Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 01-29-2019, 12:15 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur866 View Post
Why are you bringing up how many yards the other team got, when what's important is how many touchdowns they got?
Because "yardage" here is an analogy for an important metric of growing vs "constantly-shrinking".
  #102  
Old 01-29-2019, 12:15 PM
Bryan Ekers's Avatar
Bryan Ekers is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 59,092
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillFarnaby View Post
Yes it is more basic, perhaps we should elevate your understanding of the firm.

That’s like saying the president is accountable to the electoral college. This is what some would call a pedantic understanding, but not a practical understanding.
It's miles better than your libertarian fantasy of the CEO answering to the customers. That is a pleasant dogmatic fiction which lets libertarians tell themselves that private industry will always be for the greater good, on the assumption that customer satisfaction will be first and foremost on the mind of any successful industrialist, while the ones driven by greed above all will just automagically fail.
__________________
Don't worry about the end of Inception. We have top men working on it right now. Top. Men.
  #103  
Old 01-29-2019, 12:20 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by snoe View Post
1) How many of those Republican candidates were conservatives, by your definition? Or by the standard definition? Or by the multitude of non-non-standard definitions that exist? And does voting for a Republican make you a conservative, anyway?

2) We have a growing population of voters. How’s the GOP vote share in 2018 compare historically to other midterms?

3) Are votes cast a good way to think about whether the population of “conservatives,” absolute or relative, is growing or shrinking? Why or why not?
1) Most of them. Not always, but there's a high degree of overlap.

2) Lower than 2014 and 2010, higher than 2006.

3) For "absolute", sure.
  #104  
Old 01-29-2019, 12:23 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlikTheBlue View Post
Exactly. I wonder how all the people supporting a Schultz run would feel if say, Mitt Romney ran as an independent.
There's no need to wonder. Most of us would hate it, just as your side hates the idea of Schultz campaign. All that high-minded rhetoric about the importance of democracy goes right out the window when it looks like it might cost you a win.

Last edited by HurricaneDitka; 01-29-2019 at 12:23 PM.
  #105  
Old 01-29-2019, 12:31 PM
WillFarnaby's Avatar
WillFarnaby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baltimore
Posts: 5,266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan Ekers View Post
It's miles better than your libertarian fantasy of the CEO answering to the customers. That is a pleasant dogmatic fiction which lets libertarians tell themselves that private industry will always be for the greater good, on the assumption that customer satisfaction will be first and foremost on the mind of any successful industrialist, while the ones driven by greed above all will just automagically fail.
Profit comes from the difference between lower valued inputs and higher valued outputs. Please tell me how a greedy businessman can make money without taking lower values inputs and offering higher valued outputs.
  #106  
Old 01-29-2019, 12:46 PM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,413
if he doesn't run then all these tantrums will be wasted
  #107  
Old 01-29-2019, 12:59 PM
adaher is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 28,896
Here's my take: Perot led in the polls in mid-1992 before he went flaky and started talking about being spied on and dropped out. If Schultz is looking at a lead in the polls in June, or even 2nd place, he should run and run hard. But if he's stuck in single digits or even a strong third, he should get out. There's no harm in running. There is harm in getting on the ballot if he can't win.

But just assuming he can't win is wrong. Third party candidacies can win under the right circumstances, as in, not a crazy person and the two parties have extremely unappealing candidates.
  #108  
Old 01-29-2019, 01:02 PM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 22,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillFarnaby View Post
Profit comes from the difference between lower valued inputs and higher valued outputs. Please tell me how a greedy businessman can make money without taking lower values inputs and offering higher valued outputs.
Um, many many.

Monopolistic practices.
Lying.
Outright theft.
Lowering cost by avoiding regulation.
Bribery.
Lobbying for protectionist governmental policies.
Union-busting to avoid paying higher wages.

That's just the start. History is replete with examples of corporations pursuing policies that are clearly counter-customer best-interest to enhance revenue. Even lives are not always enough to control such impulses.

