Yeah, fuck those kids for being born to poor ones.
I can’t speak for him, but I wager he has never voted for a Dem for president.
The gun lovers genuflect to HALF of an amendment, they got the Supreme Court to take an eraser to the first half of the second.
I can’t speak for all pro-choicers, but there is no actual amendment, just the belief that an actual person should not be forced to grow a potential person.
I am now starting to get a little worried despite my recent confidence that Clinton will win. The main concern I have is how the media is covering the race. I get my news primarily from CNN and POTUS radio on Sirius XM.
Almost all the coverage I hear about Clinton seems to be either about one scandal or another, about how the Sanders supporters are not going to come onboard, or how the polls show a tight race.
The Trump coverage, however, seems to be all positive, again emphasizing the same polls that are portrayed as negative towards Clinton, or how the Republican Party is “falling in line” to support him. I’m amazed at how little talk there is about his outlandish statements like his proposed ban on Muslims entering the country, building a wall along the border, deporting all the undocumented immigrants, withdrawing from NATO, and so on. If these things are even mentioned, the pundits talking about them treat those statements as if they think Trump just said them to get votes and that he isn’t really serious about any of that stuff. Until the press starts to bash Trump over the head with that stuff it’s going to be a close race. I don’t know that I have enough confidence in the press that they will start doing that. What I mean by that is the press hasn’t been discussing Trump’s more outlandish proposals as if he were serious and what kind of damage they would do to the country if implemented.
Oh, well, that’s alright, then! You just tell all the parents that it’s their job and there won’t ever be any more hungry children anywhere in America! (Because they will have starved to death and succumbed to illness, but … details! details!) I’m sure your plan to just nag parents about their responsibilities will be ever so much more successful at combating childhood hunger than just, you know, providing actual food, of which we have so fucking much that we pay people not to make more of it.
In a sense, I think we can think of the Trump supporters as the loud, boisterous rabble-rousing Anti-Establishment, and the Clinton supporters as the silent majority which favor continuing the direction of the last 8 years (even some Republicans who see Trump for what he is seem comfortable with continuing the situation where they complain about a Democratic president while they support a Republican congress, all while grudgingly benefiting from the upward arc of the nation’s prosperity).
I agree that the demographic Trump is successfully courting is no longer large enough to win an election. Demographics have changed too much since the 1970’s, and that is why I am hopeful that Trump will lose decisively.
I’m not worried that Trump will win over new supporters. What I’m worried about is that the press coverage will discourage Clinton supporters from turning up on Election Day.
The press is currently doing what they always do;
They want the election to be a horse race. They want it to be “neck and neck”. They want to be able to write stories with tension, drama. This will translate to readers which will translate to money.
What the press does NOT want is a one-sided race that is looking to be a blow-out. This is boring. This does not generate any excitement, or heated letters to the editor or repeat clicks to the webpage.
So what the press does (like always) is treat this election like a sporting event, where the teams are equal, and nobody knows what will happen next!
TUNE IN AGAIN TOMORROW FOLKS!
Enjoy the market crash and dramatic loss of credibility in the rest of the world. Hope it was worth it.
Spot on. They need something to sell to the advertisers. If the only question is does Hillary break 300 electoral votes or 310, there’s no sizzle to sell. The media will have this as a dead heat until election day when they pretend to be surprised at how poorly their meal ticket Donald did.
I sure as hell hope so.
I agree, he’s insincere. So is Hillary. He’s at least insincerely saying the right things on guns. Hillary is insincerely saying the wrong things.
It was not boring in '64.
So if you guys don’t believe the media (which is fair, I think), who / what do you believe? Pollsters? Nate Silver? Your own gut?
i’m not overly worried. There has been a record turn out of Republican voters during this primary and the donald still trails hillary by more than a few million actual votes… of actual people voting for him.
I dont think that number changes in the general. And the polls will swing back to her once the 'bern" drops out and the only choice on the left is hillary.
I also cannot believe that after the first debate donald v hillary that anyone would consider supporting him on his own merits its just not possible for me to believe.
Folks will still vote against hillary, but I can’t see that many voting FOR donald.
Trump is not a right-wing phenomenon. We should all be very worried. Trump is tapping into anger and outrage that spans party lines.
This is a guy who’s a 3-time divorcee, vulgar, brags about nailing married women, supports abortion and single payer health care… and who received a large percentage of the evangelical vote. These are the same voters who would reject another candidate for even hinting that abortion was okay in cases of rape or incest, and they are throwing their full support behind Trump. How does that make any sense?
if Trump can pull in Republicans like he has without having any conservative bona fides and while advocating loopy, anti-Republican ideas like pulling out of NATO, just think how much support he might get from blue-collar Democrats and independents.
I sure hope the Democrats can stop him, because I’d rather see almost anyone else in the White House over Donald Trump. But I think Hillary Clinton is a terrible candidate with a very checkered past, and she’s going up against someone who is not afraid to push every button he can find.
The two parties have both managed to nominate terrible candidates. This race isn’t going to be about who you like the most - it’ll be about who you dislike the least.
Seems like a lousy metric to me. There are significant differences in some states, like when one party chooses to have a closed caucus vs an open primary that can drastically affect vote totals, as well as differences in dates and the perceived competitiveness of the contest (if Trump has the Republican nomination all sewn up, but the Dems still have a lively contest between Bernie and Hillary, it’s far more interesting to vote in the Dem primary election than the Republican).
Let me put it this way: RCP shows 11.54 million votes for Trump vs 12.99 million votes for Hillary in the primary. There are a few states left to go, including the big one (CA), but for comparison’s sake, in 2012 Romney got 60.9 million and Obama got 65.9 million in the general election. Primary voters get absolutely swamped by general-election-only voters. Happens every four years. It’s those low-information, not-yet-interested-in-the-race voters that will largely pick the next President, not the extra 1.5 million Clinton primary voters than Trump primary voters.
It’s not that I don’t believe the mainstream media such CNN, the New York Times, etc. It’s that I think they are focusing on Clinton’s negatives and personal baggage while saying little about how she would govern. On the other hand they are emphasizing Trump’s charisma, his huge rallies, and the poll numbers while doing little to examine what the results would be if he actually won and was able to build a border wall, deport all the undocumented immigrants, ban entry of Muslims, etc. Due to that slanted focus the polls are looking worse than they would otherwise be.
Yeah, this has confused me for awhile. We should see 70/30, or 60/40 once in awhile, but we don’t. Somehow it’s a nail-biting 50/50 'til the end, or it ends up 50/50 'til the last few votes have been counted. The media alone shouldn’t be able to pull that off, no matter how hard they try. I just don’t believe Americans or humans come down 50/50 over very many things, certainly not the president.
Do you believe past election results are accurate?
2012 = 51% to 47%
2008 = 53% to 46%
2004 = 51% to 48%
2000 = 48% to 48%
I think we really are just a very closely-divided country.
If there’s not a name for the “won’t someone think of the children” fallacy, there should be.