It’s my understanding that the polls consistently show Trump losing to either Clinton or Sanders; and that the polls consistently show Cruz doing considerably better than Trump would against either Clinton or Sanders; and that the polls consistently show Kasich doing considerably better still.
Does that match your understanding? If not, why not? If so, how do you explain it?
It matches my understanding, in that I don’t dispute that those polls represent the best info that we have. But we also know that those kinds of polls don’t mean too much this far out. I don’t think it’s easy at all to predict what is going to happen. But Trump has a real chance at being president, after surviving an onslaught from the political establishment including hundreds of millions of dollars in ads against him. That alone is a massive success.
I see the presidential election like climbing K2 without oxygen. The primary is just the trek to base camp, if Trump makes it that far the general will be a whole other level of challenge. Hillary is very smart in her own right. And remember, she is used to dealing with self entitled rich assholes, since she has had to deal with the Saudis.
The GOP will take their chances and support Ted Cruz over Trump, and they can live with Trump running as a 3rd party candidate. From their point of view, they long ago accepted that this race might be a complete waste. It’s not like they like Ted Cruz, either, but they tolerate him because they know he’s at minimum loyal to the republican party, even if not to republican hierarchy in the senate. They can live with Cruz because he will keep the core of the republican party together and the hierarchy will remain in place.
With Trump, the republicans would lose it all. They cannot accept him as their nominee unless he accepts a long list of terms that Trump probably wouldn’t dare bother to consider. Trump’s whole point of running is that he’s his own man. And the only way the republicans allow him to be their nominee is if he’s not his own man. Everything’s a deal breaker from the start for both sides.
A 3rd party run from Trump would be a disaster for 2016 but not necessarily for 2018 and 2020. Trump as the GOP nominee would be a terminal illness for the republicans. That’s why he won’t be nominated. Period. It’s just a matter of whether he wants to run or not, and my gut says no. He doesn’t actually want to be president; he just wants to know he could have been and that he affected the outcome of the race.
I apologize if this was already mentioned (hard to search from my mobile). But Trump has stated that he will eliminate the national debt, currently about $19 trillion dollars, and he will do so in eight years. Yep. He’ll dig about $2.5T out of the couch cushions every year of his administration and apply it straight to paying down the debt.
Now, some economists might call his plan “nuts”, “crazy”, or “mathematically impossible”, but that’s just because they’re total losers. Sad!
Well, granted, I guess, but I posted that in reply to your claim that Trump is “much more in touch with the sentiments and concerns of the average American” than “any of the other candidates. And better at communicating with them.”
If so, then why do the national numbers apparently put him fifth compared to the other four candidates? I mean, yeah, sure, as of today – but if he’s already much more in touch, and better at communicating, with the average American, then shouldn’t he be polling at least as well as at least one of the other candidates?
All of the other candidates have the establishment behind them to one degree or another. And Trump has been blasted by the media with tons of unfair characterization. Still he is one of the most likely people to be the next president. Also, Clinton might not be as in touch with the average American as Trump is, but she surely has people working for her who are. Trump is a one-man show, comparatively speaking. He has needed his greater understanding of the average American and his expert communication skills to even keep up and survive until now.
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha
‘Unfair characterization’ of Trump by the media.
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha
Sorry. I just had to laugh.
That’s complete nonsense.
Two points: one, he’s gotten more free publicity than any candidate in history. Two, no one needs to mischaracterize him; he constantly and consistently shoots himself in the foot.
Yes yes. Hysterical incredulity. So original. Works every time. Until it doesn’t. Then it becomes the biggest joke on the internet.
Yes he has benefited from all the coverage as well. But it has been a trade-off, the constant hammering villfication from the media has had a cost.
The media bias against him is ever present and obsessive though, whether they need to do it or not.
"TRUMP: I have such respect for women. I cherish women. I’m going to take such good care of women’s health care issues, you won’t even believe it, but I’m surging with women. One of the things coming out, I’m watching television and they said Trump is surging with women. I said really? That’s amazing. You know, it’s incredible. I’ll make like statements because, you know, Carly is giving me a little bit of a hard time even though her poll numbers are horrible. She’s the one. She was another one. She is surging. Ben is, everybody is surging but me.
(LAUGHTER)
TRUMP: Hilary is not surging, I tell you that. They are not saying – thank you.
(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)
TRUMP: Hilary is not surging. Look, I like Carly and I like Ben and I like many of the people that I’m running against. I mean, many of these people are terrific people, but nobody is going to be able to do the job that I’m going to do. Nobody. They won’t.
(CHEERS AND APPLAUSE)
TRUMP: They won’t. Don’t forget, I love these people in back of me."
Expert communication skills? He comes across like a drunk uncle at a bad family gathering.
That quote is from mid September. Since then, Trump has gotten millions more votes than any of the other 17 or so GOP contenders.
That’s the thing about an expert, his output might not appear clearly superior, and when the strategy used is unconventional, it can even come across as less than competent to a novice that is unfamiliar with it.
Okay, I clicked that, and then I was kind of dumbfounded. I felt like a fuddy-duddy, not being familiar with this kind of video remix. So I looked at the comments, and someone included a link to the original source video, which I went to peruse to try to figure out WTF this was all about. And I must say, now I’m really glad to have gone down that rabbit hole, as I have now found the most hilariously ignorant Sanders supporter starting at 3:37 (watch for 37 seconds, until about 4:14).
“I have done my research. I have done my research.”
He was doing fine, of course, for the first twenty seconds or so. I thought he might actually be a smart anticapitalist who knew what the fuck he was talking about. But then…SMH. “Those were capitalists!” Oh dear. :smack:
I wonder if the ratio of length to population is that much different. Or to GDP. And you have to put your troops somewhere anyway, and we’ve got a lot of them.
Again, I’m by no means advocating this, but the “it can’t be done!” talk seems defeatist.
If he’s so smart, how come it appears he knows about as much about President Lincoln (the one president he said he wouldn’t be able to outdo in greatness) as Sarah Palin knew about Supreme Court decisions or newspapers when Katie Couric interviewed her?
Nice Drumpf attack haiku.
Yes: in any normal year, the absurdity of this proposal would incite a media firestorm. But this year, people aren’t even talking about it much because it’s only the 178th stupidest/craziest thing Drumpf has proposed.
He is famous now, known as AIDS Skrillex. He is the face of the anti-Trump movement (if the Trumpists get to pick their adversary’s figurehead, anyway, which they aim to do).
Smart doesn’t mean well informed. And no one is well enough informed to never come across sounding ignorant, let alone a constantly on the record blabber mouth like Trump.
But why would they use those bits, even including the “I’ve done my research” line, without the truly damning part? What’s edited together there in no way makes him look remotely as stupid as the unedited 37 seconds I pointed to. You could even cut it down to 25 seconds: 3:49-4:14.
It’s all been used. It’s been cut, chopped, screwed, and looped hundreds of times over. The “Your fucking a white male” retort has become his catch phrase.
Says the man whose argument is basically insulting everyone else.
Trump is very successful at enriching himself. His product is the Trump brand, and he markets it very well. The problem - as the investors, employees and customers of his various previous ventures have discovered - is that he’s not very good at actually enriching anyone else. Where are the long-lasting, stable successes in his portfolio?
So Trump will do very well for himself as President. But all evidence suggests he’ll fuck up the country - and quite possibly other parts of the world - in the process. And you’ve got nothing to suggest otherwise.
Ah right, the drunken master theory. Sure, he looks and acts like a pissed up fool, but really it’s a masterful display of talent and skill.
Or, alternatively, he is precisely as limited as he seems, but his prejudice and showboating appeal to stupid people, which fortunately for him aren’t in short supply.
He’s a second rate demagogue. From an external point of view, it’s frankly terrifying that there’s a significant percentage of americans who honestly think he should lead them. Final days of the roman empire, I guess.