ADVERTISEMENT

Trump wins again

qazplm said:
I think he's headed for a whole lotta republican delegates. Looks like I overestimated the Republicans... He's at 49% in the latest poll. That's half the primary voters folks. He is mainstream Republican right now.
Click to expand...

Yup unfortunately he's tearing it up
 
jadeezra said:
Yup unfortunately he's tearing it up
Click to expand...

The whole race, mostly on the Republican side, is just flat out weird.

I mean, last summer I thought Trump would stick around and eventually flame out down the road - but never to a point where he was winning fairly mainstream states.

The approach that's been taken against him has been baffling, to be quite frank. And now that Rubio has taken this approach of acting like Trump himself - I don't know how well that will play to his more mainstream core as the antics over the last several days have been embarrassing, to put it nicely.

I think the field has really put Republicans in a tough spot. They don't want Trump, they really don't like Cruz - so Rubio has kinda become their default candidate. Not so much because they really like him though. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense logically - Rubio hasn't won a state and will likely not win a state until perhaps Florida. Meanwhile, Cruz will probably win a couple at that point. But Trump has almost made it impossible for Cruz to breakout because he's actually taking away a lot of his voting bloc (which is ironic because Republicans want Cruz to drop out cause they think Cruz voters will suddenly support Rubio).
 
lbodel said:
The whole race, mostly on the Republican side, is just flat out weird.

I mean, last summer I thought Trump would stick around and eventually flame out down the road - but never to a point where he was winning fairly mainstream states.

The approach that's been taken against him has been baffling, to be quite frank. And now that Rubio has taken this approach of acting like Trump himself - I don't know how well that will play to his more mainstream core as the antics over the last several days have been embarrassing, to put it nicely.

I think the field has really put Republicans in a tough spot. They don't want Trump, they really don't like Cruz - so Rubio has kinda become their default candidate. Not so much because they really like him though. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense logically - Rubio hasn't won a state and will likely not win a state until perhaps Florida. Meanwhile, Cruz will probably win a couple at that point. But Trump has almost made it impossible for Cruz to breakout because he's actually taking away a lot of his voting bloc (which is ironic because Republicans want Cruz to drop out cause they think Cruz voters will suddenly support Rubio).
Click to expand...
Is it weird, or has Trump simply metastasized the half of the party that harbored a host of...ideas.
 
As I've said elsewhere, I like Rubio. I think he's got a solid grasp of the state of foreign affairs. I like his stated plan for the military. I like his other domestic ideas for the most part, though I put less stock in that than other places.

I admit that his antics last week turned me off a bit because the third cog in the wheel for me is how I think someone would represent the country. I would prefer that he stayed above Drumpf's games, but desperate times and all. I can't say I blame him, and he definitely rattled Drumpf in the debate. The sideshow the following day was embarrassing. Almost a stand-up comedy act between the two.

Kasich has grown stronger in my eyes through this whole last debate and last week. I think the larger problem than Cruz or Drumpf running is that there were too many other establishment candidates to start with. Kind of a perfect storm for Drumpf. He was able to use his bravado to stand out amongst the clown car, where the other guys who were playing the game all blended in. It's probably too late for anyone to do anything about it now.

Congrats Hillary (I hope, at this point).
 
gr8indoorsman said:
As I've said elsewhere, I like Rubio. I think he's got a solid grasp of the state of foreign affairs. I like his stated plan for the military. I like his other domestic ideas for the most part, though I put less stock in that than other places.

I admit that his antics last week turned me off a bit because the third cog in the wheel for me is how I think someone would represent the country. I would prefer that he stayed above Drumpf's games, but desperate times and all. I can't say I blame him, and he definitely rattled Drumpf in the debate. The sideshow the following day was embarrassing. Almost a stand-up comedy act between the two.

Kasich has grown stronger in my eyes through this whole last debate and last week. I think the larger problem than Cruz or Drumpf running is that there were too many other establishment candidates to start with. Kind of a perfect storm for Drumpf. He was able to use his bravado to stand out amongst the clown car, where the other guys who were playing the game all blended in. It's probably too late for anyone to do anything about it now.

Congrats Hillary (I hope, at this point).
Click to expand...

