is still an absurd amount, and not 7 or 8 which would have left off Christie and Kasich.
Dems are saying they did that to make the the statistical distance between Kasich and Perry greater. It certainly looks that way.
As far as why Perry doesn't get more respect, he really did start looking wacky back in 2012. It wasn't just the "oops" moment. He had an incident in Vermont or New Hampshire (I forget) where he looked kinda drunk. Once he started downhill back then, he never regained any respect, and I think that has carried over.
aren't we in EDT at this time of year?
Republican voters determined that Trump, Cruz, and Carson should have a platform - and that Perry, Santorum, and Graham need to take a backseat.
If anything people should be thankful that Fox/RNC made the cutoff at 10 candidates, which is still an absurd amount, and not 7 or 8 which would have left off Christie and Kasich.
This is a fair topic for discussion. There are a lot of grass-roots Republicans in New Hampshire, Iowa and South Carolina who disagree vehemently with the Fox News process and are on the record as protesting it. There is more than one way to do anything, but the traditional route of trying to make connections with voters on the ground in the early primary states is being ignored. Now that may change when the primaries are actually at hand.
Quote:
Blaming Fox or the RNC is a bit of a cop out. They decided the 10 people based on polling . . . who do you think are the people that they're polling?
Republican voters determined that Trump, Cruz, and Carson should have a platform - and that Perry, Santorum, and Graham need to take a backseat.
If anything people should be thankful that Fox/RNC made the cutoff at 10 candidates, which is still an absurd amount, and not 7 or 8 which would have left off Christie and Kasich.
This is a fair topic for discussion. There are a lot of grass-roots Republicans in New Hampshire, Iowa and South Carolina who disagree vehemently with the Fox News process and are on the record as protesting it. There is more than one way to do anything, but the traditional route of trying to make connections with voters on the ground in the early primary states is being ignored. Now that may change when the primaries are actually at hand.
I don't know if there is any practical way to do it. The number is unwieldy, not that that is a bad thing. Maybe some sort of playoff system could work where you do groups of 4-5 and come up with scores and rankings and then re-group for the next one. With 10, you will not get to know anything about anyone and will most likely just get canned answers without give and take. The other way to do it would be to have a swimsuit competition before you had the questions event.
"While FOX is taking a lot of heat, the RNC deserves as much blame for sanctioning this process. They should not be picking winners and losers. That's the job of the voters," Beynon added.
Well, the runner up for the 2012 nomination hasn't done diddly this time around and didn't deserve a spot at the adult table. I watched the New Hampshire forum on Monday and he didn't help himself there as well. Combine that with low poll numbers and good riddance. In fact, neither did Perry, who I thought was mediocre on Monday.
Seems like they wanted Kasich in the main debate. The other 9 I think would have made it under almost any formula. That's only problematic due to the fact that Kasich didn't have a breakout day on Monday.
BTW- If it interests anybody, I graded the performances after the forum on Monday and put them into 3 tiers. It doesn't really match up with the polling, and may be skewed by my personal beliefs (though I have a higher opinion of Kasich than his rating) but here it goes:
Tier 1 - Rubio, Walker, Graham, Christie, Bush
Tier 2 - Kasich, Fiorina, Paul, Cruz
Tier 3 - Perry, Santorum, Carson, Jindal, Pataki
Is it all the "oops" moment? Is that really the undoing of his whole candidacy?
I agree with you, but he does nothing for me. And honestly, he was governor of Texas, which was ground zero for the oil/gas boom. Not sure he had that much to do with it sans not getting in the way.
Quote:
Blaming Fox or the RNC is a bit of a cop out. They decided the 10 people based on polling . . . who do you think are the people that they're polling?
Republican voters determined that Trump, Cruz, and Carson should have a platform - and that Perry, Santorum, and Graham need to take a backseat.
If anything people should be thankful that Fox/RNC made the cutoff at 10 candidates, which is still an absurd amount, and not 7 or 8 which would have left off Christie and Kasich.
This is a fair topic for discussion. There are a lot of grass-roots Republicans in New Hampshire, Iowa and South Carolina who disagree vehemently with the Fox News process and are on the record as protesting it. There is more than one way to do anything, but the traditional route of trying to make connections with voters on the ground in the early primary states is being ignored. Now that may change when the primaries are actually at hand.