If such things didn't happen routinely we wouldn't need regulatory bodies like the EPA, FDA, Department of Labor and so forth.
  #109  
Old 01-29-2019, 01:04 PM
Bryan Ekers's Avatar
Bryan Ekers is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 59,092
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillFarnaby View Post
Profit comes from the difference between lower valued inputs and higher valued outputs. Please tell me how a greedy businessman can make money without taking lower values inputs and offering higher valued outputs.
This little jaunt through Microeconomics 101 would normally be just plain fascinating, I promise you, but it's only of trivial relevance and I see Jonathan Chance hit on many of the obvious real-world issues while I was typing.
__________________
Don't worry about the end of Inception. We have top men working on it right now. Top. Men.

Last edited by Bryan Ekers; 01-29-2019 at 01:06 PM.
  #110  
Old 01-29-2019, 01:16 PM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,482
Edit: nvm n9t worth it
__________________
The United States is currently running a series of concentration camps at the border. If you support or defend this, you're a monster and we cannot be friends.

Last edited by Budget Player Cadet; 01-29-2019 at 01:17 PM.
  #111  
Old 01-29-2019, 04:57 PM
foolsguinea is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 15,822
I find it puzzling that Democrats think an airhead businessman is 1) a serious threat & 2) going to hurt them.

Ross Perot had his protectionism & a (correct) sense that the GOP had turned away from national growth to a philosophy more unpatriotic—even if he was, in personality, a bad candidate for President, his message had a fair point at core, and he had media friends to put that out there. Carly Fiorina & Herman Cain just got attention by playing tokens onstage. I don't see how "man with a name so ordinary I keep forgetting it" from the coffee-bar business gets any of that: He says blandly & without conviction things that are the opposite of populist; his appeal is that of a bad imitation Perot without policy, from a food & drink industry; he's whitebread Herman Cain, & he will get nowhere.

If you're serious about him hurting Democrat chances in 2020, that seems bizarre to me. Is the present ranting about Mr. Schultz just an excuse to write clickbait?

Last edited by foolsguinea; 01-29-2019 at 04:57 PM.
  #112  
Old 01-29-2019, 06:56 PM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 36,464
He's the Starbucks guy. Everyone knows Starbucks. If he were a nobody, it wouldn't be an issue.

We need as many people who are uncomfortable with Trump voting Democratic as possible. Trump, despite all conventional wisdom, is a serious threat, as we saw in 2016.
__________________
sig for testing purposes only

Last edited by BigT; 01-29-2019 at 06:58 PM.
  #113  
Old 01-29-2019, 08:39 PM
adaher is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 28,896
If you believe that, nominate a candidate who people uncomfortable with Trump will vote for, AND that would keep Schultz out of the race.
  #114  
Old 01-29-2019, 09:21 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,016
Schultz could throw the election to Trump even if he only gets voes in the low single digits, a la Nader in 2000. (Which Giore actually won, but Ralph made it close enough for the GOP to steal.)
  #115  
Old 01-29-2019, 09:27 PM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 22,791
Mmm. I wouldn't necessarily believe that, adaher.

I believe Shultz is, to a certain extent, believing his own hype.

I once, no shit, interviewed one of the richest and most successful businessmen in Ohio. Without irony, he said "I have been successful in all of my business efforts. The state government should just do what I tell them to."

It's that sort of hazard Shultz may represent. It's an attractive - though entirely unproven - position that success in one field must therefore translate to success in all fields.

Hell, success in one field doesn't even necessarily translate into success in another, closely related field. Look at the example of Ron Johnson. He was the Apple exec who flagshipped the entire Apple Store concept and made it wildly successful. He attracted so much attention - media, peers and so forth - that when JC Penney was failing they made him CEO as a 'retail expert' who could update and make cool and successful - i.e. duplicate his success - a brand that had been flagging for years.

He failed. Utterly and spectacularly. He didn't understand the store, the market or the brand and openly disdained the existing customer base. It led to one of the worst retail quarters ever and Johnson - the magic man at Apple, recall - was fired in two years.

