If she can withstand a marathon grilling from an extremely hostile congressional grilling, nothing Trump can say is going to throw her off her game. Still, to be safe, she should probably spend some time with patients in a psych ward as part of her debate prep.
-
As had been pointed out to me, Clinton did have a response, and one that was earlier than Trump’s. It wasn’t a photo op one to be sure, and it could have been larger. But it was present and early.
-
Obama’s Gallup approval rating is the same 52% now that it was before those floods so the hypothesis that the settling back to the lower end of the 5 to 7 point +Clinton range that this race has been mostly travelling in having to do with Obama’s alleged fading popularity secondary to his golf game is unfounded.
-
Personally I see this as nothing to see. The Clinton advantage more than 7 was the anomaly, a convention bounce that extended itself by virtue of Trump being so horribly offensive, which got him in the news more. Again though, Clinton needs to message more on why she is a good choice. Not much on that since the convention.
The coverage of the candidates in this election cycle has been so poor that I if find it frustrating. Trump seems to always grab the headlines with shallow and content-free jabs aimed at people or groups of people and I never hear anything of substance from him. But the news seems to be all-Trump-all-the-time.
I heard a snippet of a speech Clinton gave to the American Legion a day or two ago while driving to work. She said something that I found interesting and that I wanted to hear a bit more about when I got home from work later.
When I got home, all the news I saw was about Trump’s trip to Mexico: Was it planned? Was it spontaneous? They didn’t talk about who would pay. They did talk about who would pay. Is someone lying about whether or not they talked about who would pay?
What was even the purpose of that trip?
Does nobody care about Clinton’s presentation to thousands of vets about her expericence as SoS and her views on foreign policy and national security?
Guess not.
It’s hard for Clinton to get her “message” out when the media prefer to repeat Trump’s latest idiocy–or just run poll results saying she’s “disliked.”
Alas, she speaks in sentences. Sometimes she even uses paragraphs. Trump keeps it simple.
Right – e.g., the important mental health policy changes that Clinton proposed yesterday. Substantive things, but not conducive to angry sound-bites.
Hillary’s large lead of a couple of weeks ago terrified the media–how can they keep people tuning in, unless this thing is close?
Their profits are at risk. Hence you will find them giving Trump a pass at every turn, and undercutting Hillary whenever possible.
A good example of the ‘let Trump get by with whatever lie he chooses to tell’ philosophy shared by CNN, MSNBC, the networks, and FOX News alike:
Well, as counter to that (not the media part, I do agree the media wants a horse race) I do think that many of the undecided and moderate Republicans that are making the polls swing wildly are not racists or bigots or have respect of science and reality.
And, every time Trump pivots 360 degrees* as he did with immigration (his openness with Hispanic leaders giving hints that he would change his tune on immigration recently was just a trial balloon that did sink like a lead one) and sounding unhinged like in his recent speech is not bound to make those undecided to support Trump in higher numbers. I do think hateful speeches will hurt him with more people that help him with the ones that need to be convinced that Trump could be a good choice if they look sideways or squint.
An anecdote here from Arizona: I have to report that in a school where I sometimes do IT work there is a very old, white, conservative teacher’s aid, the kind that usually is planning to vote for Trump and he attended his latest rally here in Arizona.
He just confided to me and other workers that after what he saw in that rally he is NOT going to vote for Trump. Somehow knowing Hispanics and other minorities that will be hurt by the spewed hatred from Trump can change the mind of a Republican. So hopefully many on the fence can finally see what a bad idea has been to put Don the Con in the ticket.
*Tip to 538 for that line.
Of course, anecdote is not data, so looking at a recent polls Clinton has been more often ahead by 4 to 7 in most polls, and now there is Suffolk University/USA Today showing Clinton ahead by 7.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/poll-clinton-leading-trump-227639
Which lines from his speech made him sound “unhinged” to you?
Just an overall impression, parental units just changed the channel that day, I was on the net. The yelling and grandstanding from Trump was too much in their opinion.
The conservative worker I know over here in Phoenix noticed the overal hate too, and very little to support.
