Trump got a six or seven point bounce for the Republican convention. That means that some undecided folks watched that clusterfuck and thought, hey, that guy seems like he would be a good president. So no, I don’t trust the American voters.
If you’re planning on voting against Trump in November, volunteer to help get out the vote. Complacency is what caused those disastrous mid-term elections.
yes…still has a good chance.
look at polls 1 month from now… then after 1st debate .
if he’s close to her by then …even better chance.
if hillary still has dbl digit lead in swing states… turn out the lights… party’s over.
long time regardless. lots could happen.
I don’t for a moment believe that Trump would ever shill for anybody but Trump. But I do think it’s plausible that he doesn’t want to be president, that the entire campaign was just a stunt to push his own brand. He’s probably gone further than he expected, and now he’s looking for a way to lose or be removed from the process while saving face and being able to blame someone else for his loss.
“I saw that video. It was YUGE. The best. I mean, the worst if you’re for Hillary. But it was the best. It was on Fox News I think. Puppies and everything. If this election wasn’t rigged, your be allowed to see it too.”
Anyone who seriously thinks Trump stands a chance is as deluded as Karl Rove was on election night 2012 when Obama was called the winner early in the evening. Karl stammered that you have to wait until the votes are in and the pollsters, even the Fox news experts, told him it was over. Models, doncha know. The current polls reflect what is Trumps doom.
I am a little tired of this theory . I don’t know how serious he is/was about this whole thing but there just is no way it was a stunt to push his brand. If that was his objective he would never have been so divisive. He could easily have gone off on the “rigged system”, “they’re giving away our jobs” and “Make America Great Again” without all the Mexican/Muslim/etc shit.
Your reading of Trump’s character is that he would willingly put a big “LOSER” label on himself?
(And for the purpose of helping out Hillary Clinton, yet?)
Polls drift. There are more than 80 days to go before the election. The polls-only models at 538 and other places put Trump’s odds at 12-21%. Median: 13.5%. Those take into account historical observations regarding the way polls can change.
That’s not zero. That’s far from a 5% significance cutoff and is even above a 10% cutoff. And this year is different from the historical record, so you should drive the forecast towards 50% in some way, to some extent.
I expect the polling models to drive Trump’s percentages below 5% as the race continues. When that happens, I will argue that they underestimate Trump’s chances: I will probably favor taking an average between the existing models and a 15% baseline. Something like that.
Don’t forget that Clinton still has to actually win. Health problems or a scandal could easily do her in.
I’m expecting a Clinton landslide. But I expected a Remain result in the Brexit referendum, so I have a poor track record.
I agree with both of you.
Whether he was sincere or not at first, I cannot believe that he is in this for anyone else, nor can I believe he would want to lose on purpose. He sure is dragging his precious 'brand" through the toilet- I don’t think he’d do that for giggles. I think he really wants to win. Failing that, he may quit before he can lose.
Of course, in the aftermath who knows what he’ll say to save face.
This is the key factor. Even if you believe that Hillary Clinton is every bit as bad as Donald Trump you have to concede she’s more competent at hiding it.
I guess you missed that we were talking about the debates, and not an interview she gave a year ago. Sure, these words could be used in ads too, but so could words used at any point in her life. We were directly talking about the debates and her answering a question definitively about refugees and having that turned into an ad.
It’s the bombast and extreme opinions that have given him strong appeal. If he had made lukewarm speeches, he’d have been run over in the debates and primaries.
I don’t think he’s a “shill for Hillary.” :smack: But he never expected to get this far, and doesn’t really want to be President.
So she would say it on Face the Nation but not in a debate. Solid reasoning. I’m sure she might hedge her bets but with any hemming, hawing or lawyerly jibber jabber Trump can just yell “500% increase, people. That’s what she said!”.
Something she said a year ago at a different point in the campaign, she might not say in the same way today. What part are you having a hard time understanding?
The part where she would get away with denying her publicly stated opinion.
But she’s up against Trump so it doesn’t really matter.
Do you honestly not understand how an experienced politician can give a non-specific answer to a question, even to one they may have answered more than a year earlier?
You’re right. Hillary has just a way with the audience, is well beloved and is such a skilled campaigner that it should prove no problem. Thanks for reminding me.
The Other Waldo Pepper said she had no other choice but to give a “yes” or “no” to the question of Syrian refugees in an upcoming debate. I said there’s another possibility. Could she mess it up? Sure. But is it also possible she and her campaign prepare for the question so as not to give a straight yes or no answer? Yep.
Why don’t you go back to phone banking for Trump now. He could probably use the help.
But, at the same time, he doesn’t want to be a “Loser.” So he came up with that idea of letting his VP run the country.