Last edited by Jonathan Chance; 01-29-2019 at 09:27 PM.
  #116  
Old 01-29-2019, 09:52 PM
jasg is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Upper left hand corner
Posts: 6,051
Here in Seattle we assume that if elected, he will move the US Capitol to Oklahoma...
__________________
It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into.
~ Jonathan Swift (1667 - 1745)
  #117  
Old 01-29-2019, 10:15 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 22,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Chance View Post
Yeah, if the last two years have taught us anything it's that the skill set required to run a for-profit organization is entirely dissimilar to that required to run the worlds largest non-profit organization.
I don't know if 'look the other way while Russians launder money by buying overpriced real estate' is a skill set.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion

Last edited by Wesley Clark; 01-29-2019 at 10:16 PM.
  #118  
Old 01-29-2019, 10:21 PM
Wesley Clark is offline
2018 Midterm Prediction Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 22,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
You might be working from a flawed worldview, or a non-standard definition of "constantly-shrinking" if you believe this. In the 2018 elections, Republican candidates in the House received ~51M votes. That is, I believe, the most they've ever received in a mid-term election.
They got 63 million votes in 2016, whats your point?
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #119  
Old 01-29-2019, 10:58 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,016
You can’t compare midterms with presidential cycles. If we did, then Democrats did much better in 2016 than in 2018. That’s just not how it works.

Jonathan, I remember that whole JCP fiasco. We were Penneys customers at the time, and although we weren’t thrilled with the prices, I wanted it to work partly just because I like Ellen a lot and she was the face of the shakeup.

I don’t know if you intended it, but there’s sort of an indirect Howard Schultz connection there. Myron Ullman was the Grover Cleveland to Johnson’s Benjamin Harrison, as Ullman was succeeded by, and then subsequently replaced, Johnson as JCP chief. Now Ullman is Starbucks CEO, having taken over from Schultz in 2018.
  #120  
Old 01-29-2019, 11:26 PM
Pork Rind's Avatar
Pork Rind is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Santa Barbara
Posts: 2,552
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasg View Post
Here in Seattle we assume that if elected, he will move the US Capitol to Oklahoma...
Yeah, and he’d probably pick David Stern as his running mate. Asshole.
  #121  
Old 01-29-2019, 11:56 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
They got 63 million votes in 2016, whats your point?
That US conservatives are not a "constantly-shrinking" group.
  #122  
Old 01-30-2019, 02:31 AM
foolsguinea is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 15,822
Quote:
Originally Posted by SlackerInc View Post
Schultz could throw the election to Trump even if he only gets voes in the low single digits, a la Nader in 2000. (Which Giore actually won, but Ralph made it close enough for the GOP to steal.)
Schultz, a businessman, will appeal to the voters who want a non-partisan businessman instead of a partisan ideologue. Schultz, a man, will appeal to the voters who want a male President & find it hard to vote for a woman. Those voters, if Schultz takes them, are coming heavily from Trump's base, more than from future nominee Senator Ladypants's base. Ergo, in a close state, Schultz could throw an election to Ladypants even if he only gets votes in the low single digits.

How is this hard to understand? Just because Trump has incumbency doesn't mean that everyone who might vote for him definitely will, nor that everyone swayable to vote against him is swayable in the same way. In this mess, yes, a fiscally right-wing naïf splitting the fiscally right-wing naïf portion of the swing vote is "good" for Democrats.

The partisan Republicans won't vote for him; the partisan Democrats won't vote for him. Those who just hate Trump and would vote for Senator Ladypants in the absence of coffee-boy's run will still jump onto her team by election day. Schultz's entire base is basically pro-business types who are wiling to back an independent.

And if Schultz gives up and drops out, which he will in reality, he won't leave a mass of angry supporters like Bernie did, because he's just not that interesting.

The possible downsides (for Dems) are these:
1) Schultz may bring voters to the polls who will vote for the GOP downticket & would otherwise stay home. This is possibly why he's running.
2) Owners of mainstream media outlets are the main constituency for Schultz's nonsense, and they will try to get their writers to talk him up even if the writers know he's full of hot air. This will make those workplaces somewhat more annoying.
3) Mainstream media can, of course, use their influence to make him sound more credible. They can cherry-pick his quotes, they can give him free media. But again, he's not interesting enough. He's more boring on TV than the blustering Trump; and he can be attacked by Dems as more of the same nonsense as Romney & Trump, just more ignorant.

Last edited by foolsguinea; 01-30-2019 at 02:35 AM.
  #123  
Old 01-30-2019, 03:59 AM
Brayne Ded is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 388
Quote:
Originally Posted by foolsguinea View Post
Are you from Belgium?

Corporate USA literally has managers who try to develop a feeling of "team" or "family" in their employees—even when those employees have no ownership in the company and can be fired at will. It's a form of mental manipulation, legal here in Extreme Capitalist Paradise.
Many European companies do that, especially the family-owned ones, but this tends to apply to companies that are relatively long-lived and stable and are generally not run on Extreme Capitalist Paradisical principles. Of course, that might just be their PR BS.
  #124  
Old 01-30-2019, 08:26 AM
Ancient Erudite is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 176

Can Schultz win states in the general election


Can Schultz win states in the general election? I will say YES, especially if the Democrats pick a minority with positions to his left. The states I think Schultz can win are Washington, Oregon, Minnesota, and Vermont. All blue states.

Combined these four states are worth 32 electoral votes. Assuming he wins just Washington and Oregon alone, that's 19 electoral votes, and pretty much show stopper for Democrats to obtain 270 electoral votes.

Look at it this way; Trump won the 2016 Presidential election 306 to 232.

Take away WA and OR, and Clinton drops 213...meaning not even a flip of PA and WI could get them to 270 votes, however, if Trump holds server on the other states that voted for him, he'll pass the 270 electoral votes.
  #125  
Old 01-30-2019, 08:32 AM
Ancient Erudite is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by foolsguinea View Post
I find it puzzling that Democrats think an airhead businessman is 1) a serious threat & 2) going to hurt them.

Ross Perot had his protectionism & a (correct) sense that the GOP had turned away from national growth to a philosophy more unpatriotic—even if he was, in personality, a bad candidate for President, his message had a fair point at core, and he had media friends to put that out there. Carly Fiorina & Herman Cain just got attention by playing tokens onstage. I don't see how "man with a name so ordinary I keep forgetting it" from the coffee-bar business gets any of that: He says blandly & without conviction things that are the opposite of populist; his appeal is that of a bad imitation Perot without policy, from a food & drink industry; he's whitebread Herman Cain, & he will get nowhere.

If you're serious about him hurting Democrat chances in 2020, that seems bizarre to me. Is the present ranting about Mr. Schultz just an excuse to write clickbait?

Hardly click bait. If Schultz ran as a Democrat, Democrats would embrace him quickly. As an independent with left-leaning positions, he can and will speak up against Obamacare and other failures, sounding like a Republican, which would damage the party overall when the facts are on his side.

It is my hunch that Schultz will do very well with white Democrats in northern states that have low minority population.
  #126  
Old 01-30-2019, 09:02 AM
Chronos's Avatar
Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 84,463
foolsguinea, can we perhaps find a more dignified name for the hypothetical Democratic nominee and possible future President than "Ladypants"?
  #127  
Old 01-30-2019, 09:07 AM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,413
I also wonder if he's such a bad candidate why are Dems super worried about him running.
  #128  
Old 01-30-2019, 09:13 AM
Gyrate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Greater Croydonia
Posts: 23,511
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bijou Drains View Post
I also wonder if he's such a bad candidate why are Dems super worried about him running.
Not a Democrat myself, but my objection is that we've seen the damage an egotistical billionaire businessman who overestimates his political ability can do to the country and we've had quite enough, thank you.

So no Howard Schultz, no Oprah, no Jeff Bezos or Mark Cuban, definitely no Kanye West - they can all fuck right off. I'll give a grudging 'maybe' to Michael Bloomberg on the basis of having some experience but I'd rather he fucked off too.
  #129  
Old 01-30-2019, 09:20 AM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 22,791
Largely because it's twelve months until things get real and something has to keep people busy.
  #130  
Old 01-30-2019, 09:30 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,482
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bijou Drains View Post
I also wonder if he's such a bad candidate why are Dems super worried about him running.
Electoral margins are slim. A few hundred thousand people in a few states, and the last two years look very different. It doesn't take a good candidate to mess with those margins - Jill Stein was abysmal, but she still picked up nearly as many votes in relevant states in 2016 as Clinton would have needed to win.

Howard Schultz is also a pretty lousy candidate. He's touting ideas that nobody is particularly interested in (his only policy proposals to date are "reduce the debt", which he doesn't seem to understand, and "cut entitlements", which polls about as well as cockroaches and congress), he's not particularly charismatic, and the last thing any of us need is another arrogant billionaire who thinks he "gets" politics when in fact he doesn't "get" anything or anyone with a net worth or less than 10 million. But... it doesn't take much. And given that he's tailoring his message explicitly towards (what he thinks are) moderate democrats... Eh. The dems have been burned by spoiler candidates pretty hard in the recent past.
  #131  
Old 01-30-2019, 09:35 AM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,413
Seems to me the bigger issue for Dems is the large number of people running who are going to spend a lot of time ripping each other and so the winner will look pretty bad no matter who it is.

