2016 Election
Quote: kewlj
EvenBob, I don't think the "Trump Bump" in the last week was due to Bush dropping out...
.
It wasn't my idea, I got it from articles I read
and from Rush. I seldom have original ideas.
Quote: EvenBobHillary people say they want Trump to win
because he'll be easy to beat. They also
dismissed him as a joke last summer. If
everybody else has been totally wrong
about Trump every step of the way, why
does the Hillary camp think they'll be
right about beating him. I don't believe
they think that at all, I think he scares
them to death.
Only if he actually wins the whole shebang. (i.e., the White House)
The repubs could've beaten him. They stayed divided and conquered. You don't need a military tactician to figure out what is going wrong.
Quote:On Monday, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich blamed -- and considering the tenor of the conversation, that seems like the right word -- the Fox News program for creating the Trump political phenomenon. Trump appeared on the show every Monday for four years, until he launched his presidential campaign last spring. The regular segment was called, simply, "Mondays with Trump."
Blondes and anyone else who brings the ratings. That's free market stuff.
thought they were supposed to hate his guts
because of the remarks he made.
Quote: EvenBobTrump got 41% of the Hispanic vote in NV? I
thought they were supposed to hate his guts
because of the remarks he made.
Makes sense, the ones votings have done things the right way and resent those here illegally.
Quote: charliepatrickfyi http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-35647126 has the results coming in with a click-able map for all the counties. Unsurprisingly the outlying ones have already made their returns but Clark country is less than 1/4 way through.
Yep, Clark County (Las Vegas) is lagging behind in the counting. Trump is winning Clark County with about 51%, so when all is said and done, I expect Trump will register 46-47% of the state total, but that likely won't occur until sometime Wednesday.
Also, at the current time (12:20 am), Cruz is running slightly ahead of Rubio, but when all the Clark County votes are counted, I expect Rubio will beat Cruz by about 3%.
Marco Rubio 23.85% 17,940
Ted Cruz 21.38% 16,079
Ben Carson 4.81% 3,619
John Kasich 3.60% 2,709
100% Reporting
http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-35647126
I hope that Kasich and Carson drop out. They are not in serious contention and, in the case of Kasich, will have a bit of an impact in some states that will basically make votes for him even more worthless than they are at this point--if there is ANY case for Rubio or Cruz the votes Kasich takes in places like Ohio and Michigan will help prevent that from coming together. It isn't important to me at this point who wins--I think I am fine with all three (more fine with one than others, but the voters are speaking loudly)--it is that the front-runner is fully challenged and continues to gain momentum OR that the race tightens up quickly, before the front-runner is too far ahead.
The "why" behind that is that I want to see Republicans get behind a candidate. It looks like Trump will be the candidate, so Republicans need to get it decided and move to the general election. We need to get past all the stupid "I'm going to sue you" crap within the party and start the process of making sure Hillary or Bernie do not win. The more time between the attacks amongst Republicans and the general election, the better. I think Trump needs to flesh out some of ideas, but I thought that a long time ago and it did not matter at all...
"About 20 percent of likely Democratic voters say they would buck the party and vote for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump in a general election, according to a new poll."
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/265330-some-dems-would-defect-for-trump-poll-shows
That all sounds good, 20% going to Trump from the Dems, but the same poll showed 14% would go to Hillary. In an election year where some Republicans may not participate because they simply do no like the candidate, getting Dem voters is important. The way to do that is to get to campaigning against Hillary (or Bernie) as soon as possible. Hillary is just not liked or trusted; hay needs to be made from that fact. In addition, Hillary and Bill are the "other" dynasty out there and their time in office was filled with scandals. It may be a "vast right wing conspiracy" but even the most skeptical of every investigation over the 24 or so years they have been in the national spotlight can't possibly still believe it is all just something someone made up.
If someone is accused of a crime or something bad one time, it may not be true.
If they are accused twice, they still may be innocent.
If the number of allegations grows into a bunch (five or more), it is likely they have done something wrong and have covered their tracks well enough that they might get away with it. The "proof" may not all be there, and I am not saying that it is 100% sure that they are guilty, but there is something there.
With the Clintons, there IS something there. Some of it has been proven to a point. How much is there? Who knows.
The folks that deny it can deny it all day but, as much as I dislike President Obama, I don't see him involved in the scandals of the "vast right wing conspiracy", nor was Carter. Things have happened in each administration, but the Clinton's time at the top has been marred by many more of them.
