2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

Akrasia

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

But Trump is not "one of the most hated Republican candidates ever"
Polls and primary result are indicating that he is very popular.
Strong GOP voter turn out in primaries would also indicate the above.

Hillary on the other hand has major popularity problems.
Poor Dem voter turn out in the primaries would also indicate the above.

The Dems really need to get dirty and focus on "stop Trump".
Trying to make Hillary popular is a lost cause at this stage.

He is popular amongst his supporters, and Hated amongst his detractors.

In order to win a general election, you need to pick up votes from moderates and independents and undecideds

Being loved by 30% of the population and hated by 60% of the population is unlikely to win you a general election

Hilary Clinton also has an unfavorability problem, but her numbers are still better than Trumps (Trump has a net favorability rating of minus 25, Clinton has a net favorability of minus 8)

Trump is liked more than he is hated in the Republican party, but for independents and the democrat party, he is disliked way more than he is liked



http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/donald-trump-is-really-unpopular-with-general-election-voters/

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

jobbridge4life

OH I'd say happy and in some cases in fact positively willing to utilize it to their advantage. And criticisms of these elements and aspects of the Republican party was routinely dismissed and written off as 'PC gone mad' etc.

20Cent

Just a question if Republicans are still hoping Cruz or Rubio will get the nomination why is Bernie being written off when he has won more primaries than both of them?

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

Just a question if Republicans are still hoping Cruz or Rubio will get the nomination why is Bernie being written off when he has won more primaries than both of them?

Do you know how the system works?
Bernie is up against one candidate so between them one will get a majority of delegates and the nomination, i.e., Hillary.
The Republicans have more or less accepted (unless they're mental) that while Trump has a plurality pretty much guaranteed at this stage they're hoping to stop him getting a majority. If they managed that and no-one gets a majority on the first round of voting at the convention then all delegates are "free" and can go with whoever they want.

Colonialboy

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

One other thing that has also changed is that the banks that were 'too big to fail' in 2008 and caused the crash are now between 30 and 40% BIGGER, than they were in 2008 when they were 'too big too fail'
Alot of Americans , even poor rural Americans are aware of this. Whilst main street has suffered Wall St has prospered under the Democrats.

Thats where alot of Trump support is coming from. People know whats going on , but now they have a candidate who might fix it.

Also if the selection process at the convention seems mad just check out what happens if no-one hits the 270-mark in the actual election. :pac:

FreudianSlippers

20Cent wrote: »

Just a question if Republicans are still hoping Cruz or Rubio will get the nomination why is Bernie being written off when he has won more primaries than both of them?

Neither of them are viable presidential candidates and I think the majority of the Republican strategists know this. I think the Republicans know this electoral cycle is lost and will focus on the House/Senate.

FreudianSlippers

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Neither of them are viable presidential candidates and I think the majority of the Republican strategists know this. I think the Republicans know this electoral cycle is lost and will focus on the House/Senate.

They should still have the Congress after the election so there's always the hilarious possibility of them running a spoiler candidate in a few states to stop anyone hitting 270. :P

Colonialboy

Akrasia wrote: »

Hilary Clinton also has an unfavorability problem,

but unlike Trump the polls indicate the more she is out there the worse her favourability numbers are getting. She is sliding ...
If she continues her trend by November her favourability will be in the 20s.
Trumps numbers are not worsening , the are holding steady , Hilarys numbers are getting worse.
Trump will take her apart in any debate when they go head to head and this will add to her downward spiral trend.

20Cent

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you know how the system works?
Bernie is up against one candidate so between them one will get a majority of delegates and the nomination, i.e., Hillary.
The Republicans have more or less accepted (unless they're mental) that while Trump has a plurality pretty much guaranteed at this stage they're hoping to stop him getting a majority. If they managed that and no-one gets a majority on the first round of voting at the convention then all delegates are "free" and can go with whoever they want.

So their splitting the vote so no one will have a majority then pick Cruz or Rubio in the convention. Even if Trump has won the most primaries?
Won't there be uproar if that happens?
Then Trump could go it alone and really f them up.

Christy42

20Cent wrote: »

So their splitting the vote so no one will have a majority then pick Cruz or Rubio in the convention. Even if Trump has won the most primaries?
Won't there be uproar if that happens?
Then Trump could go it alone and really f them up.

Not really. 65% of the Republican party are voting against Trump. When it comes to the convention they will argue that Cruz or Rubio has a better shot but their votes got split. If Trump's numbers go towards 50% then it gets harder to stop the uproar.

If Trump goes it alone then they will lose in November. Right now I am willing to bet a lot of them would be willing to accept a loss in November and a chance to regroup in 4 years time.

Edit: @ColonialBoy, Trump is a business man, he won't touch the banks. If you want to deal with the banks being too big then get your Bernie placard out (and even then he would likely be blocked by congress anyway)

Akrasia

20Cent wrote: »

So their splitting the vote so no one will have a majority then pick Cruz or Rubio in the convention. Even if Trump has won the most primaries?
Won't there be uproar if that happens?
Then Trump could go it alone and really f them up.

The republican party really are in a no win situation.

I think the Romney strategy would work in preventing Trump from getting the nomination, in each state, anti-Trump voters should concentrate their vote on whichever candidate is most likely to beat Trump especially in the winner takes all states, the idea is to keep him below a majority of delegates. Then either Cruz or Rubio needs to withdraw just before the convention and endorse the other candidate and the vast majority of their delegates will move to that candidate giving him a majority going into the convention.

This would work a lot better than having Cruz and Rubio taking support from one another and Trump getting everything in those key winner takes all states (all the primaries from March 15 and afterwards)

Of course, ganging up on Trump will likely be considered as 'Not fair' by the man himself and he'll threaten to go independent.... There's also the risk that Trumps supporters might get a little bit angry about 'The establishment' rigging the primaries against their preferred candidate and the party could go into meltdown or split entirely.

Akrasia

Christy42 wrote: »

Not really. 65% of the Republican party are voting against Trump. When it comes to the convention they will argue that Cruz or Rubio has a better shot but their votes got split. If Trump's numbers go towards 50% then it gets harder to stop the uproar.

If Trump goes it alone then they will lose in November. Right now I am willing to bet a lot of them would be willing to accept a loss in November and a chance to regroup in 4 years time.

Edit: @ColonialBoy, Trump is a business man, he won't touch the banks. If you want to deal with the banks being too big then get your Bernie placard out (and even then he would likely be blocked by congress anyway)

If Bernie is the Democratic candidate, his presidential campaign will energise the democrat base and could see a large swing back to the Dems in both Congress and the Senate, especially if republican voters stay at home because they don't want to support the Trump campaign.

If Hillary is the candidate, turnout will be low, because people would be voting for her through gritted teeth rather than because they actually want her to be president. in fact, her campaign against Bernie is hoping that the turnout stays low, because she knows high turnout benefits him, not her.

The turnout has been very low in the red states that Hillary has won, but in the Blue states that went to Sanders, Turnout has actually been pretty high
Minnisota had very high turnout with some precincts even running out of ballots, Oklahoma broke the turnout record for a democratic primary, Colorado's turnout was so high that some precincts saw voters turned away by the fire marshals

If Sanders was the democratic candidate, I would predict large gains in both houses on November 8 and that would make it easier for him to get more of his reforms through

K-9

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Its the cover up of Bill's history I was really referring to, the cop killing stuff is hyperbole.

Its the cover ups that will get her, cover ups always do.

The outlandish stuff takes away from actual point though and cheapen the message, people are more likely to roll their eyes and ignore the whole thing.

Albeit the opposite seems to be happening in this campaign!

Rjd2

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

That is interesting.
Sky News are playing a different angle.
Their 2 min segment being repeated is an edited collage of the other candidates abusing Trump.

Then a shot at the end of Rubio refusing to shake Trumps offered hand.

This may be part of the reason why people on our side of the pond cannot understand why he is winning?
Our media never show any substance.

Trump had a poor debate and resorted to insults quickly, Rubio never got going while Cruz was slick but empty as Colonial Boy alluded to. . The winner was Kasich but like Rubio winning the last debate it won't mean much. Trump's supporters are not going to flee after what was his first poor debate and the others are to far behind to catch up now.

Rubio and Trump definitely did a fist bump, plenty of vines of it after the debate.

ebbsy

Myself I d'ont think there is any point in putting Rubio or Cruz forward, I d'ont think they would beat Clinton. I expect her to get past Sanders easily enough. He does'nt have enough support.

However Trump does have an excellent chance against Clinton. She is going through the motions, while people keep tuning in to hear what he has to say. He also has the advantage that he is not a politician (yet) and can fire at will. Also he is a familiar face on TV, which helps.

At first I thought it was a publicity stunt, but it might take something of a balls up of Rick Perry proportions to stop him

JPNelsforearm

Listen to his banter, natural on the stage," Romney, drop to your knees", schlonged.

Also he calls out the infamous "47% dont work/pay taxes etc" line.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qv8M66ZbAZA

20Cent

20Cent wrote: »

So their splitting the vote so no one will have a majority then pick Cruz or Rubio in the convention. Even if Trump has won the most primaries?
Won't there be uproar if that happens?
Then Trump could go it alone and really f them up.

Yeah they are pretty screwed at this stage. Not meaning to be glib either

DEFTLEFTHAND

Kasich won that Fox debate for me also. Some people are saying that Trump will look for him to be his VP although Kasich himself dismissed this idea in an interview with Bill O'Reilly after the debate.

Rubio doesn't instill confidence in me. Softly spoken and young, he looks like a boy dressing up in his Dad's suit.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Inquitus

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Kasich won that Fox debate for me also. Some people are saying that Trump will look for him to be his VP although Kasich himself dismissed this idea in an interview with Bill O'Reilly after the debate.

Kasich is the best candidate the GOP have, it's just a shame he won't get off the ground. He'd make an excellent President imo.

MightyMandarin

Hillary paid herself $250k from her own campaign funds.

Surely this has to be the last straw with this woman. No other candidate in the race has done something like this, not even a habitual liar like Trump, who 'only' used $410k in campaign funds for expenses and even someone as slimey as Cruz hasn't done this.

It's not illegal to do such a thing, but I doubt anyone thinks it's acceptable to take $250k from campaign donations when you're worth over $100m.

Honestly, I must say that if Sanders loses, I will not support a blatant liar like Hillary. This type of stuff just sickens me. Let Trump win the race, I can't say that he's more repulsive than this woman.

Fr Tod Umptious

ebbsy wrote: »

Myself I d'ont think there is any point in putting Rubio or Cruz forward, I d'ont think they would beat Clinton. I expect her to get past Sanders easily enough. He does'nt have enough support.

However Trump does have an excellent chance against Clinton. She is going through the motions, while people keep tuning in to hear what he has to say. He also has the advantage that he is not a politician (yet) and can fire at will. Also he is a familiar face on TV, which helps.

At first I thought it was a publicity stunt, but it might take something of a balls up of Rick Perry proportions to stop him

I don't believe for a minute that the GOP are attacking Trump because they think he will lose to Hillary.

They don't want him because they are afraid that he will heat Hillary.

And to be honest I think he will too.

ebbsy

MightyMandarin wrote: »

Hillary paid herself $250k from her own campaign funds.

Surely this has to be the last straw with this woman. No other candidate in the race has done something like this, not even a habitual liar like Trump, who 'only' used $410k in campaign funds for expenses and even someone as slimey as Cruz hasn't done this.

It's not illegal to do such a thing, but I doubt anyone thinks it's acceptable to take $250k from campaign donations when you're worth over $100m.

Honestly, I must say that if Sanders loses, I will not support a blatant liar like Hillary. This type of stuff just sickens me. Let Trump win the race, I can't say that he's more repulsive than this woman.

At this point unless one of them does a school shooting it will be Trump vs Clinton bud.

BoJack Horseman

Inquitus wrote: »

Kasich is the best candidate the GOP have, it's just a shame he won't get off the ground. He'd make an excellent President imo.

He still might make a very good vice president.
For the GOP it would be nice (and necessary) to have Ohio & its 18 electoral college votes.

BoJack Horseman

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

He still might make a very good vice president.
For the GOP it would be nice (and necessary) to have Ohio & its 18 electoral college votes.

If he was popular then yes. We'll see on the 15th but I doubt he's worth going with.

BoJack Horseman

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

All that rifle-barrel-cooked bacon has aged Cruz somewhat!

vetinari

I actually think the opposite to some of the other people here.
Hillary beats Trump handily imo.
She'd have a struggle against Rubio or Kasich.
Rubio and Cruz (a bit too late though) have finally cottoned on to the best tactic against Trump.
Keep attacking him directly, he's going to lose his composure and look weak eventually.

jobbridge4life

Inquitus wrote: »

Kasich is the best candidate the GOP have, it's just a shame he won't get off the ground. He'd make an excellent President imo.

Popularity aside for the moment, although it is obviously critical, he is the best candidate by far and has been since the start. In terms of developing the party, of moving it forward in some small way his comments regarding the gay marriage ruling show a what very different Republican party might look like. He isn't perfect, but Hillary certainly isn't either. His experience is extensive and impressive but it is all for nothing when you are up against such a cartoon buffoon in a party that has long since become a sort of sinister circus.

I can't help but think of Jon Huntsman Jr., an even better candidate, whose 2012 run was prematurely suffocated by the deluge of loons that made up that embarrassing nomination process for the Republican Party. A functioning Republican Party should definitely have nominated him and he quite likely could have been President.