Meanwhile Trump sits back and has no basically issues within his own party , assuming he does run.
  #132  
Old 01-30-2019, 09:41 AM
cmkeller's Avatar
cmkeller is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 13,416
adaher:

Quote:
If you believe that, nominate a candidate who people uncomfortable with Trump will vote for, AND that would keep Schultz out of the race.
Michael Bloomberg, maybe?
  #133  
Old 01-30-2019, 10:45 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 34,994
I'm most surprised by how unprepared, boring, and milquetoast he comes across on his way-too-many TV appearances. He's offered nothing that I've seen beyond the kind of bland platitudes that have infested punditry for at least a decade.

Him and Trump are really challenging the idea that billionaires are necessarily exceptionally talented and able people. Some of them may be just really lucky.
  #134  
Old 01-30-2019, 11:28 AM
Ancient Erudite is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I'm most surprised by how unprepared, boring, and milquetoast he comes across on his way-too-many TV appearances. He's offered nothing that I've seen beyond the kind of bland platitudes that have infested punditry for at least a decade.

Him and Trump are really challenging the idea that billionaires are necessarily exceptionally talented and able people. Some of them may be just really lucky.

I would argue he showed he's sensitive to racial discrimination as he orders his business shut for a while to address the issue.

Schultz to me scores highly on the green environmental scale. Starbucks plan for is for 10,000 environmentally friendly stores.

I'd say he has scored well on two issues most on the left are sensitive to. This action speaks louder than any words a slithering politician might say to get elected.
  #135  
Old 01-30-2019, 11:49 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,482
Leaving aside everything else you're saying, do you really think you're a good candidate to say what the left cares about, or how seriously they take his actions?

Last edited by Budget Player Cadet; 01-30-2019 at 11:50 AM.
  #136  
Old 01-30-2019, 12:26 PM
Red Wiggler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bijou Drains View Post
Seems to me the bigger issue for Dems is the large number of people running who are going to spend a lot of time ripping each other and so the winner will look pretty bad no matter who it is.

Meanwhile Trump sits back and has no basically issues within his own party , assuming he does run.
Donald Trump came sneering and taunting out of a field of 17.
  #137  
Old 01-30-2019, 12:46 PM
Dale Sams is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,980
Anyone is this thread pointed out that if Schultz takes enough votes away it will throw the election to the House?

edit: And by the way anti-electoral collegers....it seems to me that a number of independent presedintial candidates would have a greater chance of throwing elections to the House in a popular vote than an electoral one

Last edited by Dale Sams; 01-30-2019 at 12:49 PM.
  #138  
Old 01-30-2019, 01:11 PM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 39,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Sams View Post
Anyone is this thread pointed out that if Schultz takes enough votes away it will throw the election to the House?
Nobody should point that out. The likelihood of Schultz winning an electoral vote is infinitesimal.

Sure, Schultz could cause a shift of a state's EVs from one candidate to the other in a way that results in a 269 tie. But he's just as likely to cause a shift of a state's EVs from one candidate to the other in a way that keeps a 269 tie from happening.
Quote:
edit: And by the way anti-electoral collegers....it seems to me that a number of independent presedintial candidates would have a greater chance of throwing elections to the House in a popular vote than an electoral one
How would that work?

There are two ways a U.S. Presidential election could be decided by popular vote:

1) The National Popular Vote compact, or
2) a Constitutional amendment.

1) The NPV compact doesn't kick in until states with at least 270 votes, total, participate. So there's no way the NPV compact can result in a tie (other than defection of electors, which can happen anyway).