You must watch John Oliver. :)

I was perusing FiveThirtyEight's primary analysis, and with the exception of Texas (Cruz), Drumpf is likely to win every state. It's possible that this KKK BS has actually helped him in some of these states.
 
qazplm said:
I gave him zero chance way back when he first started, obviously now that's not correct but I've long since changed my thoughts on that.

I still think he'll fail to win enough to avoid a brokered convention but then again most republican contests are winner take all so who knows.

I think Hillary beats him by five to seven points though so hopefully he keeps it up. I cannot imagine an America that actually elects him to office.

What an indictment that would be.
Click to expand...
I cannot imagine an America with billary as president,. Either way the future doesn't look bright.
 
Doesn't compare to 1981 -1988
99.9% of Clinton's success was a Republican congress....first 2 years was a disaster. Hillary ' s travelgate, failed healthcare, mysterious deaths, selling of our secrets to the Chinese etc. etc. ., I remember all to well
 
Boilers1975 said:
Doesn't compare to 1981 -1988
99.9% of Clinton's success was a Republican congress....first 2 years was a disaster. Hillary ' s travelgate, failed healthcare, mysterious deaths, selling of our secrets to the Chinese etc. etc. ., I remember all to well
Click to expand...
yeah, it's not like we had a recession in 1982 and the first two years of Reagan were awesome, and certainly there were no "gates" with Reagan involving anything, absolutely not involving arms to Iran. I'm leaning strongly towards memory issues vice a lack of imagination because clearly, you have plenty of imagination.
 
gr8indoorsman said:
As I've said elsewhere, I like Rubio. I think he's got a solid grasp of the state of foreign affairs. I like his stated plan for the military. I like his other domestic ideas for the most part, though I put less stock in that than other places.

I admit that his antics last week turned me off a bit because the third cog in the wheel for me is how I think someone would represent the country. I would prefer that he stayed above Drumpf's games, but desperate times and all. I can't say I blame him, and he definitely rattled Drumpf in the debate. The sideshow the following day was embarrassing. Almost a stand-up comedy act between the two.

Kasich has grown stronger in my eyes through this whole last debate and last week. I think the larger problem than Cruz or Drumpf running is that there were too many other establishment candidates to start with. Kind of a perfect storm for Drumpf. He was able to use his bravado to stand out amongst the clown car, where the other guys who were playing the game all blended in. It's probably too late for anyone to do anything about it now.

Congrats Hillary (I hope, at this point).
Click to expand...

Kasich has always been just the normal one. He seems rather reasonable, which is unacceptable in a primary (and to be fair, on both sides).

I actually think Trump will be rather tough to run against in the general election. There's enough crazy people out there. It'll obviously come down to the minority vote - as Trump can proclaim he's doing well with them, but doing well with a tiny fraction of a big group that shows up to vote is not actually doing well.
 
lbodel said:
Kasich has always been just the normal one. He seems rather reasonable, which is unacceptable in a primary (and to be fair, on both sides).

I actually think Trump will be rather tough to run against in the general election. There's enough crazy people out there. It'll obviously come down to the minority vote - as Trump can proclaim he's doing well with them, but doing well with a tiny fraction of a big group that shows up to vote is not actually doing well.
Click to expand...
on a policy level Kasich is as much an extreme conservative as anyone on that stage...he just does it with a smile.

And no, there are not enough crazy people out there. Trump might bring out a small sliver of low info folks but he turns off a much larger chunk of people who will be motivated to come out against and vote for the Dem OR folks who might have been motivated to beat Hillary but now will vote third party or stay at home.
 
  • Like
Reactions: atmafola
qazplm said:
on a policy level Kasich is as much an extreme conservative as anyone on that stage...he just does it with a smile.

And no, there are not enough crazy people out there. Trump might bring out a small sliver of low info folks but he turns off a much larger chunk of people who will be motivated to come out against and vote for the Dem OR folks who might have been motivated to beat Hillary but now will vote third party or stay at home.
Click to expand...
Maybe Kasich is, but unlike Cruz and against everything Trump stands for (ME! ME! ME!), both he and Rubio have records of working across party lines to achieve policy aims. This includes making concessions in order to achieve some perceived greater good... you know, the way politics is supposed to work.

