• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Presidential Primaries 2016

Just heard on NPR broadcast that 10-15% of the early vote among democratic voters who voted for Obama in 2012 in Ohio had registered Republican this time around, pundit was saying this is related to having Kasich running in the Republican primary. Could be an interesting turn of events, I'll give a longer look for some reference after I get something to eat, its been a long day. It was just a short blurb if anyone else knows anything more detailed about this please post a link.
 
Trakar said:
Just heard on NPR broadcast that 10-15% of the early vote among democratic voters who voted for Obama in 2012 in Ohio had registered Republican this time around, pundit was saying this is related to having Kasich running in the Republican primary. Could be an interesting turn of events, I'll give a longer look for some reference after I get something to eat, its been a long day. It was just a short blurb if anyone else knows anything more detailed about this please post a link.
Click to expand...
I was listening to the same (or a similar) story and I heard that differently. They said numbers have shifted but they don't know if it means voters switching over or just different numbers of people showing interest in the primary.

And shouldn't you be concerned? Bernie depends on high turnout.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
I was listening to the same (or a similar) story and I heard that differently. They said numbers have shifted but they don't know if it means voters switching over or just different numbers of people showing interest in the primary.

And shouldn't you be concerned? Bernie depends on high turnout.
Click to expand...

Ohio is set up so that people can basically declare their party by which ballot they ask for at the polling place. And yes, I am somewhat concerned that this is one of the reasons that Democratic turnout is lower in several primary states who have already , or soon will be, voting. It really doesn't matter to me whether they are switching over to vote for or against Trump. but from the few related discussions I have read, most of the cross over are younger, mid-20s to mid-40s, blue-collar workers. Personally, I think Sanders is more hurt by this than Clinton, but that's my bias.

My larger concern is the crossover becoming permanent and these people becoming moderate Republicans (similar to the Reagan Democrats) rather than returning home after the primaries or even the general election. My concern are the estimates of the size of this movement. 1-6% is probably a normal variance, 10-15% is a potential problem that is much more concerning.

Turnout will indeed tell the tale. A suppressed Democratic turnout tomorrow combined with another record turnout by the GOP will be extremely problematic regardless of which Democratic candidate wins their primary states.
 
Trebuchet said:
I think the only person in the country not surprised by Trump's success is Trump himself.
Click to expand...

Maybe the people who are voting for him, attending his rallies, etc?

I still think his reality check will come in the general election. He has been so toxic, including to other Republicans, I think there will be at least some portion of usually reliable Republican voters who won't come out to vote for him in November.

It does remain to be seen if he has any other tricks up his sleeve, but his promises seem to be all pie in the sky.
 
Puppycow said:
I still think his reality check will come in the general election. He has been so toxic, including to other Republicans, I think there will be at least some portion of usually reliable Republican voters who won't come out to vote for him in November...
Click to expand...

Against Sanders, you may well be right, against Hillary, however, he'll likely draw not only record numbers of Republicans to turn out, he'll probably pick up most of the independents as well. It is still really hard for many Democratic voters to understand how much the Right hates HRC, much less how the middle and much of the Left actively dislike her. About the closest I've ever been able to compare it to, would be like having Cheney (or possible Cruz) as the Republican prohibitive front-runner. Having HRC as the Democratic nominee practically guarantees a strong and energized Republican turnout in November, regardless of who their candidate ends up being.
 
Trakar said:
Against Sanders, you may well be right, against Hillary, however, he'll likely draw not only record numbers of Republicans to turn out, he'll probably pick up most of the independents as well. It is still really hard for many Democratic voters to understand how much the Right hates HRC, much less how the middle and much of the Left actively dislike her. About the closest I've ever been able to compare it to, would be like having Cheney (or possible Cruz) as the Republican prohibitive front-runner. Having HRC as the Democratic nominee practically guarantees a strong and energized Republican turnout in November, regardless of who their candidate ends up being.
Click to expand...
You seem to not understand that Trump is viewed less favorably among voters than Clinton.
 
Trakar said:
Against Sanders, you may well be right, against Hillary, however, he'll likely draw not only record numbers of Republicans to turn out, he'll probably pick up most of the independents as well. It is still really hard for many Democratic voters to understand how much the Right hates HRC, much less how the middle and much of the Left actively dislike her. About the closest I've ever been able to compare it to, would be like having Cheney (or possible Cruz) as the Republican prohibitive front-runner. Having HRC as the Democratic nominee practically guarantees a strong and energized Republican turnout in November, regardless of who their candidate ends up being.
Click to expand...

The high GOP turnout in the primaries does not necessarily equal a high GOP count in the GE. They're going through the most hotly contested primary in several decades. Everyone's touting the high primary turnout as doom for the Dems (if their choice doesn't win). This ignores that there are probably more people who hate hate hate Trump than do Hillary. Hillary's not expecting logger's vote, believe me. Nor that of any knee-jerk conservatives.

