John King of CNN showed that if he holds onto every single state Romney won, which is hardly a sure thing, and wins Virginia, Ohio, Michigan and PA he gets 273 electoral votes(the magic number needed is 270) and the Presidency.
However, that is by the thinnest of margins and it’s certainly not a sure thing, though not impossible.
I am wondering how genuinely family-oriented, likely-GOP-leaning voters process Trump’s documented history of discarding wives …? I’m not the world’s greatest expert on The Donald, but as far as I know there was no “cause” for his divorcing them other than their aging (and, I believe, a pre-nuptial agreement that would have kicked in had he let the marriage to Marla go on).
Is this going to be easy for evangelical Christians, for example, to overlook or excuse?
Good point. I dont know the cause of divorce either. His first wife married multiple times and the second one married just once (With Trump). At least he seems close to his children.
Apparently they overlooked it in the primaries so yes?
Don’t forget Mormons, whom he’ll need in a lot of western states.
I suspect that Trump didn’t fare particularly well in the primaries among the hardest-core evangelicals / moral conservatives, who would have been more likely to have been turned off by Trump’s multiple marriages and affairs; I suspect that those voters had voted for candidates who were closer to their values, like Cruz, Carson, and Huckabee.
However, it looks like he probably did pretty well among those evangelicals for whom his America-first, xenophobic message was more important than any “family values” message.
A very relevant question is whether he can bring the first group into his camp, or if they’ll just stay away in the general election.
With Cruz and Rubio dropping God references left and right I am sure they would do better with the more hardcore religious but the fact is that people who describe themselves as Evangelical aren’t necessarily all that religious. That said:
Yep, and unfortunately, in this democracy, he doesn’t really need a whole hell of a lot more definition than that. America doesn’t have a political crisis as much as it has a ‘stupid’ crisis…which ultimately can become a political crisis if untreated.
Hillary Clinton should win, but that doesn’t mean that she will. If anything the fact that she’s really only beating Trump by 10 percentage points in the RCP averages ought to be telling, because she really should be beating trump by closer to 20 percent.
There are a lot of voters out there who are uncommitted to anybody, and that’s a real danger for Clinton. Yes, Clinton has the support of people who hate Trump’s guts, like pretty much an overwhelming majority of minority voters. She also has the support of a democratic party that is probably mostly unified, among the democratic loyalists who are age 40+.
But there are a lot of voters out there between 18 and 35 who are itching to be more politically active, and presidential election cycles are when that’s most likely to happen (as opposed to mid-terms). Younger voters tend to want something new, something fresh, something different. That favors Trump over Hillary.
And Trump has been, and will most likely continue to, redefine mainstream opinions of what American capitalism is and what it ought to be. And there are a lot of people, of all age groups, who agree that American capitalism now in 2016 is not what it was when Hillary Clinton was the First Lady. That’s not to say that they blame her, but while Hillary has the incumbent’s advantage, she also owns incumbency’s disadvantages as well. Namely, the fact that she has a voting record.
Hillary should win, but don’t think for a moment that Trump couldn’t win. He most definitely can win. He will be an extremely difficult target to hit for precisely the reason you just stated. He has no ideology, which means that he’s free to speak as he pleases. He’s free to reverse himself. He’s free to flip flop, free to insult, free to half-ass apologize for missteps, free to do almost anything. It’s Hillary who has to not step out of character. As Little Marco, Low Energy Jeb, and Lyin Ted can attest…those are not insignificant advantates.
His current wife Melania has done nude photoshoots which are easily available. Didn’t seem to have any effect on the primaries, but given this campaigns brutal nature I expect that to become an issue during the general.
NSFW
Sounds like the Donald can count on Chris Matthews’ vote, especially if he sees that.
Seriously? That’s not going to be an issue. She’s a model. She did risque shoots. So what? If anything that’ll get him votes. Lol.
I think a lot of women, particularly many traditional middle America women who would normally vote Republican are going to have very negative impressions of Melania.
However I don’t think it’s so much pictures she took while she was a model.
I don’t think America is ready for it’s first Trophy Wife First Lady.
I should add that I myself am not making that comment as an attack on her and suspect that she’s just counting down the days till she gets a Golden parachute and can retire and he moves on to wife #4 or is it wife #5?
Slutty Barbie doll wife? Melania is a former model who had money of her own by the time she met Trump, and is a fairly accomplished business woman in her own right. What evidence do you have of her slutitude?
I think Americans are at least as ready for their first trophy First Lady as they are for their first reality show President. It just won’t be an issue. First off, I am guessing any slut shaming campaign on Trump’s wife would seriously backfire on Clinton. Secondly, most people just don’t give a crap who the President’s wife is. Third, a 70 yr old guy being married 3 times isn’t that big a deal anymore. Something like 40% of married couples, at least one of them is doing it for the second time.
It’s funny…before I saw any polling, I predicted a 20-point victory for Hillary vs. Trump, then downgraded it to 10 around the time of NY. But in the end I don’t care if it’s 270-268 for Hillary, so long as she wins.
I still have a great deal of trouble buying that those young idealists who are being schooled in the capitalist class system by Bernie are going to turn around and vote for the elitest of the elite, especially considering that he’s been stating Trump’s inadequacy in the most stark of terms in his stump speeches. Trump may get a few who just want change for change’s sake, but there’s no way you’re going to see mass defections of new Dems to his banner. That is, as long as Hillary doesn’t screw it up with Bernie. All she has to do is give him enough to mollify him without looking overly weak, and reap the overwhelming majority of Dems.
I think there is a feeling among a segment of the population that women who show a lot of skin are sluts.
Remember in 2004 when a Democrat, Zell Miller (who, to borrow a term, was already a Democrat in Name Only) as he voted more often with Republicans, failed to support the nominee? That was treated as a shocking treason.
12 years later, the GOP has pretty much every major figure in the party past and present refusing to support him.
Nobody remembers that. Certainly less people than those who remember Lieberman endorsing McCain.
Do you mean her QVC jewelry and watch line? I guess that would qualify her as a business woman, though I don’t know how accomplished. From what I can tell, she was a moderately successful model, but nothing big, most of her biggest work has been as Trump’s wife. Her biggest cover was on Vogue, but that was as “Donald Trump’s New Bride”, her name’s not on the cover. She’s definitely a trophy wife who married Trump for her money, and I don’t necessarily think less of her for that, but she definitely would break the mold for first ladies. I’m not at all bothered by her nude photoshoots, and I am bothered by people slutshaming her for them. But I wouldn’t think that they’d hurt Trump’s votes by much; if someone is religious and conservative enough that the photoshoots would lose Trump their vote, then there’s likely something else that Trump has said or did that would have already lost that vote.
I would think that overall Melania is not a positive or negative for Trump. She’s beautiful, but not overly charming from what little I’ve seen of her doing interviews. I don’t think she has any pet causes she promotes like first ladies often do. She is an immigrant, but from Europe instead of Latin America, so maybe Trump supporters would see her as one of the good ones. First ladies are often used as a way to humanize candidates, but Melania is used as a way to play up how rich and successful Donald is.
I heard an audio clip on CNN earlier today. She said as First Lady that she wants to help women. She wants to help children.
Rather short on details on just what this help will be or how it will be done.
Just like Donald.