5642

Six years, actually.

5643

@Redistrict 4m4 minutes ago
The GOP is perilously close to being hijacked by a pirate. They have three weeks to avoid a November shipwreck. http://53eig.ht/1Qd00V5

5644

Can we stop the politics-talk for a second to just marvel at the grim horror of that abortion of a link-shortening URL there? Jesus 538, get a hold of yourselves.

5645

Especially given that Mrs. Clinton needs to shore up her bona fides within her own party. Picking Kasich (or the other rumor du jour) Bloomberg as a running mate sends a very bad message to a base she’ll need to fire up.

But there is a rationality to it, especially given the current political climate.

There is a very large chunk of the voting public who doesn’t really like the hyper partisanship. Having the two sides work together would actually be attractive, potentially BECAUSE it would be unprecedented.

Going back to McCain, I always thought that if he had chosen Lieberman for his VP it would have been pretty amazing.

5646

“Santos and Vinick” had a nice ring to it back in the day, but even then it seemed too much of a stretch even for TV.

5647

How many of the people who say they don’t like hyper-partisanship would actually cross the aisle to vote for the other party? My guess is, like the fabled and largely mythical “independent voter”, there’s not very many.

5648

My guess is that if something like that came to pass, it would lower turnout on both sides more than it would get people to actually cross their identified party lines.

5649

Party registration is at an all time low, man. In 2013, we had an all time high of 43% of Americans identifying as political independents. Currently, only about 30% identify as Republicans, 30% as Democrats. The independents are larger than either party now. Even when you lump in “leaners” from the independents with the parties, you’re still leaving out around 15% of folks who don’t choose to even say they lean one way or another.

Even in a 3 man race at this point, a truly middle of the road ticket could theoretically win straight up in today’s climate, beating BOTH parties if those parties decided to go way out to the extreme edges.

So if you had one of the parties embrace the middle? They’d likely win big time. They don’t need to even pull folks in from the other party… they just need to get the middle, and they’d crush it with like 70% of the vote.

5650

There is a story in California now about how the GOP registration numbers are dropping. It sounds really bad for them, until you also learn that the DEM registration numbers are dropping. People are just not registering with a party affiliation anymore apparently. The Independent or No Party Preference numbers are rising.

5651

Pretty interesting article. I had no idea about the small number of GOP primary voters in traditionally Democrat states holding such huge political sway. Still, even if the information in that article is correct, it seems like Cruz would have to literally drop out soon AND THEN endorse Rubio for the kind of numbers the GOP needs to oust Trump. I just don’t see that happening. The Republican party may have finally over-crazied itself right into Donald Trumps hands. While I am not a huge fan of the guy, I have to give Trump (or more likely his advisors) respect for having played the game near perfectly thus far. He has literally and very deftly hijacked the GOP.

If he wins the nomination, what are the chances that his concession to the party would be to ask Rubio or Kasich to be his VP? A popular and/or experienced mainline GOP VP pick would help swing spurned party voters back into the fold and could end up giving him the necessary combined numbers to win, especially if Hillary’s VP pick is perceived as inexperienced or weak.

Clinton needs to pick wisely, unless Trump goes off book and brings in someone crazy for his running mate (or maybe the GOP pulls another McCain and saddles him with crazy to sabotage his campaign, but that’s unlikely). HUD boss Julian Castro would seem to be a logical pick, bringing in both younger Dems and the Latino vote. They aren’t going to want to vacate any current senate seats, so I don’t see any of the popular senatorial names getting the nod, as it weakens the party where they need strength the most. I also don’t see the Dems going with an all female ticket, as that’s a political risk I believe the party is unwilling to take right now. That narrows the list considerably. Of course, Joe Biden IS eligible to be VP again, and would lend a big boost from within the party. I think the most entertaining thing I’ve read is how some Constitutional scholars are debating if Clinton can choose her husband to serve as VP. The argument being that he’s ineligible to be “elected” president, but the wording can be interpreted either way on his eligibility to be elected VP. It will never happen, but man, what a boost it would give to her campaign. Plus, think of the hilarity of Bill having to be addressed as “Former President Vice President Bill Clinton” all the time! ;-)

5652

Former President and Vice President and First Husband Bill Clinton!

5653

I feel that even 15% is too high. It is just trendy to say you’re an independent these days even though you really support one party 99% of the time.

