2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins

Status
Not open for further replies.




Interesting the gap has narrowed And the national lead is all but gone for Clinton.

If he wins Nevada could he get another bump in SC ?

It hasn't narrowed really, CBS/Yougov polled SC a few weeks ago and had Hillary up by 22, so they're within each other's margin of error.

And the Quinnipiac poll might've showed a national tie, but one by PPP a day prior showed a 21 point Hillary lead still.
 
Aren't those polls ancient?

With Bernie doing well in Iowa and thrashing Hillary in NH, I think that polls now would look quite different (see SC poll, when the results changed from +38 in the December poll, to +19 in today's poll).

Sure, Hillary is an absolute favorite, but who knows. If Sanders win Nevada (which I think he will) and does well in Iowa (-10 or so), who knows what will happen.

Ancient as in the past few days, yes.
 
Saw this on reddit, interesting:

CBS SC numbers

70% of Whites "know Bernie Sanders and what he stands for", 63% support him.

28% of Blacks "know Bernie Sanders and what he stands for", 26% support him.

2 things:
it's an obvious opportunity, and
voter registration is long over. First-time voters and new voters aren't going to help him out. Fortunately for him, it's an open primary with non-Repubs allowed to vote.
 
Saw this on reddit, interesting:

CBS SC numbers



2 things:
it's an obvious opportunity, and
voter registration is long over. First-time voters and new voters aren't going to help him out. Fortunately for him, it's an open primary with non-Repubs allowed to vote.
That's a bit selective. The tables also show that 63% of black voters want the candidate to be less or equally as progressive as Obama, compared to just 28% of white voters; that 71% of black voters feel that Hillary is trustworthy, compared to 41% of white voters (14% and 41% are the corresponding figures for "not trustworthy"); and 34% of black voters don't think Sanders is ready to be President, compared to only 20% of white voters. Also, the results you've posted aren't quite accurate and are misleading: 28% of black voters know Bernie Sanders and what he stands for very well. A further 49% know him fairly well.
 
is that your PoV though? I think everyone knows Hillary is leading and Bernie has a tough road ahead.

There are a good number of Bernie supporters who are living in a reality vortex where they seem sure Bernie has somehow closed the gap - he hasn't, which is why I keep harping on the state by state polls. It is possible that he may not win more than a few states out of the remaining 48.
 
I'm baffled how anybody can watch how the candidates act during any of the Republican debates and think, 'Yeah, one of those guys is definitely the one to lead our country.'
The South Park episode of voting between a giant douche and a turd sandwich continues to stay relevant.
 
It is their fault a bit, because they have to live with the likes of Ted Cruz as president for at least 4 years.

Is Clinton really that bad? I said that I don't like her that much, but I think that she will continue doing Obama's policies. And I quite like Obama despite that he didn't manage to turn to life most of the promised policies, but on the other hand, has there ever been a more hostile Senate/House than during his presidency.

And lets not forget, US has a far more stable economy than 8 years before, and isn't doing wars on other countries (or at least, not as much as before). If Clinton continues doing this, it might be an okay president, although far from a potential awesome one like Bernie. And point in case, if Bernie becomes president (highly unlikely), I can see him going the same way as Obama, unless Democrats control both the Senate and the House.

You are saying voters, young or old should pick the lesser of two evils. Why should that be the choice? That may end up being the choice. But why should it? Whether you are are a leftie or rightie, you want to pick a candidate that represents You. There are only two candidates who do not have Super-Pacs. Sanders and Trump. Neither will be answerable to any Special Interest. So if Sanders does not get the nomination, they will look at what Trump has to say compared to Hillary.

Lets also remember, if you do not have an enthused voter, the down ticket wil also be hurt.

Finally. I believe Hillary will be much worse than Obama, no matter what she says.
 
Last edited:
You are saying voters, young or old should pick the lesser of two evils. Why should that be the choice? That may end up being the choice. But why should it? Whether you are are a leftie or rightie, you want to pick a candidate that represents You. There are only two candidates who do not have Super-Pacs. Sanders and Trump. Neither will be answerable to any Special Interest. So if Sanders does not get the nomination, they will look at what Trump has to say compared to Hillary.

