As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

The USA Presidential Election Thread: Bad Hair Day

StericaSterica YesRegistered User, Moderator mod
edited May 2016 in Social Entropy++
It's the Presidential Election for the US of A! Frequently called "the most powerful person on the planet", a title which may be inflated American ego or an example of how much power is concentrated in one individual. Either way, it's still an important position that wields a lot of influence on both a domestic and international level. With our friend Barack Obama unable to run for a third term, we have a host of fresh new faces eager to earn your vote. So play nice and enjoy the show.

In the Blue Corner...

The democratic primary is still on! Here are the remaining candidates...

TgZ1OBz.jpg
Hillary "Hilldawg" Clinton
68 Years Old
Former Secretary of State and Senator


Pros: Clinton is a name that is tied to two popular presidencies, and in this circus of an election she comes off as a very serious politician. She's also got more money than God and Satan put together, a war chest that will crush all opposition. She has fairly large pull with women and minorities, particularly black Americans if the primary is anything to go by. One also cannot discount that the possibility of our first woman president could spur supporters to go vote.

Cons: Her politics are center-left if we're being very generous, and she has some baggage that is a turn-off for the base. Among these issues include a very cozy relationship with Wall Street and corporate donors. While she has repented regarding her views on Iraq and gay marriage, she still has a fairly hawkish attitude (although she does seem to be leaning towards support of rights for transgender people). The main problem with Clinton is that she has none of the charisma of her husband, and even attempts at warmth come off as pandering. It seems like Clinton's biggest strength is the very weak competition.

qJzu3bA.jpg
"Feel the" Bernie Sanders
74 Years Old
Senator, Former Representative and Mayor


Pros: An arguably more enthused alternative to Clinton, Sanders provides the lefty candidate that younger democrats really want. His independent status in the Senate gives him "outsider" bonafides, and seems committed to fixing the gross wealth disparity in this country.

Cons: No name recognition, as in the public eye he was basically a nobody until this primary. His method for campaign funding has been successful but is likely to hurt him in the long run. Youth vote is great, but they've proven to be a demographic with a spotty track record for voting. While incredibly passionate, his opponents have had some success as spinning this into an old communist yelling at clouds. Socialism in general is still something of a bad word in America, and wearing the badge with pride will likely turn off a lot of the boomers. Tends to have issues with racial minorities due to his campaign being laser-focused on class issues over all else.

In the Red Corner...

The GOP primary has been decided! While the party leadership is reluctant to fully back his candidacy, it's highly unlikely they'll deny him the nod or else risk alienating a ton of voters.

PApMhrJ.jpg
Donald "Baby Hands" Trump
69 Years Old
Meets the Constitutional Requirements


Pros: Extremely charismatic to many people, Trump's utter lack of filter has gotten him attention for nearly a year now. He's tapped into conservative anger, at long last giving them the True Conservative they've constantly had to shelve in favor of milquetoast candidates such Romney and McCain. Primary voting drew in massive numbers of voters, and debates got high enough ratings that Trump felt his presence at them could be used as a bargaining chip. Another thing is that Trump can be something of a while wildcard, saying things palatable to the left like recognizing Planned Parenthood does more than abortions or that we need universal healthcare (but one that isn't socialism...somehow). Who knows what Trump will pull in the general to attract moderates

Cons: If you're not a white man, then chances are you don't like Trump. He is dead in the water when it comes to minority polling, and we've long passed the era when you can just rely on angry white men to win you elections. Particularly damning is the growing Hispanic population, an increasingly vital voting bloc that Trump has been continually pissing off since he announced his candidacy. This doesn't even get into the laundry list of his other issues, like pissing off old-school republicans in large numbers (when the Nation Review dedicates an issue against you, you know something is up), or the fact that he's mostly a bullshitter who has repeatedly been unable to give specifics on any of his proposals.

FAQ

When are the conventions?

Republican: July 18th-21st
Democratic: July 25th-28th

Expect running mates to be announced or leaked a week or two prior.

Isn't Clinton in trouble with the FBI?

Her server woes have been a source of scandal and fodder for Republicans. While an indictment would effectively kill her campaign, it seems highly unlikely considering that the DNC hasn't been that good at hiding their support for Clinton over Sanders. There's no way the DNC would risk backing a criminal if they felt any chance of something sticking.

What's a superdelegate?

A number of prominent democrats that get to vote in the primary. They have been controversial, as they make it that much harder for outsider or "dark horse" candidates to win...and raise the question of how democratic this is if the party can decide. However, superdelegates have never decided a race, as they are fickle fair-weather creatures that can change their vote at any point up until the convention. Many superdelegates switched their vote to Obama once it became clear he was the frontrunner. However, it's still a hotly debated issue, as even the illusion that one candidate has an overwhelming advantage over another can hurt things like voter turnout.