I think you're underestimating Trump. Most R primaries/caucuses have had record turnout, and Trump is winning the "first time participant" vote. So I don't think he's motivating a "small sliver". I think he's motivating a larger base of generally disinterested voters who believe that their standard establishment candidate doesn't speak for them.

I think Trump is also turning off a lot of voters like me, but I believe I'm in some minority of people who would rather vote Hillary or stay home. Anecdoctally, in discussions with family members who are all either Rubio or Cruz supporters, every single other person will vote for Trump over Hillary or Sanders whereas I will hold my nose and vote Hillary. I think the former is far more the majority of conservatives and right-leaning independents than the latter. On the whole, if Trump wins the nomination, I think he'll gain more votes from "normal non-participants" than he loses from folks like me. But that's not enough to win; he'd need to both motivate low-info/low-participation voters (as he does) and win center-right votes. Ironically, he's probably the most center of any of the clown car, yet he is completely unelectable for me.

I agree with your overall point that unless Trump somehow motivates people like me to show up and vote for him along with some others, he won't win the GE against Hillary, thankfully.
 
gr8indoorsman said:
Maybe Kasich is, but unlike Cruz and against everything Trump stands for (ME! ME! ME!), both he and Rubio have records of working across party lines to achieve policy aims. This includes making concessions in order to achieve some perceived greater good... you know, the way politics is supposed to work.

I think you're underestimating Trump. Most R primaries/caucuses have had record turnout, and Trump is winning the "first time participant" vote. So I don't think he's motivating a "small sliver". I think he's motivating a larger base of generally disinterested voters who believe that their standard establishment candidate doesn't speak for them.

I think Trump is also turning off a lot of voters like me, but I believe I'm in some minority of people who would rather vote Hillary or stay home. Anecdoctally, in discussions with family members who are all either Rubio or Cruz supporters, every single other person will vote for Trump over Hillary or Sanders whereas I will hold my nose and vote Hillary. I think the former is far more the majority of conservatives and right-leaning independents than the latter. On the whole, if Trump wins the nomination, I think he'll gain more votes from "normal non-participants" than he loses from folks like me. But that's not enough to win; he'd need to both motivate low-info/low-participation voters (as he does) and win center-right votes. Ironically, he's probably the most center of any of the clown car, yet he is completely unelectable for me.

I agree with your overall point that unless Trump somehow motivates people like me to show up and vote for him along with some others, he won't win the GE against Hillary, thankfully.
Click to expand...
it's 2015...you can't win with just the white male vote anymore. You need a substantial minority of the Hispanic vote. You need a substantial minority of the female vote, and you need the AA vote to not be fully mobilized against you. Trump will not do any of that, in fact, he will mobilize all of those groups...and his ability to get white men, and even his ability to bring out some new white men will not remotely be enough demographically speaking.

He will get crushed in NOVA for example, and lose VA. He will get crushed in the Tech Triangle in NC and among AA voters and lose NC. He will "bigly" lose every major city in Ohio and PA and Michigan and the rest the midwest industrial states. He won't win Florida.

He'll win the red states so it won't be a "blowout" in the sense that he will probably not have much of a different EV total from say McCain or Dole...but I don't think I underestimate him at all in a GE. You can't alienate the wide swaths of people he alienates and win 270 EVs. Not going to happen...and yep that's a guarantee, and you can feel free to mock me for it or say what you want about "certainty" because I have zero concern that i will need to eat crow, taste crow, or even go crow shopping.
 
qazplm said:
it's 2015...you can't win with just the white male vote anymore. You need a substantial minority of the Hispanic vote. You need a substantial minority of the female vote, and you need the AA vote to not be fully mobilized against you. Trump will not do any of that, in fact, he will mobilize all of those groups...and his ability to get white men, and even his ability to bring out some new white men will not remotely be enough demographically speaking.

He will get crushed in NOVA for example, and lose VA. He will get crushed in the Tech Triangle in NC and among AA voters and lose NC. He will "bigly" lose every major city in Ohio and PA and Michigan and the rest the midwest industrial states. He won't win Florida.