2) A Constitutional amendment to decide the Presidential election by popular vote would surely supersede the 12th Amendment in its entirety, including the part where the House decides an election where no candidate gets a majority of the Electors.
  #139  
Old 01-30-2019, 01:17 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale Sams View Post
Anyone is this thread pointed out that if Schultz takes enough votes away it will throw the election to the House?

edit: And by the way anti-electoral collegers....it seems to me that a number of independent presedintial candidates would have a greater chance of throwing elections to the House in a popular vote than an electoral one
The odds of that seem extremely slim to me. Ross Perot, the most successful independent Presidential candidate in recent memory, garnered almost 20 million votes in 1992, which amounted to ~19%. He didn't win a single state. He managed to win a few scattered counties around the country. He managed a solid second-place finish in Utah, and barely edged out a second-place finish in Maine, but other than that, finished 3rd in every state (I think).
  #140  
Old 01-30-2019, 01:36 PM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 12,016
True about Perot, whose appeal was remarkably evenly distributed. But George Wallace won some electoral votes. That was awhile ago, but not exactly ancient history.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bijou Drains View Post
I also wonder if he's such a bad candidate why are Dems super worried about him running.

What BPC said; in addition, he’d presumably be running attacks against the Democratic nominee, driving up their negatives, not just attacking Trump.
  #141  
Old 01-30-2019, 01:38 PM
MortSahlFan is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: US
Posts: 373
I came on here specifically for that (he's on TV right now)...

I don't believe in spoiler-hysteria -- I don't mind who runs, but if this guy thinks the Democratic Party is too far left is a liar, because he can't be this dumb. It's not even centre-left!
  #142  
Old 01-30-2019, 01:51 PM
Rick Kitchen's Avatar
Rick Kitchen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Citrus Heights, CA, USA
Posts: 17,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ancient Erudite View Post
Hardly click bait. If Schultz ran as a Democrat, Democrats would embrace him quickly. As an independent with left-leaning positions, he can and will speak up against Obamacare and other failures, sounding like a Republican, which would damage the party overall when the facts are on his side.

It is my hunch that Schultz will do very well with white Democrats in northern states that have low minority population.
I didn't realize doing away with medicare and Social Security were left-leaning positions.
  #143  
Old 01-30-2019, 01:53 PM
Rick Kitchen's Avatar
Rick Kitchen is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Citrus Heights, CA, USA
Posts: 17,023
Jill Stein. Went on Tucker Carlson. To talk up Howard Schultz.
https://www.newsweek.com/fox-news-ji...-third-1311541
  #144  
Old 01-30-2019, 02:11 PM
FlikTheBlue is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bijou Drains View Post
I also wonder if he's such a bad candidate why are Dems super worried about him running.
It’s because he’s a bad candidate that we’re worried. Schulz is not a Ross Perot or George Wallace who has the potential to be a serious player. He’s a Ralph Nader or Jill Stein who might win 1% of the vote in a state that’s decided by 0.5%.
  #145  
Old 01-30-2019, 02:13 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Kitchen View Post
Jill Stein. Went on Tucker Carlson. To talk up Howard Schultz.
https://www.newsweek.com/fox-news-ji...-third-1311541
That's going to reinvigorate the Stein-haters.
  #146  
Old 01-30-2019, 02:14 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlikTheBlue View Post
It’s because he’s a bad candidate that we’re worried. Schulz is not a Ross Perot or George Wallace who has the potential to be a serious player. He’s a Ralph Nader or Jill Stein who might win 1% of the vote in a state that’s decided by 0.5%.
If you're really worried that the next election might come down to 0.5%, you don't seem very confident in your ability to win handily after 4 years of President Trump.
  #147  
Old 01-30-2019, 02:38 PM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. ¥
Posts: 12,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
If you're really worried that the next election might come down to 0.5%, you don't seem very confident in your ability to win handily after 4 years of President Trump.
I was confident in 2016 that Trump would loose handily. Turns out there are more deplorables than I imagined.
  #148  
Old 01-30-2019, 02:41 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by Procrustus View Post
I was confident in 2016 that Trump would loose handily. Turns out there are more deplorables than I imagined.
Given that your perception of the electorate was proven wrong, vividly, have you considered the possibility that your perception of people you think are "deplorables" is likewise wrong?
  #149  
Old 01-30-2019, 02:47 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,126
Wha? The fact that there are so many of them does not mean they are not deplorable.
  #150  
Old 01-30-2019, 03:15 PM
Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,413
Perot turned out to be a nutjob and got 19%. if he stays in the race Schultz won't get a small number like 2% , he could probably get 10% barring any scandal. Libertarians are considered to be really fringe and they get 3%, he will beat that number easily.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:41 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017