When is Election Day?

November 8th

How long do I have to register to vote?

It varies by state

YL9WnCY.png
Sterica on
«134567100

Posts

  • Metzger MeisterMetzger Meister It Gets Worse before it gets any better.Registered User regular
    you're doing... gods?... work here, bobkins.

  • BeastehBeasteh THAT WOULD NOT KILL DRACULARegistered User regular
    Your country is turbofucked

    Nay, gigafucked

  • ThetherooThetheroo Registered User regular
    Beasteh wrote: »
    Your country is turbofucked

    Nay, gigafucked

    We're all fucked

  • OmnipotentBagelOmnipotentBagel floof Registered User regular
    Thetheroo wrote: »
    Beasteh wrote: »
    Your country is turbofucked

    Nay, gigafucked

    We're all fucked

    I've been in a pretty dry spell myself.

    cdci44qazyo3.gif

  • DoobhDoobh She/Her, Ace Pan/Bisexual 8-) What's up, bootlickers?Registered User regular
    We've been fucking the rest of the world enough

    Bout time we fucked ourselves

    Miss me? Find me on:

    Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
    Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
  • StericaSterica Yes Registered User, Moderator mod
    Nah, it's very likely going to be a Clinton presidency and essentially a repeat of the past eight years with some differences. Despite how weird this election is going to be, we're probably just going to have four years of gridlock as Clinton fights with Congress.

    YL9WnCY.png
  • ThetherooThetheroo Registered User regular
    Thetheroo wrote: »
    Beasteh wrote: »
    Your country is turbofucked

    Nay, gigafucked

    We're all fucked

    I've been in a pretty dry spell myself.

    not to be confused with fucking which is gross and dumb and no one should do it

  • WhippyWhippy Moderator, Admin Emeritus Admin Emeritus
    I wholeheartedly believe we're in for eight years of President Trump. Because good is dumb.

  • DoobhDoobh She/Her, Ace Pan/Bisexual 8-) What's up, bootlickers?Registered User regular
    Make Frosted Flakes grrrrrreat again

    Miss me? Find me on:

    Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
    Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
  • OmnipotentBagelOmnipotentBagel floof Registered User regular
    I was in the cereal aisle yesterday and apparently they have Frosted Flakes with some sort of granola clusters now? What's up with that? Trying to chomp Honey Bunches of Oats' style?

    cdci44qazyo3.gif

  • BahamutZEROBahamutZERO Registered User regular
    I was in the cereal aisle yesterday and apparently they have Frosted Flakes with some sort of granola clusters now? What's up with that? Trying to chomp Honey Bunches of Oats' style?

    yes

    BahamutZERO.gif
  • SnicketysnickSnicketysnick The Greatest Hype Man in WesterosRegistered User regular
    edited May 2016
    As a resident of the UK I'm still not entirely convinced that holding a series of elections to decide who you get to vote for in another election isn't either an elaborate practical joke or a barefaced attempt to have one thing on the news for 2 years running. Hell, the idea of any national vote campaign running for longer than 6 weeks rankles.

    Snicketysnick on
    7qmGNt5.png
    D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO
  • OmnipotentBagelOmnipotentBagel floof Registered User regular
    I was in the cereal aisle yesterday and apparently they have Frosted Flakes with some sort of granola clusters now? What's up with that? Trying to chomp Honey Bunches of Oats' style?

    yes

    Well, jokes on them, Frosted Flakes are too sugary and Honey Bunches of Oats with Almonds is a damn perfect cereal.

    cdci44qazyo3.gif

  • Librarian's ghostLibrarian's ghost Librarian, Ghostbuster, and TimSpork Registered User regular
    As a resident of the UK I'm still not entirely convinced that holding a series of elections to decide who you get to vote for in another election isn't either an elaborate practical joke or a barefaced attempt to have one thing on the news for 2 years running. Hell, the idea of any national vote campaign running for longer than 6 weeks rankles.

    Yes.

    (Switch Friend Code) SW-4910-9735-6014(PSN) timspork (Steam) timspork (XBox) Timspork


  • Tommy2HandsTommy2Hands what is this where am i Registered User regular
    I wonder if trump wears briefs

    8j12qx8ma5j5.jpg
  • StericaSterica Yes Registered User, Moderator mod
    The Republican Candidate for the Presidency of the United States of America went on national television and assured the world that his dick was big.