What I do understand is that by reading about the speech and listening from time to time that I noticed a contradiction, and I did not imagine the yelling and incoherence of him declaring first that he would deport all illegals and then tossing a removed of all meat bone to the moderates:
Never seen such an over-the-place election as this one. In the morning I read an article claiming that Trump would lose in a historic landslide. In the afternoon I read a poll saying that Trump was now leading Hillary by 1% in the popular vote.
It reminds me of the Newsweek cartoon after Election Night in 2000: * “Dewey Defeats Truman Defeats Dewey Defeats Truman Defeats Dewey Defeats Truman Defeats Dewey”*
I think I know the few polls you are talking about, unfortunately for Trump they look like outliers.
As the latest one you must be talking about is coming from Rasmussen again, I have to agree with 538 and assume a Republican bias of a few points in favor of the Republican always.
My updated takes on Trump post-Mexico and Arizona are as follows:
-
Trump has completely fucked any chance of winning in states where Latinos are the king makers. It’s completely over in states like Nevada and Florida, and his campaign should just not even bother setting foot in these states again – would be an utter waste of his time.
-
Trump will literally have to use racial insecurities (and economics, national security, etc) as a wedge issue to flip states that are mostly white and occasionally have conservative leanings: Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Ohio, and North Carolina. Those are the states to watch from this point forward. And right now, Hillary is leading in every single won – she’s batting 1000 so far. Moreover, history is on her side in these states, especially in WI, PA, NH, and OH.
-
That said, if Trump plays his cards right, these might be states that could, in theory, be flipped. But they’re the only options left. Trump’s geography is down to these states.
What makes you think that Cubans in Florida dislike Trump’s deport-the-illegals positions?
Well, there is a Cuban American with influence that has already said that he will opoose Trump if he becomes president:
-
The data. Rick Scott won the governorship with something like 38 percent of the Hispanic vote (IIRC). Trump is at something like 12 percent at last check, which means he’ll need to make up some serious ground in a very short span of time. Not likely, especially after his “pivot” was no pivot at all. However, FTR, I have felt like Trump was in no position to shift in the first place, and I doubt his campaign felt that it was realistic to gain favorability among non-whites. Rather, they just hope to not sound so inhuman to moderate centrist whites in places like Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New Hampshire, and North Carolina.
-
Cubans, though they may be “legal” refugees, are immigrants and understand the vulnerabilities that come with being among the non-native Americans. Cuban Americans have long supported candidates of both parties who reject Castro on one hand and roll out the welcome mat for immigrants on the other. Trump is unlike anything Cuban Americans have ever seen from either party. I suspect Trump’s supporters are probably among the PR crowd - my apologies to Puerto Rican Americans if I’ve guessed incorrectly and maligned you in the process.
Posting from phone, so apologies’ but the latest Mason Dixon poll shows him getting 27% of Hispanics in Florida. Looks like he’said making up ground nicely
Because we are dealing with 538 the most recent Florida Poll that made by Reuters shows Clinton ahead by 5 overall (not just Hispanics).
Not sure about the Hispanic vote from Reuters, but I also do remember seeing studies that show that recent Hispanic immigrants or first generation ones are against Trump big time; later generations are so much like most Americans that the polls look like the usual ‘Clinton ahead by high single digits.’
Point being here is that Florida should be a great place to find many second and higher generation Hispanics, seeing Trump get about 27% sounds a lot like a normal crazification factor 
. But more seriously that 27% looks to me like a shameful result from Trump, because of the generational thing Trump should be doing much better than that.
I truly don’t know what polls you guys are talking about (because no one provided a link to any of them). asahi’s claim about “the data” appears to be out of date, if it was ever correct. The latest Reuters poll I could find was for the whole country, not just Florida, and it had Clinton clinging to a 1-point lead (link). Personally, if my candidate was barely eeking out a 1-point lead against as-shitty-of-a-candidate-as-Trump, I’d be nervous as hell, but you guys do what you want.
Trump is actually ahead in two of the last three Florida polls, but Clinton maintains a lead in the RCP average. My broader point here is that it’s borderline delusional to believe that “It’s completely over in … Florida”. HRC is currently a slight favorite to win Florida, but anyone who thinks that it’s impossible for DJT to win Florida is not living in reality.