Those that made the cut are the correct ten. To say one poll was skipped for another so that the gap between Kasich and Perry was larger is BS because Kasich still had higher numbers.
As far as states disagreeing with the process, it is not their place to bitch. Who really gives a crap what Iowa wants or New Hampshire.
Aside from Dems and those looking for entertainment, does Perry vs Trump excoriating each other really have any relevance? Neither will be there at the end and it detracts from the real candidates time.
It's like people who support Trump. It's not really the person or even the policies, it's either their outspokenness (in Trumps case) or with Hillary, she represents the Democrat hierarchy. And the fact that we've become accustomed to politicians lying. Her husband was kind enough to lay the ground work for her in that regard.
Quote:
Maybe close to 60% see Hillary as a big fat liar and yet the majority still vote for her. That's why I see this more as a societal election in terms of what are and aren't important virtues, not in our politicians but ourselves.
It's like people who support Trump. It's not really the person or even the policies, it's either their outspokenness (in Trumps case) or with Hillary, she represents the Democrat hierarchy. And the fact that we've become accustomed to politicians lying. Her husband was kind enough to lay the ground work for her in that regard.
A couple differences I think. Politicians lie in terms of policy promises and in terms promoting their agenda to make it palatable or salable. If they lie because that's their character and their lie's are for other than political issues a la Bill, we usually know it after they are elected. This is neither of those.
Hillary is losing support because she doesn't take a stand on anything, i.e., Keystone Pipeline, Planned Parenthood (last week she was appalled, this week she supports). Talk about the Teflon Don....
I think Joe sees an opportunity and he jumps at it.
Why, because he is quiet? He doesn't stand out? No splash? I think Jeb is best of the lot.
I think he is beatable because his father and brother were President and that will be the hew and cry.
I don't like Walker because he voided a legal contract - sorry government employees I don't like what we are paying you so I'm rescinding your contract.
Quote:
and if Biden gets in, it could be very damaging to her. There was a report in the WSJ yesterday that her support among white women was plummeting. That's not good.
Hillary is losing support because she doesn't take a stand on anything, i.e., Keystone Pipeline, Planned Parenthood (last week she was appalled, this week she supports). Talk about the Teflon Don....
I think Joe sees an opportunity and he jumps at it.
In current-state she doesn't need to take a stand on anything until she gets the default win and the DNC's seal of approval. She's got no competition and unless all of the primary voters magically become 19 year old neckbeards and give Bernie Sanders the nomination, she can just smile and spout empty platitudes to give the other team nothing to work with until the race is actually on and she has a fight on her hand.
Biden likely changes the equation quite a bit, but he did rather disastrously on his last go round and is jumping into this a bit late. Spending 8 years as a VP changes things for him and I think most people on the Democrats side are desperately looking for a (viable) alternative to Hillary, but I'm not sure he's a slam dunk. Coupled with Clinton "inheriting" a lot of the Obama ground game that swept him into the presidency and I'm reserved on the prospect of Biden jumping in, especially if he wants to preserve a legacy he's just built.
I think the D's need some additional mainstream players involved in this process, but Clinton (even with the bad numbers on her favorability) is polling as like an incumbent right now.
is a joke
I would have respect for the candidates had they all boycotted it in unison.
Ronald Reagan proclaimed the 11 Commandment
Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican
by cutting off at 10 candidates the RNC and Fox are implying some Republican candidates are more equal than others
What's maddening is that there's such an easy solution: Throw all 16 names in a hat. Pick out 8. They debate one night. Then, the other 8 debate the next night.
Quote:
why? He's acceptable to both the establishment and the conservatives.
I don't like Walker because he voided a legal contract - sorry government employees I don't like what we are paying you so I'm rescinding your contract.
And that union thing is his calling card. Walker is living a charmed life -- no one is talking about his fairly poor performance as governor.
I dont think you can really evaluate anyone until they have their "moment", especially non-Senators. That's when the other campaigns start dumping on them. Most semi- to well-informed voters dont really know a lot about these guys. We form an opinion based on stuff we do know about: (1) stated policy positions, and (2) how they carry themselves (charisma, public speaking, not taking of guff etc.). For a guy like Rubio, that's all there is to know -- the curse of being a Senator is having a voting records, but the blessing is not having a governance record. But the governors? Lets first see how they actually did. That's not happening yet.