    YL9WnCY.png
  • Tommy2HandsTommy2Hands what is this where am i Registered User regular
    So yeah?

    8j12qx8ma5j5.jpg
  • FencingsaxFencingsax It is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understanding GNU Terry PratchettRegistered User regular
    Eh, Hillary is actually somewhat left of Obama, hawkism aside. Also, she obviously knows the power of diplomacy, so it's not like she'll immediately go to war or whatever.

  • BahamutZEROBahamutZERO Registered User regular
    As a resident of the UK I'm still not entirely convinced that holding a series of elections to decide who you get to vote for in another election isn't either an elaborate practical joke or a barefaced attempt to have one thing on the news for 2 years running.

    I've watched Yes, Prime Minister a few times so I think I have a vague understanding of how the UK system works, but maybe I don't so let me run it by you.

    My understanding is that the prime minister is not elected separately from the parliament in the way that the US president is elected separately from congress, but is chosen by the party or coalition of parties that hold the majority in parliament. People only vote directly for their representatives in parliament. And while prime minister has similar powers and responsibilities to the US president of being in charge of the military, the government bureaucracy, diplomacy, and enacting the legislation the parliament/congress passes, the PM doesn't have any veto power over legislation and the parliament can replace them whenever it wants to.

    Does that sound right?

    BahamutZERO.gif
  • DoobhDoobh She/Her, Ace Pan/Bisexual 8-) What's up, bootlickers?Registered User regular
    You don't have to do a plain ol' war to be hawkish

    Miss me? Find me on:

    Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
    Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
  • Tommy2HandsTommy2Hands what is this where am i Registered User regular
    edited May 2016
    Hilary is not to the left of Obama in my mind

    They're basically on the same point

    Tommy2Hands on
    8j12qx8ma5j5.jpg
  • StericaSterica Yes Registered User, Moderator mod
    As a resident of the UK I'm still not entirely convinced that holding a series of elections to decide who you get to vote for in another election isn't either an elaborate practical joke or a barefaced attempt to have one thing on the news for 2 years running. Hell, the idea of any national vote campaign running for longer than 6 weeks rankles.
    Primaries were very different in the past, where candidates wouldn't announce until like a month or two prior to the primary. What's happening now is a fairly recent phenomenon possibly spurred by how fucking massive the Republican primary was, prompting Republicans to constantly vie for attention throughout the latter half of 2015 in order to remain relevant.

    It's a definitely a thing that benefits the media.

    YL9WnCY.png
  • ShortyShorty touching the meat Intergalactic Cool CourtRegistered User regular
    Hilary is not to the left of Obama in my mind

    They're basically on the same point

    she's been pushed leftward by public opinion, and that's reflected in her stated policies--stuff like a 12$ minimum wage, putting a stop to shadow banking, all that is left of Obama

    and it has been found that politicians usually do put a lot of effort into following through on their promises

    she's definitely more hawkish though, and that matters more to some

    I'm not going to try and argue whether that's right or wrong

  • BertezBertezBertezBertez Registered User regular
    edited May 2016
    Whippy wrote: »
    I wholeheartedly believe we're in for eight years of President Trump. Because good is dumb

    Thing is here evil is dumb too.

    Honestly the depressing thing is that the reason Hillary will win here is because powerful people both stand to lose if Trump wins and gain if Hillary wins.

    BertezBertez on
    ...but I would say that

    steam_sig.png
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • WybornWyborn GET EQUIPPED Registered User regular
    edited May 2016
    Trump's grasp on foreign and fiscal policies mean that electing him as president would have effects everywhere

    A crazy man as president support by a Congress that will fall in step behind him because it's what their constituents want could make shockwaves felt economically and politically all over the world

    It's a fascinating, terrifying thing to think about

    Wyborn on
    dN0T6ur.png
  • DoobhDoobh She/Her, Ace Pan/Bisexual 8-) What's up, bootlickers?Registered User regular
    I wonder if this media trend has a small lifespan, or if it's simply the way things are done now

    It seems like something folk would get sick of

    I know I can't handle too many more election cycles like this

    Miss me? Find me on:

    Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
    Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
  • SnicketysnickSnicketysnick The Greatest Hype Man in WesterosRegistered User regular
    As a resident of the UK I'm still not entirely convinced that holding a series of elections to decide who you get to vote for in another election isn't either an elaborate practical joke or a barefaced attempt to have one thing on the news for 2 years running.

    I've watched Yes, Prime Minister a few times so I think I have a vague understanding of how the UK system works, but maybe I don't so let me run it by you.