Lets also remember, if you do not have an enthused voter, the down ticket wil also be hurt.

Finally. I believe Hillary will be much worse than Obama, no matter what she says.

False equivalence. Trump is Special Interest.
 
He is for himself, true. But he is not an ideologue. He will see that helping the voter will also help him in the long run. He wont take his marching orders from these groups.
So what's he going to do to overturn Citizens United, which is the actual cause of all this?
 
He is for himself, true. But he is not an ideologue. He will see that helping the voter will also help him in the long run. He wont take his marching orders from these groups.

I don't think he gives a shite if he gets in. His interests align with the 1% and while he might not cut welfare, there's nothing to suggest that he will tackle the tax codes in a real meaningful way or care much, if at all, about the plights of the working middle class and poor. The tax plan he's released was scrutinised and it came out the Donald and his friends will benefit the most from it, and his answer to social issues is deporting people and banning Muslims. On guns, well, I'd be damned if President Trump ever champion a gun control bill.

It's ok to be angry and disappointed at the status quo, but better not be drinking the Kool-Aid. This is a man who throughout his life has only ever been about himself and not afraid to ruin others' lives to his benefits. Why would he change now?
 
I don't think he gives a shite if he gets in. His interests align with the 1% and while he might not cut welfare, there's nothing to suggest that he will tackle the tax codes in a real meaningful way or care much, if at all, about the plights of the working middle class and poor. The tax plan he's released was scrutinised and it came out the Donald and his friends will benefit the most from it, and his answer to social issues is deporting people and banning Muslims. On guns, well, I'd be damned if President Trump ever champion a gun control bill.

It's ok to be angry and disappointed at the status quo, but better not be drinking the Kool-Aid. This is a man who throughout his life has only ever been about himself and not afraid to ruin others' lives to his benefits. Why would he change now?

all you say may well be right. The point is everyone's vote has to be Earned.
 
That's a bit selective. The tables also show that 63% of black voters want the candidate to be less or equally as progressive as Obama, compared to just 28% of white voters; that 71% of black voters feel that Hillary is trustworthy, compared to 41% of white voters (14% and 41% are the corresponding figures for "not trustworthy"); and 34% of black voters don't think Sanders is ready to be President, compared to only 20% of white voters. Also, the results you've posted aren't quite accurate and are misleading: 28% of black voters know Bernie Sanders and what he stands for very well. A further 49% know him fairly well.


Fair enough, I didn't bother to check the source.
Usually, bs manipulation of numbers gets called out on reddit itself. But I've been noticing a very strong surge in optimistic posts in that subreddit, contrasting with before IA and NH. Not sure if it's bravado or self-reinforcing or there's some substance to it. The main evidence they've got is Clinton's campaign heavily downplaying expectations, and how in both elections so far Sanders numbers have been consistently understimated (by 3-5%)
 
Fair enough, I didn't bother to check the source.
Usually, bs manipulation of numbers gets called out on reddit itself. But I've been noticing a very strong surge in optimistic posts in that subreddit, contrasting with before IA and NH. Not sure if it's bravado or self-reinforcing or there's some substance to it. The main evidence they've got is Clinton's campaign heavily downplaying expectations, and how in both elections so far Sanders numbers have been consistently understimated (by 3-5%)
I think all those things stack up and create a greater sense of optimism that isn't always necessarily warranted, similar really to when your team's on a great run and you think no-one can stop you. But that isn't always a bad thing either, optimism will possibly make the volunteers work harder, speak for him more passionately, go the little bit extra that they perhaps wouldn't if they knew it was all for a lost cause. Trouble is obviously that the reverse can also happen, the bubble can burst and you're left feeling much worse. One interesting thing I did notice in the numbers was that amongst white voters, Sanders and Clinton scored pretty much identically on whether they were ready to be President. Amongst black voters, it was heavily in favour of Clinton. I suppose the implications of this depend on whether that view is formed before or after you decide who to vote for, it likely changes from person to person, but does suggest that perceived electability is a big factor in the difference and if he could somehow overcome that, he'd make some pretty decent gains.

