Also, Trump proudly tweets out poll results that show him one point ahead in Utah.
Utah.
:sigh:
The mainstream media should get it through to their thick skulls that Trump is relying more on the Internet for information. And from unsavory [del]sauces[/del] sources.
The take home lesson for the old time media should be:
-
Trump will dismiss then like a dirty rag, just as he has done to several news groups already. Not only that, but as president he will have the power to make the life of the ones that oppose him harder.
-
The people need to be told that there is nothing wrong by relying on the Internet, the problem is to have a credulous guy with the finger on the button, with the capacity of appointing deniers of science to the CDC, EPA and other government groups; with the power to appoint yahoos to the FBI, CIA and other security organizations that will have to deal with a cretin that has a lot of trouble differentiating between bad or good sources of information.
[Scrooged]
Frank Cross:
I want to see her nipples.
Censor Lady:
But this is a CHRISTMAS show.
Frank Cross:
Well, I’m sure Charles Dickens would have wanted to see her nipples.
[/Scrooged]
:smack: So proud of that one point lead. :rolleyes:
Right? And how are they still doing things this way? With Ailes out, why aren’t they toning it down just a tad? This completely fits with an NPR story that ran on Friday about the Ailes regime:
Speculating here, but I think Trump’s point is it’s not really a significant factor in the election, meaning it’s not going to drive many people to change their votes.
When asked, “Do you think Trump should release his tax returns?” I’m surprised that it wasn’t even a lot higher than 62%, but a good follow-up question might be “Will Trump’s decision on the previous question influence your vote?” or something like that. If 51% of the people answer a yes-no question one way, but it’s, on average, #6,327 on their list of priorities, I can see how Trump might say, “I think people don’t care”.
That’s because Trump is an idiot who doesn’t understand he is dying from a thousand little self-inflicted cuts.
I agree, while this issue is growing among voters, most voters have reported that it will not change their vote. Of course Trump could ignore those voters if the election was not a close one, but one of the problems of staying close is that then this issue will undermine Trump with the independents significantly when he needs them the most.
Looking now at the most recent poll mentioned by Rick Kitchen I would think that since the numbers have increased for the ones that want Trump to release his taxes that then it is likely that the numbers of the voters that would change their vote if Trump does not release his taxes have increased too.
It’s clear Trump doesn’t care about any voters who aren’t already in his corner.
I’m still not sure if Trump knows he’s doomed and is just riling up his base for the inevitable media network… Or is he so delusional that he thinks that because he’s getting bigger crowds than Clinton that the polls are all rigged and he’s actually winning?
I think the correct calculus here is not whether his refusing to release his tax returns will change any votes, but whether it will prevent votes from being changed over to his favor, which he needs. It’s not as though he is the front-runner who can just run out the clock.
The dilemma for him, of course, is that the people whose minds he needs to change will likely not at all be pleased with what is actually in those tax returns. So Mitt Romney is likely correct that he will never ever do it.
That may actually be it, wouldn’t be the first time. The energy of the crowd has incredible power, people keep on chasing it. A lot of the Bernie people had that, they would see the enthusiasm and energy of their crowds and think “How can we lose?”.
Plus, he is surrounded by people who’s checks he signs (if anyone does). They tell him what pleases him. So, swacked out by attention dope, he gets little nuggets of hope from his sycophants, and believes it. If he starts getting creepy doubt, he does another rally, and its wiped away.
Plus, you got standard Republican derangement. They know that America is a center-right country, they know that America is basically conservative, so if they are not winning every election by landslides, its because they are being cheated.
But he’s sounded the alarm, hasn’t he? Now, America is warned to be on their guard, be on the lookout for busloads of brown people rolling up to the polls and trying to vote based on the testimony of their underwear labels. They don’t get fooled again!
So, crush liberal voter fraud, expose the liberal media, rile up all the Real Americans and it smells like napalm in the morning. Morning, in America.
Hear! Hear! I admire her intellect and political expertise, she brings depth to any conversation, arms herself with facts, and stops liars in their tracks.
But do 62 percent of voters really care?
Neither.
He’s clearly running a different campaign the last few weeks, and it actually seems to be working. So I’d be careful about writing him off. As I’ve said before, Trump doesn’t have to be presidential; he just has to look presidential long enough to convince a bunch of white know-nothing voters in middle America that he could be president. He’s been doing that the past few weeks. It’ll be interesting to see if his new brain trust can keep the straight jacket on long enough for him to truly transform.
But make no mistake about it: Trump is two good debate performances away from being president of the United States. That’s a thought that ought to scare the piss out of us all.
“In poll after poll, the Trump isn’t even close to winning a majority of the vote”
(Not my wording)
Why did you have to add that last disclaimer? Would you usually make a comment in quotes that was your wording, not the quotees?
Wouldn’t anything in quotes have to be the original writer’s wording? This is unsettling. I trust the posters here to quote from their sources without changing them. I hadn’t even suspected that someone would post someone like:
http://www.politico-ish.com/story/2016/09/trump-poorly-polling
“In poll after poll, Trump is shooting people on 5th Avenue and still winning a vast majority of the vote!”
The Dallas Morning News did a first: a condemnation of one party’s candidate before they announce who they are endorsing.
http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/20160906-donald-trump-is-no-republican.ece
Mr. Shepard is mistaken and missing the point.
How is he missing the point? Trump doesn’t need to win a majority of the vote. That’s not what makes you President. You get elected President by winning a majority of the ELECTORAL votes, and Trump would probably do that if he wins more votes than Hillary Clinton, not a majority of them. If the minor parties continue to do pretty well, nobody will win a clear majority.
Because he is missing that point, he is mistaken in his implicit assumption that he “isn’t even close” in “poll after poll.” Perhaps Mr. Shepard has been looking at very few polls? Here are the most recent national polls, the date the poll was concluded, and the margin of difference, according the the 538 updates site:
RKM Research, Sept 4: Clinton +3
LA Times, Sept. 4: Trump +2
CVOTER, Sept. 3: Clinton +4
CVOTER, Sept. 2: Clinton +4
Ipsos-Reid, Sept. 1: Clinton +2
IBD/TIPP, Sept. 1: Tied
Battleground states, you say?
YouGov: NC, Sept 2: Clinton +2
YouGov, PA. Sept 2: Clinton +8
Ipsos-Reid, OH, Sept. 1: Trump +2
Ipsos-Reid, FL, Sept. 1: Clinton +4
Ipsos-Reid, WI, Sept. 1: Trump +2
… And so on and so forth. No reasonable person could look at these numbers and say it isn’t close.
Because I copied it from the article I linked to? Did you bother to click the link? Were it my words, I never would have said “the Trump”.
Now, clicking the link, I see that Politico fixed the subtitle. However, the original subtitle, and my exact quote, can be found here: