Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

[mc ukrneal]

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/floridas-sun-sentinel-no-gop-candidate-worth-163139142.html?clear=cache

[Todd]

What do you mean, you can't switch governments? This is an election thread.

When Obama leaves office, a very small portion of the executive branch will go with him.  Almost all members of Congress will return, SCOTUS remains, and millions of federal employees, thousands of laws, and an untold number of federal programs will remain.

[Pat B]

A variety of corporate interests have a stake in ACA.  Insurance companies get millions of new customers, some forced.  But that's not the only industry impacted.  M&A activity has accelerated in the past few years in other areas of healthcare, especially on the delivery side among larger hospitals and other providers (eg, HMOs).  Some of the requirements of ACA favor larger organizations that can consolidate administrative functions - eg, consolidating and managing electronic medical records, which is a massive undertaking.  I have more specific knowledge about the area where I live, where a good number of smaller providers have closed up shop while the largest providers are consolidating into basically four main providers, and a good portion of those smaller providers (mainly individual practitioners) now are part of the larger companies.  I suspect that trend will continue.  In the last few years, one enterprising delivery company specializing in treating Spanish-speaking Medicaid patients has gone from one main facility to eight facilities, plus mobile units, with contracts with multiple larger providers.  More medium and large entities on the delivery side (and the medical supply side, in certain areas) will also make sure to spend buckets full of money on lobbying since they stand to gain from the now current system.

Thanks for the clarification.

Meanwhile, The Donald seems to have recovered from Saturday (not a huge surprise) and Rubio is just getting zapped. He's behind Kasich in Michigan and even in Mississippi.

[Florestan]

big banks should be broken up, investment banking should be separated from commercial banking completely, and, perhaps at the same time, commercial banking should have higher capital requirements. 

How can all that be done without infringing on property rights and expanding governmental powers?

When Obama leaves office, a very small portion of the executive branch will go with him.  Almost all members of Congress will return, SCOTUS remains, and millions of federal employees, thousands of laws, and an untold number of federal programs will remain.

I don´t get it. Would you like that, on every change of President, all laws passed and all federal programs established under the former President be repealed and abolished, all federal employees be fired, all congressmen be forbidden to run again and all member of the Supreme Court replaced?

Re: Sanders. Suppose he wins the Presidency. Now, either he wishes to expand governmental powers within the limits prescribed by the Constitution --- in which case you shouldn´t have any, or much, problem with that, right?; or he wishes to expand governmental powers beyond the constitutional limitations, in which case he will undoubtedly be prevented from doing so by the Congress and the Supreme Court, right?

[Madiel]

When Obama leaves office, a very small portion of the executive branch will go with him.  Almost all members of Congress will return, SCOTUS remains, and millions of federal employees, thousands of laws, and an untold number of federal programs will remain.

Whereas you seem to think that changing employers within the same profession and having a new health plan will transform your world utterly. Hmm.

[drogulus]

     Trump Is Too Poor for a Third-Party Run

     The article says he doesn't have enough liquid assets, he'd have to mortgage property to lose an election. Who thinks he'd do this? We're talking hundreds of millions of debt, one hard recession away from another bankruptcy.
     
     

How can all that be done without infringing on property rights and expanding governmental powers?

      How can we infringe on property rights and expand governmental powers if we don't do all that?

     

I don´t get it. Would you like that, on every change of President, all laws passed and all federal programs established under the former President be repealed and abolished, all federal employees be fired, all congressmen be forbidden to run again and all member of the Supreme Court replaced?

      It sounds like you do get it. Don't sell yourself short.
     

[drogulus]

     Florida's Sun Sentinel: No GOP candidate worth endorsing

     It may seem strange when talking about partisan (usually) institutions like newspapers to think one of them might take the position that "no GOP candidate is worth endorsing" because no GOP candidate is worth endorsing and not because they endorse a candidate from the other party, but the quaint practice of choosing the best from each party on some not entirely partisan criteria still exists. Papers do that even now, and for one of them to deviate from this practice even to the extent of shitting on the favorite son by noticing how unqualified he is, that's notable.

     OK, to be crystal clear, newspapers don't matter much as causes, they change few minds. But as effects, as measures of what has happened, they matter as supporting evidence. If people (nondollar voters) begin to think they have to vote for one kind of unsuitable candidate or another to "send a message" to the agents of the status quo in both parties and government, the consequences will be a huge victory for the politician most firmly associated with the status quo. Only a Trump/Sanders chimera could defeat her. Can a mythological beast serve as President? Someone fetch me an originalist who's not dead.

[Todd]

How can all that be done without infringing on property rights and expanding governmental powers?

It will infringe on property rights, to be sure, but depending on how such regulation is structured, it could actually reduce direct governmental powers and oversight at the federal level.  The pre-GLBA regulation regime was less onerous than what came after, which has become even more cumbersome after Dodd-Frank.  Compliance costs for financial companies are higher than ever, and yet the largest institutions still pose systemic risk.  States also had more of a say in regulation prior to GLBA, and that can be a worthwhile tradeoff.

I don´t get it. Would you like that, on every change of President, all laws passed and all federal programs established under the former President be repealed and abolished, all federal employees be fired, all congressmen be forbidden to run again and all member of the Supreme Court replaced?

Not at all.  I have no idea how you would have concluded that I would desire such outcomes.  I merely pointed out that a change in President does not mean that the government changes, and that I cannot change governments.

Whereas you seem to think that changing employers within the same profession and having a new health plan will transform your world utterly. Hmm.

It is possible to switch employers, and receive better benefits packages, which includes more than just healthcare.  In tight labor markets, and especially for skilled employees, improved benefits packages is one of the major ways that employers lure talent here in the US.  It is unlikely to transform a person's world "utterly", but that is not what I wrote. 

[Todd]

Meanwhile, The Donald seems to have recovered from Saturday (not a huge surprise) and Rubio is just getting zapped. He's behind Kasich in Michigan and even in Mississippi.

The Donald is up to 458 delegates to Cruz's 359.  If Rubio drops out and gives Cruz his delegates, then Cruz would lead Trump.  It may be time for Rubio to go, especially if he wants to have a role in government.  VP seems unlikely.  Maybe a nice cabinet post.

Clinton is still comfortably out front even after Michigan, but only because of the undemocratic superdelegates. Could Hillary lose again?

Just imagine a Cruz-Sanders race.  Ugh.

[Karl Henning]

The Donald is up to 458 delegates to Cruz's 359.  If Rubio drops out and gives Cruz his delegates, then Cruz would lead Trump.  It may be time for Rubio to go, especially if he wants to have a role in government.  VP seems unlikely.  Maybe a nice cabinet post.

Chris Stirewalt eschews any sugar-coating:

DEAR REPUBLICANS, IT'S TED CRUZ
What is the rationale for Marco Rubio's candidacy?

The latest poll out from the classiest and most reliable Florida pollster, Quinnipiac University, says there is none.

[drogulus]

Chris Stirewalt eschews any sugar-coating:

DEAR REPUBLICANS, IT'S TED CRUZ
What is the rationale for Marco Rubio's candidacy?

The latest poll out from the classiest and most reliable Florida pollster, Quinnipiac University, says there is none.

     I can see from a Fox perspective it must be Cruz.

While there was a wintertime flirtation with Trump as the more establishment-friendly and malleable candidate for the GOP, springtime has brought a new realization that Trump could mean not just a general election wipeout, but also generational damage to the party's brand.

     How is Trump the cause, not the effect of self-inflicted generational damage to the party? This would be puzzling if taken seriously. How could a party not suffering generational damage to its brand seriously consider nominating Trump? I mean they aren't junkies, they merely overdosed on heroin. Nobody's perfect.....

[Karl Henning]

Trump Descends Into Steak-Fueled Madness After Winning More States

[André]

Here's how many here think the race will end up like:



Says the Prez: "And I'd be moving next January" (he's holding a leaflet ad about    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/03/05/cape-bretons-new-slogan-waiting-for-americans.html   

Cape Breton Island, Nova Scotia).

[drogulus]

     Top pollster: 'I have never seen anything like' what happened in Michigan

     I've worked it out. If Trump wins we all move to Canada, that's the plan. Does something, logical entailment perhaps, mean if Sanders wins we all move to Mexico?

     I live in Massachusetts. Thousands of miles away past the corn and pigs and oil wells with people tending them, over a mountain range, is California. Though Larry David lives and works there it's not supposed to be Sanders country, it's supposed to be Hillary country, all four hundred and something electoral votes of it. Now, here's where Mexico comes in.

     What if, that's all I'm saying is what if the polls are wrong and something so crazy Nate Silver can't detect it is going on? *

     _{* Why The Polls Missed Bernie Sanders's Michigan Upset}

[Pat B]

The Donald is up to 458 delegates to Cruz's 359.  If Rubio drops out and gives Cruz his delegates, then Cruz would lead Trump.  It may be time for Rubio to go, especially if he wants to have a role in government.  VP seems unlikely.  Maybe a nice cabinet post.

I'm not sure that a dropping-out candidate gets to choose where his delegates go (link).

There's clearly some animosity between Rubio and Trump, but I wonder whether Rubio likes Cruz any better. If he wants to have a role in government his best bet is to endorse Clinton.

[Todd]

I'm not sure that a dropping-out candidate gets to choose where his delegates go (link).

This is where horse-trading comes in.  Rubio agrees to work his delegates and steer them toward Cruz in exchange for, I don't know, Defense, or whatever.  This would only matter in a contested convention.  If Trump hits the magic number, it's all over anyway.

[kishnevi]

     Florida's Sun Sentinel: No GOP candidate worth endorsing

     It may seem strange when talking about partisan (usually) institutions like newspapers to think one of them might take the position that "no GOP candidate is worth endorsing" because no GOP candidate is worth endorsing and not because they endorse a candidate from the other party, but the quaint practice of choosing the best from each party on some not entirely partisan criteria still exists. Papers do that even now, and for one of them to deviate from this practice even to the extent of shitting on the favorite son by noticing how unqualified he is, that's notable.

     OK, to be crystal clear, newspapers don't matter much as causes, they change few minds. But as effects, as measures of what has happened, they matter as supporting evidence. If people (nondollar voters) begin to think they have to vote for one kind of unsuitable candidate or another to "send a message" to the agents of the status quo in both parties and government, the consequences will be a huge victory for the politician most firmly associated with the status quo. Only a Trump/Sanders chimera could defeat her. Can a mythological beast serve as President? Someone fetch me an originalist who's not dead.

In fact, the SunSentinel is being snitty because Jeb! is out.  Wah! Wah!


I did my early voting yesterday.  For Bernie, as I said I would.
Everyone I talk to thinks Hillary is a horrible person.  But if Trump is nominated, they will all vote for her because Trump as President would be horrible.

Donald v Hillary. Time to vote for the lesser of two demons.

[Pat B]

This is where horse-trading comes in.  Rubio agrees to work his delegates and steer them toward Cruz in exchange for, I don't know, Defense, or whatever.  This would only matter in a contested convention.  If Trump hits the magic number, it's all over anyway.

Makes sense, for states that don't have re-binding rules. I guess it's reasonable to expect most of the released delegates to follow him. But if his endorsement might be decisive, then he could be the subject of a bidding war. Cruz is a formidable campaigner but not much of a negotiator from what I've seen.

I was mostly kidding about Clinton, but if Rubio feels that either Trump or Cruz would be doomed in the general, and that he still has a future in politics, then he might choose not to hitch his wagon to any horse this year.

[Karl Henning]

Stand up for the Bern!

http://www.youtube.com/v/Nl0YXx_SjHQ

[drogulus]