Quote:
In comment 12402727 buford said:
Quote:
and if Biden gets in, it could be very damaging to her. There was a report in the WSJ yesterday that her support among white women was plummeting. That's not good.
Hillary is losing support because she doesn't take a stand on anything, i.e., Keystone Pipeline, Planned Parenthood (last week she was appalled, this week she supports). Talk about the Teflon Don....
I think Joe sees an opportunity and he jumps at it.
In current-state she doesn't need to take a stand on anything until she gets the default win and the DNC's seal of approval. She's got no competition and unless all of the primary voters magically become 19 year old neckbeards and give Bernie Sanders the nomination, she can just smile and spout empty platitudes to give the other team nothing to work with until the race is actually on and she has a fight on her hand.
Biden likely changes the equation quite a bit, but he did rather disastrously on his last go round and is jumping into this a bit late. Spending 8 years as a VP changes things for him and I think most people on the Democrats side are desperately looking for a (viable) alternative to Hillary, but I'm not sure he's a slam dunk. Coupled with Clinton "inheriting" a lot of the Obama ground game that swept him into the presidency and I'm reserved on the prospect of Biden jumping in, especially if he wants to preserve a legacy he's just built.
I think the D's need some additional mainstream players involved in this process, but Clinton (even with the bad numbers on her favorability) is polling as like an incumbent right now.
Sadly, you are correct. Her not taking a stand is not new but should be disturbing for Dems. What are they backing her for, because she's Bill's wife? She should be made to take a stance on a few issues.
She was gifted Moynihan's senate seat for standing by Bill and not walking out after Monica Lewinski. She was Sec State so Obama could control her (enemies closer).
I hope Joe jumps in just so she has to answer a question and at least take a position.
When the smoke clears, it's Jeb. Jeb and Hillary - once the clowns have been sent packing - as they are every campaign, they're by far the most popular and presentable.
Honestly - how many upsets have we had in Primaries? Obama in 08'... I can't think of any others in recent memory.
It's always a media circus, but in the end, pretty predictable. America will get what it deserves. Bush/Clinton. About as exciting as the second Dallas Buffalo Superbowl, and it'll have a similar result.
I And honestly, he was governor of Texas, which was ground zero for the oil/gas boom. Not sure he had that much to do with it sans not getting in the way.
Sounds like governance at it's best to me
Quote:
Easily beatable.
Why, because he is quiet? He doesn't stand out? No splash? I think Jeb is best of the lot.
I think he is beatable because his father and brother were President and that will be the hew and cry.
Best at what? Right now, he's best at getting donations.
Quote:
why? He's acceptable to both the establishment and the conservatives.
I don't like Walker because he voided a legal contract - sorry government employees I don't like what we are paying you so I'm rescinding your contract.
I doubt you'd vote for any Republican though. And I was just saying who would be the nominee, not endorsing him.
is a joke
I would have respect for the candidates had they all boycotted it in unison.
Ronald Reagan proclaimed the 11 Commandment
Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican
by cutting off at 10 candidates the RNC and Fox are implying some Republican candidates are more equal than others
What's maddening is that there's such an easy solution: Throw all 16 names in a hat. Pick out 8. They debate one night. Then, the other 8 debate the next night.
How is Fox News making this like American Idol? What is your method, picking out of a hat? That is ridiculous. They took a few different polls, not a poll on their website. The other candidates are getting a forum. It might be more interesting than the main debate.
Quote:
In comment 12402740 section125 said:
Quote:
In comment 12402727 buford said:
Quote:
and if Biden gets in, it could be very damaging to her. There was a report in the WSJ yesterday that her support among white women was plummeting. That's not good.
Hillary is losing support because she doesn't take a stand on anything, i.e., Keystone Pipeline, Planned Parenthood (last week she was appalled, this week she supports). Talk about the Teflon Don....
I think Joe sees an opportunity and he jumps at it.
In current-state she doesn't need to take a stand on anything until she gets the default win and the DNC's seal of approval. She's got no competition and unless all of the primary voters magically become 19 year old neckbeards and give Bernie Sanders the nomination, she can just smile and spout empty platitudes to give the other team nothing to work with until the race is actually on and she has a fight on her hand.