We have likely seen our last "President Bush" for a long time; it is time to put the chances of a "President Clinton" behind us.
Quote: EvenBobHillary people say they want Trump to win
because he'll be easy to beat. They also
dismissed him as a joke last summer. If
everybody else has been totally wrong
about Trump every step of the way, why
does the Hillary camp think they'll be
right about beating him. I don't believe
they think that at all, I think he scares
them to death.
Oh no... We're reverting into AZDuffman territory here. "Liberals are saying the opposite of what they actually believe" because..... reasons.
Trump is doing great in the Republican primaries. He gets 35-50% of the vote. That's what, 1/6-1/4 of the general electorate? (And that's being generous).
I'm not saying he can't win a general election (anything can happen with Trump).
I'm just saying let's not confuse angry Republican primary voters with the general electorate.
Quote: EvenBobTrump got 41% of the Hispanic vote in NV? I
thought they were supposed to hate his guts
because of the remarks he made.
Hmm
He got 41% of the few republican Hispanic votes
Most Hispanics are Dem
Quote: AcesAndEightsAnyone want to bet with me? I want Donald Trump as next president of the United States. I'll offer -200 on the other side (field), which is better than you can get on the betting sites I found with a cursory google search (oddsshark has +250, Paddy Power has 5/2 or +250 as well).
Oh, and I can't go too big on this, unfortunately. Max of $100 on my side (happy to give action all to one person or split it up). Respected forum members only (no Keysers). I have a record of paying off bets. AxiomOfChoice is gone now but I paid him for the safety in SB LXVIII. I believe TheCesspit also got some of that action?
Quote: AcesAndEightsAnyone want to bet with me? I want Donald Trump as next president of the United States. I'll offer -200 on the other side (field), which is better than you can get on the betting sites I found with a cursory google search (oddsshark has +250, Paddy Power has 5/2 or +250 as well).
If I understand you correctly, you want someone to risk $200 to win $100? If Trump is president, you win, anyone else, you lose?
Quote: SOOPOOQuote: AcesAndEightsAnyone want to bet with me? I want Donald Trump as next president of the United States. I'll offer -200 on the other side (field), which is better than you can get on the betting sites I found with a cursory google search (oddsshark has +250, Paddy Power has 5/2 or +250 as well).
If I understand you correctly, you want someone to risk $200 to win $100? If Trump is president, you win, anyone else, you lose?
Yes, that is correct. As I said, this is more generous than any odds you can get on the internet. Here's a good summary. I guess one site has him at 2/1 which is what I want.
Quote: ziadymfI think Republicans hate Hillary a lot more than Donald Trump. Does anybody REALLY think they will stay home and ensure that have 4 or more years of Hillary ? REALLY
There are always groups of people who stay away even if it seems they should want to vote. Getting out the vote is critical to beat Hillary. Some people will choose to just sit home and hate her because they also don't like Trump all that much. The trick is always to drive turn out. Obama drove turn out; that helped him get elected.
Dems will vote for the Dem, Republicans will vote for the Republican. And it will come down to a few swing states.
Quote: ams288In the end, this election will be just like all the others....
Dems will vote for the Dem, Republicans will vote for the Republican. And it will come down to a few swing states.
I think it will come down to turn out and swing states.
Quote: ams288In the end, this election will be just like all the others....
Dems will vote for the Dem, Republicans will vote for the Republican. And it will come down to a few swing states.
For once we agree. Usually winning 2 out of 3 between PA, FL and OH wins it.
Quote: BozFor once we agree. Usually winning 2 out of 3 between PA, FL and OH wins it.
Boz, I know you are a PA guy, but I don't think Pa is really a swing state during presidential elections anymore. In the last 6 presidential elections, dating back to 1992, Pa has voted democrat all six times by an average of more than 7%. Even if you exclude the two Clinton wins in 1992 and 1996, because there were unusual circumstances in a relatively strong third party candidates and just look at the last 4 presidential election, two won by a republican, George W Bush and two won by a democrat, Obama, Pennsylvania still voted democratic all 4 elections by an average of 5.5%.
I think Pa is pretty solidly democrat at this point. That's not to say that it is not possible for Pa to go republican as it did in the 80's with Reagan, but the states are all kind or related. By the time Pa flips republican, several other states that are closer to true swing states, like Ohio, Florida, Wisconsin, will have already gone republican.
I do think your above 2 out of 3 statement becomes more accurate if you replace Pa with Virginia. I think the 2 of 3 statement is more true for republicans than democrats. Because the democrats have a small electoral college advantage it is possible for them to win the presidency only winning 1 of these 3, but it would be one of those extremely close elections like Bush v Gore. They would need everything else to fall just right.