I think many democrats don’t feel like the Democratic party is going to the extreme edges at all. Democrat candidates seem to be more center left generally. Bernie is the first real candidate in a while that actually dared to have some deep left positions. The middle ground between Hillary and Kasich is not the center, it is a moderate republican.

I don’t think a lot of things that are considered Left positions should be. Things like Gay rights, Women’s rights, Education, Science and anti corruption. Even if they are considered Left, they should at least not be considered extreme left.

Also what makes you think this strategy would even work? I seem to remember the republican moving ULTRA far to the right and running a platform of complete obstruction, and it worked wonderfully.

5654

I think many democrats don’t feel like the Democratic party is going to the extreme edges at all.

Many republicans feel the same.
But those groups on both sides aren’t really in line with the middle of the country, which is seemingly a plurality.

The middle ground between Hillary and Kasich is not the center, it is a moderate republican.

Well, I think maybe that this is being colored by your own views though. I mean, Hillary has a ton of liberal perspectives on things… but perhaps you just don’t really focus on them, and just take them for granted.

But things like free college? Or all the other stuff that she’s co-opting from the Sanders campaign? That’s not centrist stuff.

I don’t think a lot of things that are considered Left positions should be. Things like Gay rights, Women’s rights, Education, Science and anti corruption. Even if they are considered Left, they should at least not be considered extreme left.

Well, to be clear, things like “science” are not left or right. What is left/right is the policy decisions you make in light of science.

For instance, someone like Kasich openly admits climate change is a thing. But where he may differ from those on the left is how he would choose to address it while preserving economic prosperity.

Also what makes you think this strategy would even work? I seem to remember the republican moving ULTRA far to the right and running a platform of complete obstruction, and it worked wonderfully.

I think it would potentially be harder for them to be as obstructionist if their opponent is not Obama. A lot of that was driven by a fairly irrational hatred of him (which, let’s be fair, was heavily based upon a core of racism).

In many ways, Hillary could also draw exactly that same type of reaction, as she has a history of being a target of polarization, often irrational.

However, having a conservative VP could potentially help this issue. The VP traditionally is the guy who works with Congress to get stuff done… and Kasich’s got some pretty hard core experience there. Is some tea party chump gonna lecture Kasich about government spending? THE ONLY GUY WHO BALANCED THE BUDGET? Yeah, that should be pretty fun to watch.

And the reality is, while Kasich genuinely cares about helping people, he generally does NOT care about being pleasant. He’s got a history of getting into some knock down drag out fights, even with members of his own party, where he simply will not yield to bullshit that gets in the way of actually solving the problems. This could play very well with Congress. He’ll fight with them to get crap done, and the best they’re gonna be able to come up with is what… calling him a RINO?

I mean, you never know. The far right is irrational to the point where reality largely doesn’t matter at all, but at that point whatever. It doesn’t matter what you do then, so fuck it. But I think the majority of congress could actually get something done if they had leadership mixed with a removal of a target to generate irrational angst against.

5655

Eh, that’s the Gallop poll numbers, and I’m not all that fond of their methodology. If I’m reading that right, they ask those questions (“Do you consider yourself R or D?”) in every poll they take, even those that are supposed to be targeted to one state or one group (e.g, likely GOP primary voters). Thus that long list of polls may or may not require a pretty big asterisk next to an awful lot of them.

The Pew data looks to be a little more deep and representative of the population in the country… if not the “likely voters”. It’s about nine months old though.

5656

The thing to bear in mind there though is that those numbers include the leaners. Those are just folks who are near the middle, but off to the side. Those people could certainly go for a middle of the road candidate… because if they weren’t near the middle, then they’d be in one camp or the other.

5657

I suspect those leaners vote for one party fairly consistently.

5658

That’s the dream of third-party centrists, but there’s just no evidence that there’s a path to electoral success there. Most people identify with a party…true independents are somewhere around 10% of the voting public, not enough to build a coalition around, really.

5659

But that’s the thing. It’s changing.

Leaners DO vote for one party fairly consistently, but that’s because both parties continue to move further from the center. If both move from the center, you’re still closer to the same one, so you’re still going to vote for them.

But at some point, a centrist becomes closer to you than the policies of the party you normally vote for.

5660

Except the VP is in position to be President, and if I don’t want Kasich as President there is no way I would vote for him as VP. It’s not a compromise, it’s a good way to get the GOP in the Presidency even if they don’t win.

5661

Guess what?
You’d vote for that ticket anyway.