    My understanding is that the prime minister is not elected separately from the parliament in the way that the US president is elected separately from congress, but is chosen by the party or coalition of parties that hold the majority in parliament. People only vote directly for their representatives in parliament. And while prime minister has similar powers and responsibilities to the US president of being in charge of the military, the government bureaucracy, diplomacy, and enacting the legislation the parliament/congress passes, the PM doesn't have any veto power over legislation and the parliament can replace them whenever it wants to.

    Does that sound right?

    Nah, it's more simple than that. The PM is just the leader of the party that forms the government by winning a majority of seats in the general election. As they are backed by a majority in the main law-making house (The House of Lords is primarily a light check rather than a hard one as the Commons can force stuff through if they want.), the PM actually has considerably more power than the US President. I think the closest analogue would be if the President was the Speaker of the House of Representatives?

    7qmGNt5.png
    D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO
  • ShortyShorty touching the meat Intergalactic Cool CourtRegistered User regular
    Whippy wrote: »
    I wholeheartedly believe we're in for eight years of President Trump. Because good is dumb

    Thing is here evil is dumb too.

    Honestly the depressing thing is that the reason Hillary will win here is because powerful people both stand to lose if Trump wins and gain if Hillary wins.

    a Trump win would be extraordinarily bad for the status quo

  • nightmarennynightmarenny Registered User regular
    Shorty wrote: »
    Hilary is not to the left of Obama in my mind

    They're basically on the same point

    she's been pushed leftward by public opinion, and that's reflected in her stated policies--stuff like a 12$ minimum wage, putting a stop to shadow banking, all that is left of Obama

    and it has been found that politicians usually do put a lot of effort into following through on their promises

    she's definitely more hawkish though, and that matters more to some

    I'm not going to try and argue whether that's right or wrong
    Obama had been very vocal about the minimum wage including supporting a plan that would raise the minimum wage to 12 by 2020.

    Quire.jpg
  • SnicketysnickSnicketysnick The Greatest Hype Man in WesterosRegistered User regular
    As a resident of the UK I'm still not entirely convinced that holding a series of elections to decide who you get to vote for in another election isn't either an elaborate practical joke or a barefaced attempt to have one thing on the news for 2 years running. Hell, the idea of any national vote campaign running for longer than 6 weeks rankles.
    Primaries were very different in the past, where candidates wouldn't announce until like a month or two prior to the primary. What's happening now is a fairly recent phenomenon possibly spurred by how fucking massive the Republican primary was, prompting Republicans to constantly vie for attention throughout the latter half of 2015 in order to remain relevant.

    It's a definitely a thing that benefits the media.

    It's kind of funny to see the difference with our media, where early campaigning is generally treated with a resounding feeling of "Really? But it's not for ages? OK, well, you do you and we'll report some stuff that is a bit more pressing." Even our coverage of the US Primaries is more along the lines of a gossip column than anything else. I can see why it gets a lot of play, it's the greatest soap opera you guys have, but yeah...it's just weird to see.

    7qmGNt5.png
    D3 Steam #TeamTangent STO
  • SolarSolar Registered User regular
    As a resident of the UK I'm still not entirely convinced that holding a series of elections to decide who you get to vote for in another election isn't either an elaborate practical joke or a barefaced attempt to have one thing on the news for 2 years running.

    I've watched Yes, Prime Minister a few times so I think I have a vague understanding of how the UK system works, but maybe I don't so let me run it by you.

    My understanding is that the prime minister is not elected separately from the parliament in the way that the US president is elected separately from congress, but is chosen by the party or coalition of parties that hold the majority in parliament. People only vote directly for their representatives in parliament. And while prime minister has similar powers and responsibilities to the US president of being in charge of the military, the government bureaucracy, diplomacy, and enacting the legislation the parliament/congress passes, the PM doesn't have any veto power over legislation and the parliament can replace them whenever it wants to.

    Does that sound right?

    Yes, apart from where the PM doesn't have veto powers and can be replaced whenever. Technically this is true, the PM is primus inter pares, first amongst equals, with no more power than anyone else. In practical terms, a PM with support of the party (bearing in mind that support from the party doesn't mean support from MPs in the party, one of our two main parties is currently led by someone who is there because of the base rather than other MPs) has a vast amount of power within the government, because the whole basis for who gets to be in charge is who can (assuming the party whips keep everyone in line) get a vote through the Commons without needing the support of any other party.

  • DoobhDoobh She/Her, Ace Pan/Bisexual 8-) What's up, bootlickers?Registered User regular
    Politics have always been full of gossip and rumor spreading

    Mass media technology, however, is pretty dang new (relatively speaking)

    So we probably ain't done making America weird

    Miss me? Find me on:

    Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
    Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
  • MaximumMaximum Registered User regular
    By 2020 we'll have Presidential debates in VR.

  • ZoelZoel I suppose... I'd put it on Registered User regular
    Dubh wrote: »
    I wonder if this media trend has a small lifespan, or if it's simply the way things are done now

    It seems like something folk would get sick of

    I know I can't handle too many more election cycles like this

    This is the way It's always been, It's just that it didn't receive as much viewership. They didn't have a bajillion debates because it helped voters decide, they did it for the same reason the Jerry Springer show had a life span. It generated numbers even though it was basically the same thing. How many did we have, 11?

    Of course, when McCain, Romney, Bush, Obama, and Kerry ran it just didn't have the same oomph of a reality television star who uses a motorcycle gang as his personal security force, screams bloody murder about women on their periods, starts a fight every chance he gets, subverts an entire party orthodoxy, promises to build a wall to keep out migrants from a country that doesn't send us most of our migrants, receives tacit support from Vladimir Putin while simultaneously proposes boots on the ground in an as yet undetermined location where democracy may or may not be at risk, might not actually know what an abortion is, waxes poetic about defaulting on the national debt, casually jokes about wanting to having sex with his daughter, makes vague threats to leaders of his current party, spent the last eight years claiming Obama was a muslim born outside the United States with a forged birth certificate, and on top of that

    has a bad comb-over

    did I miss anything that added to the entertainment value?

    A magician gives you a ring that, when worn, will let you see the world as it truly is.
    However, the ring will never leave your finger, and you will be unable to ever describe to another living person what you see.
  • StericaSterica Yes Registered User, Moderator mod
    Maximum wrote: »
    By 2020 we'll have Presidential debates in VR.
    Jeb's rallies are still devoid of people.

    YL9WnCY.png
  • ShortyShorty touching the meat Intergalactic Cool CourtRegistered User regular
    Maximum wrote: »
    By 2020 we'll have Presidential debates in VR.
    Jeb's rallies are still devoid of people.

    he coulda given out free handjobs and nobody would have given a shit

  • StericaSterica Yes Registered User, Moderator mod
    "Please like, comment and subscribe."

    YL9WnCY.png
  • ZenyatooZenyatoo Registered User regular
    Wyborn wrote: »
    Trump's grasp on foreign and fiscal policies mean that electing him as president would have effects everywhere

    A crazy man as president support by a Congress that will fall in step behind him because it's what their constituents want could make shockwaves felt economically and politically all over the world

    It's a fascinating, terrifying thing to think about

    assuming trump goes through with anything he talks about.

    It's weird that we all sort of assume a man like trump is going to actually legitimately follow through with anything.

    Does anyone seriously expect him to manage to get a wall built if he does become president? He's going to stop buying oil, and I give it until that shit hits $3 a gallon before the impeachment train comes along. ETC.

  • BahamutZEROBahamutZERO Registered User regular
    Solar wrote: »
    As a resident of the UK I'm still not entirely convinced that holding a series of elections to decide who you get to vote for in another election isn't either an elaborate practical joke or a barefaced attempt to have one thing on the news for 2 years running.

    I've watched Yes, Prime Minister a few times so I think I have a vague understanding of how the UK system works, but maybe I don't so let me run it by you.

    My understanding is that the prime minister is not elected separately from the parliament in the way that the US president is elected separately from congress, but is chosen by the party or coalition of parties that hold the majority in parliament. People only vote directly for their representatives in parliament. And while prime minister has similar powers and responsibilities to the US president of being in charge of the military, the government bureaucracy, diplomacy, and enacting the legislation the parliament/congress passes, the PM doesn't have any veto power over legislation and the parliament can replace them whenever it wants to.

    Does that sound right?

    Yes, apart from where the PM doesn't have veto powers and can be replaced whenever. Technically this is true, the PM is primus inter pares, first amongst equals, with no more power than anyone else. In practical terms, a PM with support of the party (bearing in mind that support from the party doesn't mean support from MPs in the party, one of our two main parties is currently led by someone who is there because of the base rather than other MPs) has a vast amount of power within the government, because the whole basis for who gets to be in charge is who can (assuming the party whips keep everyone in line) get a vote through the Commons without needing the support of any other party.

    so the PM can't be replaced whenever? or are you saying that in practice they are only replaced when their faction loses control of the parliament? I had the impression they could also be changed when their party was unhappy with them or their performance. Also does the PM have some kind of actual veto powers or are you saying they wouldn't want to veto anything because their faction is necessarily the one in control of the legislature?

    BahamutZERO.gif
This discussion has been closed.