Biden likely changes the equation quite a bit, but he did rather disastrously on his last go round and is jumping into this a bit late. Spending 8 years as a VP changes things for him and I think most people on the Democrats side are desperately looking for a (viable) alternative to Hillary, but I'm not sure he's a slam dunk. Coupled with Clinton "inheriting" a lot of the Obama ground game that swept him into the presidency and I'm reserved on the prospect of Biden jumping in, especially if he wants to preserve a legacy he's just built.
I think the D's need some additional mainstream players involved in this process, but Clinton (even with the bad numbers on her favorability) is polling as like an incumbent right now.
Sadly, you are correct. Her not taking a stand is not new but should be disturbing for Dems. What are they backing her for, because she's Bill's wife? She should be made to take a stance on a few issues.
She was gifted Moynihan's senate seat for standing by Bill and not walking out after Monica Lewinski. She was Sec State so Obama could control her (enemies closer).
I hope Joe jumps in just so she has to answer a question and at least take a position.
Ut oh...... the shiny armor knights are coming for you!
to hit Sanders now would turn off liberal wing
which she needs during the election
to tack too far left would hurt her in the general election
meanwhile she is getting hit by 16 different Republican candidates who are sucking up all the media coverage .
she really can't do anything - but keep her head down -shake a lot of hands in iowa and NH and hope some random hit piece does not get legs and derails her nomination
I am not a big fan of Biden - would prefer Lizzy Warren or Al Gore
as far as Republicans .. it should be Jeb but damn he just doesn't have the charisma of GWB .. so the combination of being boring and the Bush name might hurt him enough to prevent his nomination
Walker has lead a charmed life - if the definition of charmed life is being the handed picked Manchurian Candidate for the Koch Brothers so yes I think he continues his 'Charmed life"
The thing that people are forgetting is the RNC tweaked the Primary system the past few cycles - they front loaded winner take all contests - the idea is that it is best to avoid a long drawn out primary , settle on nominee and start to attack democratic nominee as soon as possible.
But the irony of this system is a guy like Trump could take all the early primaries and get a huge delegate lead - this would ensure a battle till convention or the nightmare scenario Trump actually getting enough momentum to winning nomination.
Honestly - how many upsets have we had in Primaries? Obama in 08'... I can't think of any others in recent memory.
Bill Clinton was not the favorite going into 2000, Jimmy Carter was not favored in '76, George McGovern moved ahead on an Ed Muskie screwup in '72, for starters.
Quote:
In comment 12402781 buford said:
Quote:
why? He's acceptable to both the establishment and the conservatives.
I don't like Walker because he voided a legal contract - sorry government employees I don't like what we are paying you so I'm rescinding your contract.
I doubt you'd vote for any Republican though. And I was just saying who would be the nominee, not endorsing him.
Really? I'm a repub, but not blindly so.
to hit Sanders now would turn off liberal wing
which she needs during the election
to tack too far left would hurt her in the general election
meanwhile she is getting hit by 16 different Republican candidates who are sucking up all the media coverage .
she really can't do anything - but keep her head down -shake a lot of hands in iowa and NH and hope some random hit piece does not get legs and derails her nomination
I am not a big fan of Biden - would prefer Lizzy Warren or Al Gore
as far as Republicans .. it should be Jeb but damn he just doesn't have the charisma of GWB .. so the combination of being boring and the Bush name might hurt him enough to prevent his nomination
Walker has lead a charmed life - if the definition of charmed life is being the handed picked Manchurian Candidate for the Koch Brothers so yes I think he continues his 'Charmed life"
The thing that people are forgetting is the RNC tweaked the Primary system the past few cycles - they front loaded winner take all contests - the idea is that it is best to avoid a long drawn out primary , settle on nominee and start to attack democratic nominee as soon as possible.
But the irony of this system is a guy like Trump could take all the early primaries and get a huge delegate lead - this would ensure a battle till convention or the nightmare scenario Trump actually getting enough momentum to winning nomination.
"Tough Position"?? She doesn't have to do anything and likely has the easiest path to the nomination for a non-incumbent in decades. The excuses people come up with for her are ridiculous.
But nobody is talking about the health insurance cost savings realized by merely opening up the teacher's union pet insurer (WEA Trust) to competition. And sometimes, not always, the savings have been achieved with no change to the plan, just fee negotiation.
