But she has a huge lead. You would think the logical political strategy would be to coast in, and not invite unneeded attention. It's almost as if she can't help herself. What's really to gain by centralizing these issues? Democrats already are known to have a more populist position on guns and race than Republicans.
Yes, but Bush won in 2000 and 2004 due to a supreme court decision, winning with a minority of the popular vote, a weak opponent in 2004 and a large wave of patriotism stemming from 9/11. You could argue that Obama got similar help due to the Anti-Bush sentiment in 2008, but I think any political analysis would say that the GOP has an uphill battle this election.
In post 3, MonkeyMan576 wrote:But she has a huge lead. You would think the logical political strategy would be to coast in, and not invite unneeded attention. It's almost as if she can't help herself. What's really to gain by centralizing these issues? Democrats already are known to have a more populist position on guns and race than Republicans.
In post 10, SleepyKrew wrote:You used facts in a misleading way which prompted me to use a product that I've already got a better version of. You're a natural.
In post 3, MonkeyMan576 wrote:But she has a huge lead. You would think the logical political strategy would be to coast in, and not invite unneeded attention. It's almost as if she can't help herself. What's really to gain by centralizing these issues? Democrats already are known to have a more populist position on guns and race than Republicans.
I can't make myself vote for Hilary because I know she will basically be the same as a generic republican, thus when she gets the now I will not vote in this election, probably. It really depends on what local shit is going down.
In post 16, CooLDoG wrote:I can't make myself vote for Hilary because I know she will basically be the same as a generic republican, thus when she gets the now I will not vote in this election, probably. It really depends on what local shit is going down.
first we need voting reform so we can actually have an effective congress... the presidential election is a popularity contest that doesn't make much difference in the long run
In post 22, inte wrote:first we need voting reform so we can actually have an effective congress... the presidential election is a popularity contest that doesn't make much difference in the long run
Too true!
Definitions are the guardians of rationality, the first line of defense against the chaos of mental disintegration.
especially for example: obama's exec order to force guantanamo to follow army procedures for torture... he wasn't able to actually close it down like he said in his 2008 election because congress threatened to cut funding to all his shit
exec orders can be rescinded by the next president - i.e. no actual lasting impact