Time's POTY won't be Sanders, Clinton, or Trump. It will be ISIS.

[onenote]

At least that's my prediction. In fact, I don't see how it could be otherwise unless Time chickens out because they know they'll be lambasted for "glorifying" and "rewarding" ISIS. But the POTY is not the "good person of the year" it's the person or group that "for better or for worse...has done the most to influence the events of the year". And that's ISIS, hands down.

If Time does chicken out, my prediction is that they go with the "candidates for president" as a group -- Trump, Carson, Cruz, Sanders, Clinton, O'Malley -- the whole kit and kaboodle. They aren't picking one candidate over all the others.

[Sherman A1]

1. I must disagree

with your conclusion, however we will both know rather shortly as to whom it may be.

[onenote]

8. I'm curious for your reasons for disagreeing with my conclusion.

My conclusion, of course, is just my opinion, but I'd be interested in knowing what flaws you see in my reasoning.

[NorthCarolina]

2. Not sure about ISIS, but I believe you're correct about

Sanders, even if he wins their poll as it appears he will. If you read down the polling page, they already say that the results of their poll will not influence their decision, just an opportunity for readers to express their choice.

[onenote]

4. The results of the readers' poll have never influenced Time's decision

They've been doing the readers poll since 1998 and I don't think the winner of the readers' poll has ever been named the POTY. And with good reason. The results of the readers poll have in many years been downright absurd.

In 1998, the winner was Mike Foley, a professional wrestler. In other years its been Kim Jun Un (the magazine's pick: Barack Obama). Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won the poll once. Last year it was Narendra Modi (the magazine's pick was Ebola Fighters).

How silly is it? Well, the readers poll allows you to vote yes or no. In 2011, Turkey's Recep Tayyip Erdoğan (probably less of a household name than Modi) crushed the competition in the yes vote category. He also crushed the competition in the no vote category.

The standard by which the magazine claims it selects the POTY (although one can debate whether their choices always meet that standard) is the one mentioned in my OP: for good or bad, what person/group/object most influenced events in the past year.
If Sanders wins the nomination next year and wins the presidency, he'll be a shoe-in for 2016 POTY. But this year? It's not even close.

[LonePirate]

3. My guesses as to their selection

1. Global climate scientists
2. Putin
3. Trump

[onenote]

6. I was going to put Climate Change as my dark horse candidate.

Definitely in the running. And you're right about Putin being a top candidate as well.

Still don't think Trump has a snowball's chance in hell of winning, notwithstanding the media's fixation on him.

[Initech]

17. You really think that they'd consider anyone over Trump?

[LonePirate]

18. Trump's impact has been isolated to the campaign. He's had little worldwide impact.

If someone defeats Trump, it will likely be a person or people will far greater impact on the entire world.

[Initech]

19. But Time has absolutely no problem with choosing the controversial candidate.

Remember the outrage over them choosing Bush after 2004? I expect that to happen again this year. It doesn't always have to be someone who's made a positive impact.

[LonePirate]

24. I agree the quality of the impact matters not. However, quantity does matter.

Trump's impact has almost exclusively been limited to the Republican campaign. He has had some impact on the Democratic campaign but not much. He's had even less impact on overall present day politics and governance in Washington and he has had almost no impact outside of the US apart from angering our neighbors south of the border. Climate scientists or Putin would be choices with global impact. Trump would be a choice with isolated American impact this year. If he miraculously wins the presidency next year, then he will be the unquestionable front runner and likely honoree.

[Vinca]

5. It shouldn't be.

ISIS should be considered a pack of homicidal nuts and not given a second of fame. That's what they want.

[onenote]

7. So should the media simply stop covering ISIS?

Yes, they are a pack of homicidal nuts. But as I mentioned, the standard, according to the magazine, by which it selects the POTY is the person or group that, for good or bad, has had the greatest influence on events during the past year. I don't see how that isn't ISIS.

Nonetheless, it wouldn't surprise me if Time chickened out simply to avoid reactions such as yours. After all, this is a magazine that named Giuliani as the 2001 POTY rather than Al Qaeda or the 9-11 terrorists because (so they argued) the response to the attacks (which they described as a great coming together, which probably wasn't unreasonable that soon after the attacks) was more significant than the attacks. In retrospect, their choice was wrong.

[Yavin4]

9. It will be Trump.

He's destroying a major political party in the US.

[erpowers]

10. Might Not Have the Courage

You may be right, but I wondered if Time has the courage to put them on the cover. In the past they have shown they are willing to cave to fears of a backlash. In 2001, they really wanted to put Osama Bin Laden on the cover, but they chose not to due to the backlash they knew they would get for putting him on the cover. As a result they put Rudy Guiliani on the cover.

I think they are going to put Bernie Sanders on the cover. They may go as far as to put all the outside candidates on the cover. They may argue that these people have upended politics as we know them. This years people have little to no government experience, or politicians who are not from the either parties' inner circle are either leading in the polls, or giving the front runners a run for their money.

[Princess Turandot]

11. Where do the candidates on the readers poll come from?

Are they from Time or some kind of initial reader nomination?

ISIS isn't on that list, but I don't know if the Time editors are limited to those names.

My guess before looking at the reader's vote list was Anthony Kennedy/Mr. Obergefell/marriage equality/SCOTUS. Then there's Black Lives Matter.
I think that ISIS or 'The Jihadist' is also a possibility.

Regarding the various US pres candidates, the effect of all/any of them can only be judged when voting occurs. (And they may be reserving that group: short of a calamity of some kind, the next POTUS elect is a shoe-in for 2016.)

I hope it's Kennedy etc. The icing on that cake is that it will raise Tony the hat's blood pressure.

[KamaAina]

12. Why not? Hitler made it

[onenote]

15. Do you think he didn't qualify? Hard to argue with the fact he did more to influence world events

in the late 1930s than pretty much anyone else.

To be honest, I'm surprised he wasn't named again in 1939. (Stalin was).

[Beacool]

23. I was going to post something similar.

I wouldn't be totally surprised. If Hitler made it one year, then anyone can top their list, no matter how vile.

[dinkytron]

13. What about "Black Lives Matter"?

[onenote]

14. a contender, but not as strong a contender as ISIS

The POTY is only slightly US-centric. About 40 percent of the time, the POTY is not from the US and/or his or her influence was not limited to the US. (In fact, the same could be said for a lot of the POTYs from the US).

So while its probably in the running, the global impact of ISIS (Russian plane brought down, attack in Paris, Brussels on lockdown, worldwide debate over Syrian refugees) give it an edge over BLM.

[SidDithers]

16. And then will begin the conspiracy theories of how TPTB don't want Bernie...

despite his overwhelming victory in the online polling and twitter elections.

Sid

[Bluenorthwest]

20. Hitler got it once, Stalin twice, Ayatollah Khomeini once and even Wallis Simpson.

nt

[n2doc]

21. Could be Putin n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

22. He's already had it once.....

nt