The 2016 Presidential Election Trainwreck

[Maximus]

This really could be a big splash year for a third party, if the right candidate emerged. Not that he/she would threaten to win or even win any electoral votes. But I think a reasonable candidate could get a larger % of the popular vote than Perot did. Independents don't want to vote for Hillary or Trump.





http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...ton_trump_race

but who? and the deadline for texas is in like a week. other states are soon after.

[byu71]

I think that the Republicans have, in large, brought this on themselves, so I don't have a lot of sympathy for them. I only wish it was happening to the Democrats too.

I have been saying this for years, the party in order to win welcomed a virus into the party. Because that virus had a large bully pulpit (conservative talk) it was able to whip up support for their causes. Look at these egotistical fringe folks. Coulter, Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, Ingram, etc. Their popularity steadily has gone down, but no one in the republican party has stood up and told them to F off.

It may have taken a while without as much power, but at least now the party wouldn't be cancerous and unlike the democrats wouldn't have been captured by the fringe.

Even the tea party was taken over by the noxious virus and was successfully branded as being much more relevant than they were and much more radical than they really were.

So who doesn't like it when you have been infected by a disabling disease. The trust element for our institutions are at an all time low, I think that is correct and we have two front runners who have huge net negatives.

I guess maybe like the forest you have to eventually burn up to start a again. I remember the repubs being doomed with Nixon and then Goldwater. They or a reasonable variation of them will return, because if we get another term of Obama, people will recognize the virus and infection in what used to be the democrats.

[Omaha 680]

but who? and the deadline for texas is in like a week. other states are soon after.

Instead of "could" I should have said "could have been". I don't think a serious 3rd party run will happen. But this was the cycle for it.

[Northwestcoug]

At this point, the Republican Party needs to keep its branding from being completely destroyed by a Trump nomination. The RNC committee meets a week before the convention to finalize and change rules. If Trump gets to 1237 delegates, then they rewrite the rules to say you need 1400 delegates. They have to prevent Trump from getting the nomination. The Trump people will be up in arms and will boycott the party and Hillary will win the presidency, but the GOP will keep its branding and be able to challenge in 4 years. I keep hearing that trump will run as a 3rd party candidate. I'm not even sure that Trump could get on the ballots of many states as a 3rd party by the time the convention rolls around. It won't take long for Trump to fizzle once he has been ousted. History will not look back kindly on Trump. And the GOP will be forever tainted if he is allowed to be their nominee. The Republican Party is a private organization. They can do what they want. They made a big mistake in allowing the state chapters to have open primaries, now there is a hostile takeover of the organization from people not part of that organization. Trump has a plurality of votes but not a majority. What would a corporation do in this situation? They will do whatever is necessary to protect their branding.

This is the problem. Besides nostalgia for Reagan, just what exactly is their brand? Fiscal conservatism? Judicial restraint? Smart power overseas? They've certainly shown this in spades in the last couple of decades...

Wait, I've got it. They are true social conservative warriors. They will continue to fight the good fight against gay marriage and abortion. Oh, and transgender bathroom laws will also be enforced, if Cruz has his way.

I'm not buying what they are selling, and the voters who are are decreasing in numbers and influence. They need to convince a majority of voters to consider letting them have power again. It's not happening with the current iteration of the GOP.

[myboynoah]

Buck up, people. The positive of a Trump-HClinton match-up is that one of them will lose. That will make me happy.

[Maximus]

Instead of "could" I should have said "could have been". I don't think a serious 3rd party run will happen. But this was the cycle for it.

I really wish bloomberg wouldve decided to run.

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

Can someone start the "Who should we call Hitler now? The 2020 Election Thread" please? After being late to the W Hitler, Obama Hitler, Trump Hitler party, I want to be on the ground floor of who is Hitler 4 years from now.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Can someone start the "Who should we call Hitler now? The 2020 Election Thread" please? After being late to the W Hitler, Obama Hitler, Trump Hitler party, I want to be on the ground floor of who is Hitler 4 years from now.

Sorry. Candidates this bad come by only once in a generation.

[USUC]

This is the problem. Besides nostalgia for Reagan, just what exactly is their brand? Fiscal conservatism? Judicial restraint? Smart power overseas? They've certainly shown this in spades in the last couple of decades...

Wait, I've got it. They are true social conservative warriors. They will continue to fight the good fight against gay marriage and abortion. Oh, and transgender bathroom laws will also be enforced, if Cruz has his way.

I'm not buying what they are selling, and the voters who are are decreasing in numbers and influence. They need to convince a majority of voters to consider letting them have power again. It's not happening with the current iteration of the GOP.

Hey, I agree. I was just speaking to what I would do if I was a Republican. The modern Republican Party is concerned mainly with social conservatism. Moving forward with that platform, they will be increasingly unelectable nationally. Fiscal conservatism has to be the republicans future, or another fiscally conservative party will rise and take its place. If Trump is the republican nominee, it will just be easier to start a new party instead of trying to rehabilitate the one he has destroyed.

[Uncle Ted]

Hey, I agree. I was just speaking to what I would do if I was a Republican. The modern Republican Party is concerned mainly with social conservatism. Moving forward with that platform, they will be increasingly unelectable nationally. Fiscal conservatism has to be the republicans future, or another fiscally conservative party will rise and take its place. If Trump is the republican nominee, it will just be easier to start a new party instead of trying to rehabilitate the one he has destroyed.

[YOhio]

Whenever I hear a grown up talk about Libertarianism I'm reminded a bit of a college kid talking about Communism. Both are woefully unrealistic, but at least the Libertarians err on the side of freedom. My biggest issue with the Libertarians is their nonsense foreign policy. If you want to hear how bad libertarian foreign policy sounds at the national level, give a listen to Donald Trump. Of the four major candidates he's by far the closest aligned with the Libertarians neutral isolationism.

[myboynoah]

blah blah blah

HClinton 1.jpg

[USUC]

Whenever I hear a grown up talk about Libertarianism I'm reminded a bit of a college kid talking about Communism. Both are woefully unrealistic, but at least the Libertarians err on the side of freedom. My biggest issue with the Libertarians is their nonsense foreign policy. If you want to hear how bad libertarian foreign policy sounds at the national level, give a listen to Donald Trump. Of the four major candidates he's by far the closest aligned with the Libertarians neutral isolationism.

Trump the closest to libertarians with foreign policy? A classical liberal foreign policy is focused on building positive relationships, with an emphasis on free trade, and avoiding negative relationships, with an emphasis on military non-intervention. Trump is building positive relationships through free trade? Nope. He is giving the international market a gigantic middle finger. Trump avoiding negative relationships through non military intervention? Nope, he wants to nuke the hell out of those damn Muslims.

[I.J. Reilly]

For the libertarian fanboys: http://raikoth.net/libertarian.html

[frank ryan]

For the libertarian fanboys: http://raikoth.net/libertarian.html

This line describes my main frustration with their ideology:


"the tenet that government can do no right and private industry can do no wrong and uses this faith in place of more careful analysis."