2016 elections - because it's never too early

[Admiral Yi]

I would be perfectly happy to see a major realignment that sees the populist left and the populist right merge.

[Martinus]

I would be perfectly happy to see a major realignment that sees the populist left and the populist right merge.

You mean socialism merging with nationalism? Yeah that would work. You could come up with some fancy word for it, like soc-nism.

[jimmy olsen]

On the contrary, I expect to have hate voting driving turnout way up as people rush to vote against Trump or Clinton. We could break 60%.

You think a socialist Sanders supporter is going to "hate vote" Trump against Clinton?  No way.  And do you understand how hated Hillary is among Republicans?  No way they are going to "hate vote" Clinton to punish Trump for flipping the GOP board game off the table.

All those people are staying home, or maybe voting write-ins/third-parties.

I mean the opposite. The Republicans hate Clinton so much they will vote for Trump though it disgusts them. Leftists likewise hate Trump so much they will vote Clinton even though it disgusts them.

[jimmy olsen]

The fun part about Bernie is there is no way he can fund a general election run without doing the same. If he thinks hes going to run a national election on 27 dollar donations the man is more delusional than I thought.

Hasn't he outraised Clinton thus far?

[DGuller]

I would be perfectly happy to see a major realignment that sees the populist left and the populist right merge.

I would be happy to see a system where incompatible political ideologies don't have keep merging until there are two camps.

[DGuller]

Anyone think the voter turnout is going to beat the 54.9% we had in the last election?  Or even the 50.3% we had in 2000? (A figure which tbe Nader-killed-Gore's-presidency sour grapes crowd should contemplate.)

Could be something to do with the fact that voting in major elections is a logistical nightmare for many classes of people, often by design.  Something that I would like to note is unlikely to change when people let Republicans get elected, by commission or by omission.

[Legbiter]

CdM already has his little story and he's gonna stick to it. No need to debate it guys.

Somehow, it's gonna be Sanders' fault if his terrible candidate loses 

Dosen't bode well for her upcoming cage fight with Godzilla. 

[Martinus]

CdM already has his little story and he's gonna stick to it. No need to debate it guys.

Somehow, it's gonna be Sanders' fault if his terrible candidate loses 

If one considers Trump to be much much worse than Clinton, then strategic voting, as CdM advises - especially in these circumstances, where Trump is no longer facing internal opposition and can consolidate his base - is a valid point.

If one considers Trump to be only marginally worse than Clinton, then obviously it doesn't make sense and it makes sense to vote for Sanders.

I think the problem is with people who think Trump is much much worse than Clinton, but still vote for Sanders because they prefer him to Clinton - such people are fools.

[derspiess]

I would be perfectly happy to see a major realignment that sees the populist left and the populist right merge.

You mean socialism merging with nationalism? Yeah that would work. You could come up with some fancy word for it, like soc-nism.

[alfred russel]

I would be perfectly happy to see a major realignment that sees the populist left and the populist right merge.

You mean socialism merging with nationalism? Yeah that would work. You could come up with some fancy word for it, like soc-nism.

national socialism?

[Eddie Teach]

I think the problem is with people who think Trump is much much worse than Clinton, but still vote for Sanders because they prefer him to Clinton - such people are fools.

Between the personal baggage and the people who hate her for being "establishment", there's no guarantee that Hillary performs better in the general election.

[Legbiter]

The slow bleed does not actually look all that slow. 

Donald Trump has now grown his lead over Hillary Clinton in Rasmussen Reports' first weekly White House Watch survey.

Trump earns 42% support to Clinton's 37% when Likely U.S. Voters are asked whom they would vote for if the presidential election were held today. But Rasmussen Reports' latest national telephone survey finds that 13% prefer some other candidate, while seven percent (7%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

http://drudgetoday.com/v2/rn=0&s=2&c=1&pn=Anonymous&u=http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/white_house_watch

[derspiess]

General Election: Trump vs. Clinton
FOX News
Clinton 42 Trump 45
Trump +3

General Election: Trump vs. Clinton
Rasmussen Reports
Clinton 37 Trump 42
Trump +5

General Election: Trump vs. Sanders
FOX News
Sanders 46 Trump 42
Sanders +4

[Legbiter]

At this rate it'll be a Trump landslide, with Clinton having fled to Russia.   

[derspiess]

The Sanders thing is what cracks me up the most.