He'll win the red states so it won't be a "blowout" in the sense that he will probably not have much of a different EV total from say McCain or Dole...but I don't think I underestimate him at all in a GE. You can't alienate the wide swaths of people he alienates and win 270 EVs. Not going to happen...and yep that's a guarantee, and you can feel free to mock me for it or say what you want about "certainty" because I have zero concern that i will need to eat crow, taste crow, or even go crow shopping.
Click to expand...
It's 20*16*, and yes, you can't. I don't know why you felt the need to be yourself at the end of the post when I didn't disagree with anything you said overall and pointed out myself that while Trump may motivate a certain sect of otherwise disinterested voters, he will still lose the GE. But, you're you, and you seek out argument even in the face of agreement, I guess.
 
gr8indoorsman said:
It's 20*16*, and yes, you can't. I don't know why you felt the need to be yourself at the end of the post when I didn't disagree with anything you said overall and pointed out myself that while Trump may motivate a certain sect of otherwise disinterested voters, he will still lose the GE. But, you're you, and you seek out argument even in the face of agreement, I guess.
Click to expand...
No you can't but I love when you disagree with me first its discussion if I respond to that disagreement then its arguing.

You hate being disagreed with every bit as much as anyone on this board.
 
gr8indoorsman said:
Sure, but I didn't even disagree with you!
Click to expand...
I think you're underestimating Trump. So I don't think he's motivating a "small sliver". I think he's motivating a larger base of generally disinterested voters who believe that their standard establishment candidate doesn't speak for them.On the whole, if Trump wins the nomination, I think he'll gain more votes from "normal non-participants" than he loses from folks like me.
 
qazplm said:
I think you're underestimating Trump. So I don't think he's motivating a "small sliver". I think he's motivating a larger base of generally disinterested voters who believe that their standard establishment candidate doesn't speak for them.On the whole, if Trump wins the nomination, I think he'll gain more votes from "normal non-participants" than he loses from folks like me.
Click to expand...
There was an interesting graphic on ABC news tonight. I don't recall the exact numbers, but roughly 5.5 million people voted in the Republican primaries on Super Tuesday of 2012 and 8.1 million voted in the Dem primaries. The numbers were almost exactly flipped yesterday with approximately 8 million voters participating in the Republican primaries and 5.5 million on the Demicrat side. Either the Republican voters are much more motivated this year or there are apparently a bunch of Dems jumping over to vote for Trump.
 
burbo said:
There was an interesting graphic on ABC news tonight. I don't recall the exact numbers, but roughly 5.5 million people voted in the Republican primaries on Super Tuesday of 2012 and 8.1 million voted in the Dem primaries. The numbers were almost exactly flipped yesterday with approximately 8 million voters participating in the Republican primaries and 5.5 million on the Demicrat side. Either the Republican voters are much more motivated this year or there are apparently a bunch of Dems jumping over to vote for Trump.
Click to expand...
you know the second largest number of voters in a dem primary? 1988. There was almost a 2 to 1 advantage between Dem primary voters and Rep primary voters (20 million to 11 million roughly). The result in the GE? A fairly easy Republican win.

in 2000 the Reps had 6 million more in their primary than the Dems...the Dems ended up winning the popular vote in the GE (usually that means winning the election but obviously this was an exception).

So numbers in primaries don't really correlate to anything meaningful in the GE. You can have more show up for your party and win, and you can have more show up for your party and lose.

The Dem primary is a two person race and for most of that race most folks think and thought that HRC was going to win. That doesn't engender large turnout. HRC among Dems has high favorability as does Bernie.

Meanwhile, the republican primary has been the far more interesting primary. Trump brings out some folks for him, and brings out other folks against him. There's a lot of fire and until recently uncertainty on that side. But there's little evidence that all most or even a substantial number of those extra votes are dems voting for Trump.

But I hope Trump wins. That's the easiest path for the Dem nominee.
 
qazplm said:
I think you're underestimating Trump. So I don't think he's motivating a "small sliver". I think he's motivating a larger base of generally disinterested voters who believe that their standard establishment candidate doesn't speak for them.On the whole, if Trump wins the nomination, I think he'll gain more votes from "normal non-participants" than he loses from folks like me.
Click to expand...
Right, but it still won't be nearly enough for him to win, as I said in that same post, for the reasons you pointed out. So, no disagreement there with your overarching point, but I do think he has motivated a large base, just not large to offset those he won't get. Like me.
 
burbo said:
There was an interesting graphic on ABC news tonight. I don't recall the exact numbers, but roughly 5.5 million people voted in the Republican primaries on Super Tuesday of 2012 and 8.1 million voted in the Dem primaries. The numbers were almost exactly flipped yesterday with approximately 8 million voters participating in the Republican primaries and 5.5 million on the Demicrat side. Either the Republican voters are much more motivated this year or there are apparently a bunch of Dems jumping over to vote for Trump.
Click to expand...