Quote: terapinedHmm
He got 41% of the few republican Hispanic votes
Most Hispanics are Dem
He wasn't supposed to get ANY Hispanic
votes, he was supposed to drive ALL Hispanics
to Hillary.
Quote: kewljBoz, I know you are a PA guy, but I don't think Pa is really a swing state during presidential elections anymore. In the last 6 presidential elections, dating back to 1992, Pa has voted democrat all six times by an average of more than 7%. Even if you exclude the two Clinton wins in 1992 and 1996, because there were unusual circumstances in a relatively strong third party candidates and just look at the last 4 presidential election, two won by a republican, George W Bush and two won by a democrat, Obama, Pennsylvania still voted democratic all 4 elections by an average of 5.5%.
I think Pa is pretty solidly democrat at this point. That's not to say that it is not possible for Pa to go republican as it did in the 80's with Reagan, but the states are all kind or related. By the time Pa flips republican, several other states that are closer to true swing states, like Ohio, Florida, Wisconsin, will have already gone republican.
I do think your above 2 out of 3 statement becomes more accurate if you replace Pa with Virginia. I think the 2 of 3 statement is more true for republicans than democrats. Because the democrats have a small electoral college advantage it is possible for them to win the presidency only winning 1 of these 3, but it would be one of those extremely close elections like Bush v Gore. They would need everything else to fall just right.
Your history is correct but the state has had a GOP Gov and a current Senator in the past 6 years. It usually comes down to how well the Dem's get out the vote in Philly and Pittsburgh because most of the state is GOP territory. And I believe someone like Trump has the potential to gain some of that Union support in Pittsburgh so it could be close.
But then again, if he does win PA, it may be over very early election night.
Quote: EvenBobHe wasn't supposed to get ANY Hispanic
votes, he was supposed to drive ALL Hispanics
to Hillary.
That's absurd
Of course he will get some Hispanic votes.
Zero Hispanics votes for Trump?
All Hispanic votes for Hill?
Where does this BS come from?
Even Rommney got plenty of Blacks to vote for him
No way Obama got 100% Black vote
EvenBob.Quote: terapinedWhere does this BS come from?
Quote: terapinedThat's absurd
Of course he will get some Hispanic votes.
Zero Hispanics votes for Trump?
All Hispanic votes for Hill?
Where does this BS come from?
Ask EvenBob for a source. See what happens. (Hint: *crickets*)
I see on Twitter that Trump's "41% of the Hispanic vote" equals out to approx. 1,300 votes.
So congrats Trump on making progress with Latinos! Hillary is shaking in her boots....
Obama is allegedly considering Republican Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval for the Supreme Court.
Haha... If that's true, it will be hilarious to see how the Senate Republicans react. Grab the popcorn.
Quote: ams288https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/02/24/brian-sandoval-republican-governor-of-nevada-is-being-vetted-for-supreme-court-vacancy/
Obama is allegedly considering Republican Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval for the Supreme Court.
Haha... If that's true, it will be hilarious to see how the Senate Republicans react. Grab the popcorn.
If he is truly a centrist and there is nothing negative on him, I would hope that they confirm him. They could show cooperation when an ideal candidate was presented and the possibility of the opening being an issue in the election would be taken away. Hillary couldn't use it to her advantage.
The other advantage is that at worst they get a centrist with the possibility of 2-3 openings in the next 4 years...if Hillary wins, there is a chance she could get 4 liberals on the court in one term if a centrist nomination is held up. That would be the death of the Constitution--everyone would be on the "living document" side...which basically means it says whatever they want it to say.
Quote:
CNN)—Former Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney is hitting Donald Trump, his party's current front-runner, over not releasing tax information the former Massachusetts governor says voters have a right to see.
"We have good reason to believe that there's a bombshell in Donald Trump's taxes," Romney told Fox News on Wednesday, also calling out by name Sens. Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio to disclose their tax information as well.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/24/politics/mitt-romney-donald-trump-taxes/
Nobody believes much will bother his core supporters though; this stuff is just for people who might care and who might vote.
Quote: EvenBobHe wasn't supposed to get ANY Hispanic
votes, he was supposed to drive ALL Hispanics
to Hillary.