Linked is a Politifact article on the issue. While saying that Walker has overstated the benefits, it also points out the positive results from competition.
Link - ( New Window )
And spare me the puppet comments. There is plenty of evidence that Hillary dances to the tune of companies like UBS and Monsanto not to mention foreign companies.
Quote:
In comment 12402803 UAGiant said:
Quote:
In comment 12402740 section125 said:
Quote:
In comment 12402727 buford said:
Quote:
and if Biden gets in, it could be very damaging to her. There was a report in the WSJ yesterday that her support among white women was plummeting. That's not good.
Hillary is losing support because she doesn't take a stand on anything, i.e., Keystone Pipeline, Planned Parenthood (last week she was appalled, this week she supports). Talk about the Teflon Don....
I think Joe sees an opportunity and he jumps at it.
In current-state she doesn't need to take a stand on anything until she gets the default win and the DNC's seal of approval. She's got no competition and unless all of the primary voters magically become 19 year old neckbeards and give Bernie Sanders the nomination, she can just smile and spout empty platitudes to give the other team nothing to work with until the race is actually on and she has a fight on her hand.
Biden likely changes the equation quite a bit, but he did rather disastrously on his last go round and is jumping into this a bit late. Spending 8 years as a VP changes things for him and I think most people on the Democrats side are desperately looking for a (viable) alternative to Hillary, but I'm not sure he's a slam dunk. Coupled with Clinton "inheriting" a lot of the Obama ground game that swept him into the presidency and I'm reserved on the prospect of Biden jumping in, especially if he wants to preserve a legacy he's just built.
I think the D's need some additional mainstream players involved in this process, but Clinton (even with the bad numbers on her favorability) is polling as like an incumbent right now.
Sadly, you are correct. Her not taking a stand is not new but should be disturbing for Dems. What are they backing her for, because she's Bill's wife? She should be made to take a stance on a few issues.
She was gifted Moynihan's senate seat for standing by Bill and not walking out after Monica Lewinski. She was Sec State so Obama could control her (enemies closer).
I hope Joe jumps in just so she has to answer a question and at least take a position.
Ut oh...... the shiny armor knights are coming for you!
You mean slimey armor.
Really? I'm a repub, but not blindly so.
Sorry, I though you were a Democrat. It's hard to keep track.
Quote:
Really? I'm a repub, but not blindly so.
Sorry, I though you were a Democrat. It's hard to keep track.
Why bother. It's hard to guess and keep track of.
There's really no other way this can play out if republicans want their best shot at winning the General election.
There's really no other way this can play out if republicans want their best shot at winning the General election.
LOL Right now, that's my preferred ticket unless they can convince someone like Condi to agree.
I disagree. I really think the last 8 years have changed (or at least put enough space) the perception of Biden. I think he's much more salable to the public.
to hit Sanders now would turn off liberal wing
which she needs during the election
to tack too far left would hurt her in the general election
meanwhile she is getting hit by 16 different Republican candidates who are sucking up all the media coverage .
she really can't do anything - but keep her head down -shake a lot of hands in iowa and NH and hope some random hit piece does not get legs and derails her nomination
I am not a big fan of Biden - would prefer Lizzy Warren or Al Gore
as far as Republicans .. it should be Jeb but damn he just doesn't have the charisma of GWB .. so the combination of being boring and the Bush name might hurt him enough to prevent his nomination
Walker has lead a charmed life - if the definition of charmed life is being the handed picked Manchurian Candidate for the Koch Brothers so yes I think he continues his 'Charmed life"
The thing that people are forgetting is the RNC tweaked the Primary system the past few cycles - they front loaded winner take all contests - the idea is that it is best to avoid a long drawn out primary , settle on nominee and start to attack democratic nominee as soon as possible.
But the irony of this system is a guy like Trump could take all the early primaries and get a huge delegate lead - this would ensure a battle till convention or the nightmare scenario Trump actually getting enough momentum to winning nomination.
Quote:
He'll be the one to go the distance for the GOP. When Rubio drops out he'll throw all of his support to Walker, which will give him the edge over Jeb. Rubio also will likely be Walker's veep choice.
There's really no other way this can play out if republicans want their best shot at winning the General election.
LOL Right now, that's my preferred ticket unless they can convince someone like Condi to agree.
Why would Rubio back Walker unless it means being VP?