It’s pretty sad when someone in a supposedly serious political debate can be refuted by the exact same argument as someone who asserts that the government has space alien bodies secretly stashed in Area 51.
A Fox News poll released Thursday showed the Republican presidential candidate Trump leading a crowded GOP primary field, with 18% of the vote.
Read more: Poll: Donald Trump Leads GOP Field - Business Insider
Gosh, a whole 18% of those polled favor Trump. Not exactly a number that suggests that the GOP, or a majority of conservatives, favor Trump. Unless you’re used to believing everything you’re being told by the MSNBC/DNC-types. It’s still a very loooooong way to the convention, and to the Primary, and to the General election.
I believe it’s important to consider the percentage in favor of someone/something as well as the percentage against someone/something.
For example -
*Monday, July 20, 2015
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows that 45% of Likely U.S. Voters approve of President Obama’s job performance. Fifty-five percent (55%) disapprove.
The latest figures include 24% who Strongly Approve of the way Obama is performing as president and 42% who Strongly Disapprove. This gives him a Presidential Approval Index rating of -18.*
And your point is …?
I’ve always wondered about the approval and disapproval numbers. Isn’t it likely that some significant portion of those who disapprove of Obama are disaffected liberals rather than conservatives who just don’t like him?
I’ve found your problem. You want to placate racist white people.
If a party can’t win without seeking out the vote of evil cunts, maybe that party shouldn’t win?
Really, what does the Republican party offer me, as a minority non-Christian woman, that would make me want to vote for them?
Yes, it’s very likely that the numbers suggest that voters across the board are not happy with Obama’s performance.
The LSM, who have nothing better to do, like to repeatedly say that Trump is leading in the GOP candidate’s poll. Which seems to be true. What the LSM doesn’t mention is that 18% is not a very large number. The LSM media doesn’t report the number of potential voters who do not appreciate Trump’s style or candidacy. Of course, reporting that number might make it more difficult for them to paint the entire GOP with one broad, and inaccurate, brush. But that seems to be the LSM’s standard MO.
Granted, 18% is not large. But when you’ve got 16 candidates, it’s nothing to sneeze at. IF he remains at that level for the rest of 2015 and IF he doesn’t drop out because he doesn’t feel like filing the official papers, then there’s no reason to think he won’t survive past Iowa next year. After that, Bush will surely beat him and win the nomination.
Remember,you read it here first: The Republican ticket will be Bush-Walker while the Democratic ticket will be Clinton-O’Malley.
The who again?
Well, they want to mismanage the economy, further weaken the middle class, make people in poverty as miserable as possible, keep you from having to worry about all those pesky abortion choices, kill a bunch of Iranians, and make global warming as bad a disaster as possible. So if you like those things…
51% is nothing to sneeze at. First at the convention, and then in the General. And they’re both a long way off.
I have no idea who will be on the GOP ticket, but I expect they’ll be facing a Sanders/Biden ticket. There are a lot of people who simply don’t trust Hillary. Will Democrats and independents hold their noses and reinstall a Clinton? Only time will tell.
No, your suggestion was to try and appeal to the racist white people on a racist issue in a non-racist manner. That’s different from ignoring that issue and appealing to them on other issues.
As far as I am concerned, your solution is impossible. If you appeal to them on that issue, you will have to include some racism. Even your proposed appeal has them being required to learn English to become a citizen. And it still involves increasing border security, which is still a racist issue and one that won’t happen as long as our corporations want undocumented workers that require less pay than Americans.
The solution is just to not make the illegal immigrants issue a part of your platform at all.
My problem with early polls like this is anyone can say anything without real risk. We all know the REAL election is 16 month away, so when a pollster asks I can make a squishy abstract choice like Trump or Bernie. It’s mostly aspirational, in that “I wish we could have someone like that,…” But, deep down we know it’ll never really happen, and probably isn’t a really good idea after all.
So, Trump gets 18%, whereas a pile of the rest of GOP candidates share a lot of the same space. Once most of them eventually drop out, the voters are not going to move their support over to Trump. Instead they’ll jump on the next guy who most matches the one that dropped, likely not Trump.
(post shortened)
“Illegal immigration” is a public issue. Ignoring the issue of “illegal” aliens is not going to solve the problem of “illegal” aliens, regardless of the “illegal” aliens race, creed, color, height, weight, or skin color. It’s bad enough that many “illegal” aliens enter the U.S. as law-breakers (Welcome to the U.S.A., where our laws don’t matter). It’s a quantum leap when the “illegal” aliens “illegally” entering the U.S. are multiply-convicted felons.
I don’t know of any 1st, or 2nd, world country that does not have strict immigration policies to deal with immigrants, and “illegal” immigrants. There is no reason why honest, law-biding immigrants must take a back seat to the “illegal” immigrants when it comes to U.S. citizenship.
IIRC Rasmussen was the one that Romney ahead all the way in 2012. I’ll wait for unbiased polls thanks. The ones I’ve seen had Obama’s numbers improving - not that this is relevant to this thread at all.
18% might not be too high, but it is a lot higher than what Jindal got. They did report on the candidates attacking Trump and the candidate (Cruz) who refused to.
Don’t blame the media - blame your Republican buddies.
I’d bet every penny I could beg, borrow, or steal that that won’t be the Dem ticket.
In 1960 the South was still heavily Democratic. Why? Because back then at the Republican Convention almost every other sentence noted that the Republican party was the party of Lincoln - definitely something to be proud of. I don’t recall having heard that for a while.
I don’t recall Kennedy or the 1960 Nixon running on race, one way or another. That changed in the next four years.
The media reports what they chose to report. The media has decided to currently report every word Trump says. Their choice.
Unless you’re suggesting that CNN or MSNBC/DNC has a George Stephanopoulos-style insider working for the GOP???
You might want to try publically holding the media outlets to a higher standard than they currently hold. just sayin’
Well, on those rare occasions when a Republican addresses a mostly black audience (such as when Rand Paul spoke at Howard University), they’ll bring up that fact. After which, of course, they’ll (a) quickly elide over the past 50 or so years and (b) act surprised that the Lincoln revelation failed to immediately convert the audience.
So, the media ignoring the current front-runner for one of the two major parties is your idea of a higher standard?