It is interesting (and I don't think it's much of an effort of Dems switching over to vote). However, it's not necessarily a huge sign of things to come. The Republican field has been "the show" on the news, etc. Not only has it had the entertainment value, but it's also highly competitive against a number of candidates. On the Democratic side, Bernie is there - but most people still do not see him with much of a chance to win. Even his own supporters often say they think Clinton will be the nominee.

I think the bigger question if Trump is the candidate is how people come together around him. A similar thing I saw talked about of the 5.5 million - 3 million didn't vote for him. And he has the highest unfavorable ratings of any candidate. Obviously some Republicans will, but not sure the mainstream folks really get behind him. The Bernie/Hillary contest has remained incredibly civil, so most believe the uniting will be rather easy.
 
lbodel said:
It is interesting (and I don't think it's much of an effort of Dems switching over to vote). However, it's not necessarily a huge sign of things to come. The Republican field has been "the show" on the news, etc. Not only has it had the entertainment value, but it's also highly competitive against a number of candidates. On the Democratic side, Bernie is there - but most people still do not see him with much of a chance to win. Even his own supporters often say they think Clinton will be the nominee.

I think the bigger question if Trump is the candidate is how people come together around him. A similar thing I saw talked about of the 5.5 million - 3 million didn't vote for him. And he has the highest unfavorable ratings of any candidate. Obviously some Republicans will, but not sure the mainstream folks really get behind him. The Bernie/Hillary contest has remained incredibly civil, so most believe the uniting will be rather easy.
Click to expand...

You have folks coming out, elected folks mind you, saying anyonebuttrump...or nevertrump.
I don't think that bodes well for getting parts of your base out. And the republicans only seem to win presidential elections in the modern era when they get high base turnout because there are numerically more people who call themselves democrats.

I don't think Trump gets blown out in the sense of Reagan-Mondale for example, but I think he probably loses purple states like NC, FL, PA, OH, VA, IA, CO, NV for sure...with a small chance for states undergoing demographic transitions like GA (closer than you might think in 2012).
 
Trump obviously won't have any traction in blue states. I would guess he could do well in states with larger rural proportion of population. North Carolina and Iowa (~35%), maybe Ohio and even less likely Virginia (>25%). I think he could do well in Nevada just because his name is all over the most populous urban areas there, and he'll carry the guy out in the desert. I don't think he can do as well in the more heavily urban states (FL, CO, PA). It won't be enough.
 
it's interesting that you believe so many people are anti-Trump. The democrats got slammed in the last election. I'd say there are every bit as many anti-Clinton people. I would not underestimate the fatigue factor for the Clinton name. I'm a bit surprised we haven't seen other names bubble up on either side or a strong independent.
 
TopSecretBoiler said:
it's interesting that you believe so many people are anti-Trump. The democrats got slammed in the last election. I'd say there are every bit as many anti-Clinton people. I would not underestimate the fatigue factor for the Clinton name. I'm a bit surprised we haven't seen other names bubble up on either side or a strong independent.
Click to expand...
Trump has the highest disapproval levels of anyone INCLUDING Clinton. He has major folks in his own party explicitly saying they won't vote for him. The prior nominee of his party just gave a speech today against him.

But you're right, totally unreasonable to think there are a lot of anti-Trump people.
 
Well Mexico has had enough , they finally made a statement. They under no circumstances will pay for that wall.