Trump hasn't won 50% in any state. He's sufficiently hated by what's left of the moderate wing of the GOP that they and the "independents" are just a likely to vote Dem. And the Bernie camp, painting Hillary as a tool of the Military-Industrial Complex are actually helping her in the GE with that bloc of legendary Reagan Democrats.
 
Foolmewunz said:
Trump hasn't won 50% in any state. He's sufficiently hated by what's left of the moderate wing of the GOP that they and the "independents" are just a likely to vote Dem. And the Bernie camp, painting Hillary as a tool of the Military-Industrial Complex are actually helping her in the GE with that bloc of legendary Reagan Democrats.
Click to expand...

...perhaps for good reason? Seriously, if she actually IS more-or-less a conservative on fiscal and foreign policy/trade issues (her husband certainly was), shouldn't we point that out? The nomination doesn't belong to her as a birthright. It belongs to whoever wins it. I think we'll see today that it's a lot more competitive than polls and pundits have been suggesting. That's what I'm hoping, anyway.
 
Last edited:
Manopolus said:
...perhaps for good reason? Seriously, if she actually IS more-or-less a conservative on fiscal and foreign policy/trade issues (her husband certainly was), shouldn't we point that out? The nomination doesn't belong to her as a birthright. It belongs to whoever wins it. I think we'll see today that it's a lot more competitive than polls and pundits have been suggesting. That's what I'm hoping, anyway.
Click to expand...

You should spend less time on the soap box. None of the points you are making are actually in response to those that I was making, so you could've just posted without quoting me.

You have to consider ideology in the break-down of the two main parties. That's become clearer in this election than any previous one. The GOP has regressed to antebellum if not medieval standards. The Dems (well, other than Webb) get to carve out the middle and the left. What I was pointing out is that the paleos have been so busy painting Obama and Clinton with that broad creeping socialism brush they love to work with and that the Bernie partisans are ignoring anything progressive she's ever done or supported and comparing her unfavorably to the Clown Car, that when the GE comes around, she's going to sit squarely in the middle.

This is compliments of attacks from both sides. I'm not backing one position or another. Bernie's closer to my own political views. I'm just talking about what I think is going to happen, which is that no amount of silliness from pouty Sanders supporters is going to change the fact that the voters in the key states will not show up for any of the marginal loons the GOP is considering.
 
Foolmewunz said:
You should spend less time on the soap box. None of the points you are making are actually in response to those that I was making, so you could've just posted without quoting me. (...)
Click to expand...



Sorry, I mis-read something in your post. I read it as attacks from the left hurting Hillary in some way, rather than the other way around. Just a little reading comprehension blunder, I guess.
 
Last edited:
Trakar said:
Just heard on NPR broadcast that 10-15% of the early vote among democratic voters who voted for Obama in 2012 in Ohio had registered Republican this time around, pundit was saying this is related to having Kasich running in the Republican primary. Could be an interesting turn of events, I'll give a longer look for some reference after I get something to eat, its been a long day. It was just a short blurb if anyone else knows anything more detailed about this please post a link.
Click to expand...


Here's an interesting Channel 4 (UK) piece on that phenomenon:

 
Clinton is winning big in FL, Ohio and N Carolina. If Sanders wins in Missouri and/or Illinois it won't likely be by large margins.
 
Trebuchet said:
I think the only person in the country not surprised by Trump's success is Trump himself.
Click to expand...
You know these "Most likely to succeed" polls some graduating high school classes have? If some guy (it is always a guy) gets exactly one vote, and it is his own, he should be taken seriously. Not a guarantee of success of course, but is not necessarily delusional.
 
Mike! said:
Well, in this case, it's more of it being wrecked from inside by a bull in the china shop, but I regretfully agree.
Click to expand...

At least the death of the Whigs was over a real issue:Slavery.
And it is considered part of the build up to the Civil War, a precedent I hope does not hold;people forget how horrible the Civil War really was.

I never ceased to be amazed about how many who endlessly talk about politics are so ignorant of history.Seems to me that an interest in history would be essential to someone interested in politics.
 
Last edited:
Mike! said:
Well, in this case, it's more of it being wrecked from inside by a bull in the china shop, but I regretfully agree.
Click to expand...
If it were not Trump, it would have been some other populist. A populist revolt in Republican Party -- and to a lesser extent in Democratic, -- has been building up for about a generation.
 
Mark6 said:
If it were not Trump, it would have been some other populist. A populist revolt in Republican Party -- and to a lesser extent in Democratic, -- has been building up for about a generation.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But I am concerned that the GOP populist revolt is going to the dark side of populism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom