OT: Predictions for 2016 Presidential Election

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=no_such_reality]

If Hillary wins, they’re be more of the bitter animosity that has plagued President Obama.[/quote]

A Hillary win will break the glass ceiling. Preceded by a black president, a woman president will signal the beginning of the end of the dominant White male culture. Subliminally, people are afraid of that and that’s where the bitter animosity comes from. Historians will record that milestone.

We are in a post colonial, post industrial, multicultural, international society. The changes are happening faster than people’s willingness to accept and adapt.

Real estate wise, the regions that are prospering, and where the greatest wealth is created are cosmopolitan cities around the world.

[PCinSD]

[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=no_such_reality]

If Hillary wins, they’re be more of the bitter animosity that has plagued President Obama.[/quote]

A Hillary win will break the glass ceiling. Followed by a black president, a woman president will signal the beginning of the end of the dominant White male culture. Subliminally, people are afraid of that and that’s where the bitter animosity comes from. Historians will record that milestone.

We are in a post colonial, post industrial, multicultural, international society. The changes are happening faster than people’s willingness to accept and adapt.

Real estate wise, the regions that are prospering, and where the greatest wealth is created are cosmopolitan cities around the world.[/quote]

If Hillary wins, it will signal the new liberal movement overtaken by elitist, condescending racists. Like yourself.

[bearishgurl]

I forgot to add to my prediction for the RNC that if Rubio isn’t brought back in by the PTB (unlikely now that the RNC has stated publicly that they will “follow the rules” at “their” convention), the potential votes from his 163 soon-to-be-unbound delegates who will also be roaming the convention floor (not that this will change much of anything, either). Nonetheless, it’s going to be very interesting this July!

*************************************************

On another note, this piece just came out yesterday:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/significant-premium-hikes-expected-under-074315185.html

Due to all the “new” insureds (those who were uninsured for years before signing onto an “obamacare” plan) having a multitude of health issues due to not seeing a health provider for years … even decades (as well as not taking care of themselves over the years), carriers on the ACA’s exchanges are apparently losing money hand over fist.

Who wouldda thunk it?

I suspect the premium on my Gold plan will go up another ~$300 month for 2017 so I’ll likely have to drop down (again) to Silver 70 or 73 this fall when renewing for 2017 unless we can get some more carriers here in Region 19 (SD County) who will offer reasonable individual PPO plans “off-exchange” which are higher than Bronze.

Hopefully, this will just be a temporary measure until our new Prez (anyone but Hillary) can successfully dismantle obamacare and bring back all these carriers who fled the individual market in the wake of obamacare (or develop a viable “single payor” system with optional supplements for purchase).

Then again, maybe dismantling obamacare and coming up with a fair alternative could take so long that I’ll be on Medicare before it happens and will no longer give a rat’s a$$ :=0

It certainly DOES make more business sense for the major carriers to “sit on the sidelines” (sit out obamacare as well as the individual market under the ACA, while keeping their “enterprise clients”) rather than jump in and be forced to cover a much sicker population (esp the 50-64 age group). After all, we’re all aware that money keeps indefinitely without refrigeration :=0

Who do y’all think is going to win at this game??

Hint: it’s NOT going to be Joe and Jane 6pAmerican who are currently “mandated” to buy coverage :=0

Folks, this unfortunate “obamacare debacle” is and will be the single largest impediment to full “retirement” for those born in or after about 1952 up to 1964. That is, unless the prospective retiree has access to a decent and reasonably priced healthplan administered by a major carrier through FERS, their state or local govm’t retirement assn, their union, their private longtime employer or the military.

Obamacare is a very unpredictable “gotcha” for those on fixed incomes (even w/nominal annual COL raises). I can completely understand why many in the 55-64 age group are still working FT and will continue to do so until they have successfully signed up for Medicare, received their cards in the mail, and, in many cases, have become eligible to receive their first full SS check (currently age 66).

Younger FT worker-bees should take heed that those boomers blocking their promotional path at work are still occupying their positions for a very good reason and should endeavor to vote accordingly in this very interesting election year IF they would like to see that path cleared.

[utcsox]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/01/politics/indiana-poll-trump-clinton-ahead/

Indiana poll – NBC/WSJ/Marist

Trump 49%
Cruz 34%
Kasich 13%

Clinton 50%
Sanders 46%

[svelte]

I’ve been watching five thirty eight’s prediction for Indiana, and they had been giving Cruz the nod as the favorite, which confused me since the polls it used to calculate that all showed Trump leading.

Then almost overnight, it flipped.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/indiana-republican/

Now five thirty eight thinks Trump will take it. What changed things so rapidly there I have no clue, but Trump appears to be building momentum.

This has been one of the strangest presidential seasons I can remember, easily the strangest since Perot’s 1992 run.

[utcsox]

Well, with the new poll I posted above, RCP has Trump up about 4 percent in Indiana. The lead might actually be bigger if you discard the outliner that had Cruz up by 16. I think 538 do add more weight on later polls and higher quality polls.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/in/indiana_republican_presidential_primary-5786.html

[livinincali]

[quote=svelte]I’ve been watching five thirty eight’s prediction for Indiana, and they had been giving Cruz the nod as the favorite, which confused me since the polls it used to calculate that all showed Trump leading.

Then almost overnight, it flipped.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/indiana-republican/

Now five thirty eight thinks Trump will take it. What changed things so rapidly there I have no clue, but Trump appears to be building momentum.

This has been one of the strangest presidential seasons I can remember, easily the strangest since Perot’s 1992 run.[/quote]

Indiana was hard to gauge up until recently because very little polling had actually been done. Indiana has a robocall ban that makes it more expensive to do polling in the state. The GOP establishment was relying on the Wisconsin results to project Indiana. It was probably an error on their part.

[no_such_reality]

Interesting read. I’ll put this here since many think this person winning or that person winning means that or this.

Why has there been an exodus of black residents from West Coast liberal hubs?

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=PCinSD]
If Hillary wins, it will signal the new liberal movement overtaken by elitist, condescending racists. Like yourself.[/quote]

If elitist means thinking about policy, then I plead guilty. Racist? Not guilty.

Condescending? Yes guilty. But that’s really the proper answer to the angry White base of the Republican Party because their policy solutions won’t work and will make matters worse for them. It’s ok to be angry. But voting against your own interests year after year hoping for a miracle is plain stupid.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=no_such_reality]Interesting read. I’ll put this here since many think this person winning or that person winning means that or this.

Why has there been an exodus of black residents from West Coast liberal hubs?[/quote]Great article, NSR. Thanks for sharing! CA’s well known NIMBYism and agencies such as CEQA DO have the effect of dampening runaway growth (as it should be) but the article focuses too much on “housing costs” when this phenomenon really only affects mostly Gen Y who are just starting out in life (as it does with ALL races). Most black families in CA now headed by boomers and older bought their homes a long time ago and never felt a need to “move up” repeatedly like other cultures do because they want to feel “comfortable” in their areas and neighborhoods. That’s more important to most Black families than paying top dollar for a newer “mcmansion.” I don’t think the article delves into the true reason why the Black population has gone down in what is now dubbed as “west coast liberal-enclave metropolises.”

In the ’80’s and ’90’s, I used to book months in advance to fly Southwest (instead of drive) just days (or 1 day) before TK and X-mas to be with my peeps in TX, AR and OK because I was working FT and didn’t have the time to drive or stay away from home for very long. In addition, I had many Black longtime co-workers and old friends whose residences mostly seemed to be concentrated into ONE approx 3 x 4 mile section of SD and bordering areas of 2-3 adjacent small cities (which I initially found odd since many of my co-workers made very good money and had many choices on where to live). These areas had several churches but didn’t have a lot of services (grocery, cleaners, gas stations and other retail establishments) at the time, causing this population to have to drive out of their neighborhoods to obtain basic services. The truth is, the typical Black family is “set up” primarily to help each other, especially if both the matriarch and patriarch are still alive who assign “expectations” to other members of the family. Meaning this culture provides child care for each other, including religious education and imparting a sense of peace and continuity among their children, nieces, nephews, grandchildren and great grandchildren. They check on each others homes while they are away, provide pet care, housekeeping, lawncare, cooking, care of a sick family members, transportation to doctor’s appts, job interviews, help to move, etc. Unlike some other cultures who are “okay” with living a long way away from family for a lifetime, I feel that Blacks feel most comfortable around family and others who are of their same culture as well as prefer living in areas with their churches nearby, which also serve as a social anchor.

As you all know, SW Airlines’ longtime hub in and out of CA is at PHX. Once passengers from all the airports in CA converge at PHX, they are rerouted on planes to smaller cities throughout “flyover country.” Without this type of system in place, there would never be enough passengers to fill a plane to Little Rock, Tulsa or Memphis, etc, and SWA is still the only carrier who offers regular, consistent service to flyover country’s “secondary markets” thru their “hub system” and multi-stop flight routes.

Once I typically boarded my plane in PHX to TX, OK or AR airports, I always tried to get a seat near the front of the cabin in the front row where six seats on each side of the plane face each other, conducive to a nice visit with other passengers for the 2-3 hr flight. In all cases, my (pre-holiday) plane filled with 75-90% Blacks (mostly all from CA) going “home” for the holidays. The entire rides were spent laughing and reminiscing about the important role our grandparents or a favorite aunt/uncle had in our lives, the mint leaves our mom grew on the back porch for “sweet and unsweet” iced tea, 3 layer chocolate cake with a warm hard-shell frosting poured over it and long toothpicks holding it together, pecan pie, fried okra in cornmeal with red-eye gravy, hamhock and beans, grits for breakfast, collard greens, fried eggplant, homemade fried chicken, the clothes our mother’s and grandmother’s sewed for us (and the fact that they taught us dressmaking skills), the veggie gardens we had to tend, the small baptist colleges they attended, playing outside until midnight in the summer with the crickets singing and fireflies buzzing and going fishing at the local lake, etc. There were never any complaints about their early lives from the passengers … just reminiscing and yearning to be “back home.”

I’ve been to several “Black” funerals in SD and have felt not only very inspired but also included. To this day, my memories of these gatherings still move me. In my mind, the Black culture of the south and southwest part of this country knows how to “do it up right,” even if the family is now headed by a matriarch through the death of their spouse. Children are raised to feel like they have a “village” which cares about them day to day. Even though the MSM paints a different picture with single Black parents in large cities who are living away from family, the Black culture doesn’t seem to me as “fragmented” as other cultures.

Some cities and towns where my peeps have lived all their lives have a Black majority and I have found these people to be the nicest and most helpful people you could ever meet. I have had to have help from neighbors a few times and they are willing to step right up, no questions asked. (Actually, ALL races are this way in certain parts of the country.)

I’ve spent several days in Baltimore, as well, taken hired “cars” to different tourist traps and eaten at all the local haunts, recommended to me by the locals and had the best time ever there.

CA is a melting pot where Black dust bowl refugees and southern dwellers came here for the (primarily defense) jobs during and after WWII. They carved out niches in cities for themselves to keep their culture alive and their kids (the boomers) stayed here and raised their kids. Now that these niches are being slowly “gentrified” into crowded, multi-unit nightmares (ex: Compton, parts of Downey, Norwalk and even the western part of SESD), I can’t blame the boomers (who don’t need high-paying jobs anymore) for wanting to go back “home” to retire. I disagree with the author in that I don’t believe Black families strive to live and raise their families in multi-unit nightmares. They (esp the boomers and beyond) prefer a SFR in a quiet neighborhood with a large backyard for their pets and garden. I don’t blame Blacks for feeling like a Martian living in isolation in (inhospitable) west coast cities (ex: Oregon) where their culture doesn’t exist anywhere and where they can’t even find the groceries to create the dishes of their youth.

And yes, Blacks vote both R and D for candidates whom they feel will act in their best interests, just like everyone else. We’re not going to be able to predict precisely where the “Black vote” will be cast in this election.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=no_such_reality]Interesting read. I’ll put this here since many think this person winning or that person winning means that or this.

Why has there been an exodus of black residents from West Coast liberal hubs?[
[/quote]

I don’t know about others here, but I have always said we need policies to increase supply and make housing affordable. I feel for people who have to move away because of housing costs.

[FlyerInHi]

BG, are you saying life for Blacks is more wholesome in the South?

I know one Black who loved San Diego but moved away for a job. Still would love to move back. I know plenty of White people who moved away because houses in CA are too expensive. For as long as I can remember, since the late 80s, people were moving away. But of course, many more have moved in and prospered.

I have less sympathy for White Republicans who moved away because they were complaining about lazy Mexicans and immigrants ruining the state (Pete Wilson and Prop 187). Well, the new people were not lazy for they had to work even harder to pay the higher housing prices.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=FlyerInHi]BG, are you saying life for Blacks is more wholesome in the South?. . . [/quote]Yes, I would say Black families are surrounded by “wholesomeness” in flyover country, especially if at least the family matriarch is still alive, active and influential. SoCal blacks have “wholesome” lives as well if those living in lower income areas can successfully keep their kids out of gangs and band together with law enforcement to successfully keep the gang influence from infiltrating their neighborhoods. And many are. It takes a village and many of these tight-knit communities have that “village” in place. Black families want the best for their kids and most want them to get accepted into college just like all parents.

The Black community in Oakland and surrounds (NorCal – Alameda Co) is far more entrenched, well-established and prosperous than those of SoCal cities (except maybe west/NW LA and SF Valley cities where entertainment industry workers and celebrities typically choose to live). RE has gotten so expensive in Oakland in the past decade+ that rents have skyrocketed, leaving out a lot of prospective tenants who have Section 8 vouchers and other marginal low-income groups whose kids were/are more prone to fall prey to gang influence, mainly due to lack of supervision after school. Due to its superior location, gentrification has taken hold in Oakland to such an extent that all but the most established longtime homeowners and other residents with good incomes have been priced out of the area forever.

The Oakland I knew as a elem/jr high schooler living in Alameda Co in the mid-late ’60’s is night and day from the Oakland we know today. It’s gone from a burned out city (in many areas) which was dangerous to even drive in during the day to a vibrant, exciting city with breathtaking views that anyone would be fine with walking around in at night ~50 years later.

What keeps the black communities together and successful is living near extended family, having decent-paying jobs to go to and their faith. Most Blacks could care less whether the immediate area they call “home” is 2 miles from the beach, 25 miles from the beach or in the middle of “flyover country.” Living in “coastal locations” isn’t as coveted by this group as it might be for members of some other ethnic groups or nationalities.

[livinincali]

Well looks like it’s Trump for the Republican nomination unless they do something crazy at the convention and blow up their party. Cruz is dropping out after getting slaughtered in Indiana.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/03/ted-cruz-suspends-campaign.html

[bearishgurl]

I just watched a couple of short videos and have been reading up a bit today and now feel that Bernie could very well win in CA and has an outside chance of possibly snagging the Dem nomination. Of course, it depends on his campaign being able to sway all those “Superdelegates” and beating Hillary in upcoming states could certainly accomplish this.

Superdelegates Can Change Their Vote At Any Time!

Bernie seems to be giving Hillary a run for her money, so much so that she now won’t be able to focus as much as she needs to on the Donald … to her detriment at this stage of the game.

Those two-faced “superdelegates” apparently dissed Hillary in favor of Obama back in 2008 (but earlier in the primary season):

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/feb/23/uselections2008.barackobama

Methinks this big jigsaw puzzle is going to get more confusing . . . . and interesting, folks :=0

[Author]

Posts