Sounds a little like the republican version of rainbows, unicorns and fairy dust. He's not only a con artist but a very bad one at that
 
qazplm said:
on a policy level Kasich is as much an extreme conservative as anyone on that stage...he just does it with a smile. .
Click to expand...
Agree totally!

qazplm said:
And no, there are not enough crazy people out there. Trump might bring out a small sliver of low info folks but he turns off a much larger chunk of people who will be motivated to come out against and vote for the Dem OR folks who might have been motivated to beat Hillary but now will vote third party or stay at home.
Click to expand...
I think you underestimate Trump's populist appeal. Remember Trump is not wedded to any traditional republic idealogy the way others are. He also is not above espousing any position - turnarounds included - he deems expedient.
 
Last edited:
GI man, I have been on this board long enough to have seen you move positions a bit when evidence and reality suggests you should. We of course still have our fundamental difference about politics and all. But you are one of the people that make me sit down and really listen to what other side have to say. Just wanted say, I have tremendous respect for you. Having said that? whats up with "Drumpf"
 
John Oliver comedy bit reference. Perhaps the Drumpf bit is in poor taste but it's amusing and kind of interesting at the same time.

 
atmafola said:
Agree totally!


I think you underestimate Trump's populist appeal. Remember Trump is not wedded to any traditional republic idealogy the way others are. He also is not above espousing any position - turnarounds included - he deems expedient.
Click to expand...
eh, this isn't 1930s America. His populist appeal?To whom? Blacks? Hispanics? Single women? Liberals? Moderates? He won't win any of these folks. You can't win by driving away all of them. I think you overestimate his GE appeal and underestimate a whole lot of Americans. If he were that prone to win the republicans wouldn't be fighting so hard to stop him, and Fox News wouldn't have utterly tried to ambush him like they did tonight.
 
jadeezra said:
Well Mexico has had enough , they finally made a statement. They under no circumstances will pay for that wall.

Sounds a little like the republican version of rainbows, unicorns and fairy dust. He's not only a con artist but a very bad one at that
Click to expand...
The tension of will they/won't they was killing me!
 
  • Like
Reactions: jadeezra
Well heck, never thought I'd see them have a penis size argument in front of the nation. o_O
 
Seriously though, when did presidential debates become reality tv shows? Like VH1 type reality shows.
 
atmafola said:
Seriously though, when did presidential debates become reality tv shows? Like VH1 type reality shows.
Click to expand...
When Trump became a candidate.

It's sad, really, because I think there could've been some good political discourse without him. There would've been enough conflict between Cruz and the rest of them, without having to be so juvenile. And I think Jeb Bush might've been more viable. I imagine a world where it's Rubio, Cruz, Kasich, and Bush vying for the nomination and debating on issues rather than hand/penis size. Maybe the party will be more discerning with its candidates in the future... for one thing, don't let 17 people run. For another, no Drumpfs.

Almost enough to make you wonder if it's not some sort of liberal conspiracy that convinced him to run as a Republican to assure a Democratic victory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: atmafola
Now trump can lift Rubio up with one hand! This is too good to make up it really is! I know 4 hardcore trump supporters that are now off the bandwagon(which I didn't think was possible) after the penis size debate
 
jadeezra said:
Now trump can lift Rubio up with one hand! This is too good to make up it really is! I know 4 hardcore trump supporters that are now off the bandwagon(which I didn't think was possible) after the penis size debate
Click to expand...

The problem is - doesn't look like Rubio helped himself much by stooping to the levels he has the last couple weeks. His performances in the primaries last night were abysmal in each state.
 
Well, he did win 23 delegates in Puerto Rico where he was campaigning all weekend with more than 50% of the vote.

At this point, it's about preventing anyone from getting to 1237, then it's anyone's guess...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

tjreese

whud a thunk?

Replies
2
Views
204
Free Board: General Discussion Forum
tjreese
tjreese
tjreese

This can't be true or we would have heard about it on CNN, MSNBC, CBS and ABC or other media. Besides,

Replies
14
Views
2K
Free Board: General Discussion Forum
typeviic
typeviic
G

Column on Painter

Replies
15
Views
4K
Boilermaker Men's Basketball
TX4GB
TX4GB
Boiler Buck

Trump 2024?

Replies
80
Views
3K
Free Board: General Discussion Forum
New Pal Boiler
New Pal Boiler
BlackGoldTexas

DGL Visiting Illinois Today (Selected Excerpts)

Replies
29
Views
2K
The Depot
Casey Bartley
Casey Bartley
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back