From statistician Nate Silver:
Quote: Nate SilverThere was a lot of nerd-fighting over who won the Hispanic vote in the Democratic caucuses in Nevada, and we suspect there will be some over the Republican caucuses as well. Indeed, the entrance poll had Trump beating Rubio 45 percent to 28 percent among Hispanics. But keep in mind that the sample size on that result is somewhere between 100 and 200 people. That means the margin of sampling error for the Hispanic subgroup is near +/- 10 percentage points (or even higher). Perhaps more importantly, just 8 percent of Republican voters were Hispanic (or 1 percent of the Nevadan Hispanic population), and they are not politically representative of the larger Hispanic community.
Nate Silver had an impressive track record predicting the '08 and '12 races. But he's not perfect: like myself and everyone else, Silver spent most of 2015 predicting that Trump would crash & burn long before New Hampshire.
Quote: ams288In the end, this election will be just like all the others....
Dems will vote for the Dem, Republicans will vote for the Republican. And it will come down to a few swing states.
With Rubio or Cruz as the nominee, that's exactly what would happen.
But Trump isn't a real Republican, so I could see a possible scenario where Trump does well in Rust Belt states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan that have been in the Democratic column in the last two elections. (Keyword being "possible.") On the other hand, the man is such an obnoxious buffoon, I could also see a possible scenario where the Democrats clobber him.
Quote: renoFrom statistician Nate Silver:
Quote: Nate SilverThere was a lot of nerd-fighting over who won the Hispanic vote in the Democratic caucuses in Nevada, and we suspect there will be some over the Republican caucuses as well. Indeed, the entrance poll had Trump beating Rubio 45 percent to 28 percent among Hispanics. But keep in mind that the sample size on that result is somewhere between 100 and 200 people. That means the margin of sampling error for the Hispanic subgroup is near +/- 10 percentage points (or even higher). Perhaps more importantly, just 8 percent of Republican voters were Hispanic (or 1 percent of the Nevadan Hispanic population), and they are not politically representative of the larger Hispanic community.
Nate Silver had an impressive track record predicting the '08 and '12 races. But he's not perfect: like myself and everyone else, Silver spent most of 2015 predicting that Trump would crash & burn long before New Hampshire.
Don't bother using facts in an exchange with EB.
Quote: renoWith Rubio or Cruz as the nominee, that's exactly what would happen.
But Trump isn't a real Republican, so I could see a possible scenario where Trump does well in Rust Belt states like Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan that have been in the Democratic column in the last two elections. (Keyword being "possible.") On the other hand, the man is such an obnoxious buffoon, I could also see a possible scenario where the Democrats clobber him.
Trump will definitely win the republican nomination
After he locks that up, he will make a huge policy pivot from hard right into the center
Repubs will freak because he fooled them into thinking he is hard right when he really resides in the center
Right wing will still vote for him to prevent a Clinton win
He will campaign as a centrist New Yorker that just happened to win the Republican nomination
He will fight hard for the Dem vote, especially blue collar rust belt voters
He will be called out for flip flopping on issues but he will also get away with it. Teflon Trump.
His path to the White House is to win rust belt states that usually Dems win
Indeed, he'll vote democrat in this year's election. And for the next 100+ years.
Quote: terapined
After he locks that up, he will make a huge policy pivot from hard right into the center
He's done it already. Bashing Bush on WMD's and
the Iraq war, saying Planned Parenthood does
good work. Estimates are he'll carve off 20%
of the Dem vote. I read today he has more paid
top advisers than any other candidate, by far.
One of his billionaire business partners said
in an interview recently, 'Never think Donald
doesn't know exactly what he's doing, he's
always two steps ahead of you without you even
knowing it'.
That is always a problem when the people doing the polling have severely limited ability in Spanish.Quote: Nate SilverThe margin of sampling error for the Hispanic subgroup is near +/- 10 percentage points (or even higher).
Quote: EvenBobHe's done it already. Bashing Bush on WMD's and
the Iraq war, saying Planned Parenthood does
good work. Estimates are he'll carve off 20%
of the Dem vote. I read today he has more paid
top advisers than any other candidate, by far.
One of his billionaire business partners said
in an interview recently, 'Never think Donald
doesn't know exactly what he's doing, he's
always two steps ahead of you without you even
knowing it'.
Oh dear... Dare I even bother asking for a source?
Or as usual should we just assume this is another one you pulled out of your rear end?
Quote: ams288
Oh dear... Dare I even bother asking for a source?
?
You missed the last debate? He bashed the
crap out of pres Bush for 5min. Go find
it on Youtube. He also said PP does a lot
of good work. Please try and keep up.
Quote: EvenBobYou missed the last debate? He bashed the
crap out of pres Bush for 5min. Go find
it on Youtube. He also said PP does a lot
of good work. Please try and keep up.
Please try to keep up with me.
See the part of your little poem/post that I bolded.
Who "estimates that Trump will carve off 20% of the Dem vote?"
(Besides you, of course...)
I almost jumped in here in EB's defense ( I know, that is simply weird ) but as always EB was already ahead of me. Take that Am88's ;-). OhDear is another member entirely, subject for a different post...Quote: ams288Quote: EvenBobHe's done it already. Bashing Bush on WMD's and
the Iraq war, saying Planned Parenthood does
good work. Estimates are he'll carve off 20%
of the Dem vote. I read today he has more paid
top advisers than any other candidate, by far.
One of his billionaire business partners said
in an interview recently, 'Never think Donald
doesn't know exactly what he's doing, he's
always two steps ahead of you without you even
knowing it'.
Oh dear... Dare I even bother asking for a source?
Or as usual should we just assume this is another one you pulled out of your rear end?
Where was I? Oooh, I remember. If I had a gazillion dollars why would I want to apply for the hardest job on the planet? Interesting question, heard it posed by someone else on the radio today on the way to my favorite grocery store (redacted, I own stock ). That commentator said he was worried Trump would quit after six months, just say eff this and walk away. Interesting thought. I mean to start with, if I had a gazillion dollars I would prolly not be applying for any job. I'd be on some private beach that I owned, surrounded by some special personal assistants. Maybe that's why I don't have a gazillion dollars, I'd prolly have quit with half a gazillion..;-)
Quote: TwoFeathersATLThat commentator said he was worried Trump would quit after six months, just say eff this and walk away.
Wouldn't surprise me
There once was a time when conservatives had a disdain for quitters
anyway
The move is called pulling a Palin
Quote: ams288
Who "estimates that Trump will carve off 20% of the Dem vote?"
One of the talking heads said it last night
after the election. Lots of Dems hate
Hillary's guts and would rather vote for
an outsider like Trump.
Quote: TwoFeathersATLif I had a gazillion dollars I would prolly not be applying for any job. I'd be on some private beach that I owned, surrounded by some special personal assistants. Maybe that's why I don't have a gazillion dollars, I'd prolly have quit with half a gazillion..;-)
I don't think it's just about work, Trump has always sought lots of attention. Best job he could pick for that.
Addams Family or what. No wonder he
gives me the creeps.
Quote: EvenBobDoes Ted Cruz look like Grandpa from the
Addams Family or what. No wonder he
gives me the creeps.
Grandpa is from the Munsters. And yes Cruz does resemble him. :) He also looks kind of like a 'grown up' Eddie from the same show.
First, Rubio is not getting out. He is the establishment candidate.
So scenario one is that Cruz either fails to win Texas, or even if he wins Texas, but nothing else in the south, he drops out seeing no path. The Rubio people think they win a two man race between Rubio and Trump, but I think most of Cruz's support actually goes to Trump. Those people want an outsider and that is Trump, not Rubio. I think this scenario easily puts Trump over 50% in most states and he wins the nomination easily.
Scenario Two is that Cruz wins Texas, maybe a couple other southern states and things go on status quo, as a 3 man race. Even at 35-40 percent support, Trump will win most states and should amass enough delegates to win the nomination.
The only possible scenario I see to stop Trump would be a 3 man race, continuing all the way to the convention, in which Trump comes up just short of the delegates needed. In a brokered convention, Trump would get little support from the elected establishment that runs the show and Cruz is the most disliked senator and also would receive little support, so advantage Rubio (or a compromise candidate like Paul Ryan).
BUT, in order for that to occur, Rubio and Cruz will have to start WINNING some states after march 15, when it becomes winner takes all many places. Just finishing 2nd and 3rd will get them zero, just like in South Carolina. It would have to be a "perfect storm". Rubio would need to win Florida (where he is 3rd, 25 points behind) and a few other winner take all states. Cruz would have to win Texas (which is NOT a winner take all state, so Trump will still get delegates) and Cruz would have to win some other states to accumulate some delegates. Kasich winning Ohio would also help.
But while there is talk of a brokered convention, the way the republicans set things up with winner take all states after march 15, makes that very unlikely. They actually set things up to avoid the brokered convention scenario. Second and third place finishes aren't going to do anything to get to a brokered convention, you would actually need at least 3 different candidates winning numerous states and that just doesn't look likely at this point