Another interesting thing that backed up your earlier points on independent voters - 77% of them wanted the candidate to be more progressive than Obama. On the one hand that shows what a great job he's doing at getting non-Democrats involved. On the other, it tells me that these independents are hugely unrepresentative of their general electorate counterparts.
 
Yesterday's SC/ARG poll had Hillary up by 38. It's probably somewhere in the mid 20s.


If this is CBS/YouGov, I would say 21-22 is a good bet. ARG (also PPP) was horrendously off in NH and IA, both times in favour of Clinton. CBS/YouGov has consistently overestimated Sanders (probably since it is internet-based).
 
The key is Bernie is closing. It will probabaly end up in single digit, which wont be bad. Looks like they are close in Nevada. This is about delegates. So he should be ok. Super Tuesday will of course have a big bearing.

The NV poll is probably off given who did it. He needs a seismic shift in sentiment in order to turn the tide, which he hasn't done yet. She has done a good job of pigeonholing him as being a one or two issue candidate
 
The key is Bernie is closing. It will probabaly end up in single digit, which wont be bad. Looks like they are close in Nevada. This is about delegates. So he should be ok. Super Tuesday will of course have a big bearing.
He's not closing, at least not lately - the same company polled SC before Iowa and Hillary was leading by 22 points, so both are within each other's MoE.

He has closed since December on that poll when he was 36 points behind. However, it's telling that this leap was due entirely to white voters switching - from 51-47 in favour of Hillary in December, to 60-38 in favour of Sanders in January and 63-36 for February. The trend for black voters over the same period: 78-19 Hillary, 76-22 Hillary, 73-26 Hillary. This suggests that either white voters in SC are paying a far greater level of attention to the race than black voters (and I personally can't see why this would be the case), or his message doesn't carry the same appeal to the two groups.
 
I don't think he gives a shite if he gets in. His interests align with the 1% and while he might not cut welfare, there's nothing to suggest that he will tackle the tax codes in a real meaningful way or care much, if at all, about the plights of the working middle class and poor. The tax plan he's released was scrutinised and it came out the Donald and his friends will benefit the most from it, and his answer to social issues is deporting people and banning Muslims. On guns, well, I'd be damned if President Trump ever champion a gun control bill.

It's ok to be angry and disappointed at the status quo, but better not be drinking the Kool-Aid. This is a man who throughout his life has only ever been about himself and not afraid to ruin others' lives to his benefits. Why would he change now?
And you think Hillary will raise taxes? Maybe for the middle class not her "high" class
 
And you think Hillary will raise taxes? Maybe for the middle class not her "high" class
She has an electorate that she must represent, so yes, she'll have to raise taxes on the 1%, if not to the extent Warren of Bernie wants. Donald Trump can walk in the WH, give the middle finger to the gullibles who vote him in and walk out unscathed. It's often pointed out that politicians are influenced by special interests and lobbyists, but they do have to perform a balancing act to keep their office, none of that applies to Donald Trump.
 
She has an electorate that she must represent, so yes, she'll have to raise taxes on the 1%, if not to the extent Warren of Bernie wants. Donald Trump can walk in the WH, give the middle finger to the gullibles who vote him in and walk out unscathed. It's often pointed out that politicians are influenced by special interests and lobbyists, but they do have to perform a balancing act to keep their office, none of that applies to Donald Trump.
That's why I like him
 
She has an electorate that she must represent, so yes, she'll have to raise taxes on the 1%, if not to the extent Warren of Bernie wants. Donald Trump can walk in the WH, give the middle finger to the gullibles who vote him in and walk out unscathed. It's often pointed out that politicians are influenced by special interests and lobbyists, but they do have to perform a balancing act to keep their office, none of that applies to Donald Trump.

Good post. This is what politics comes down to. We don't need the Bernie Sanders far left tax cuts for the 1%. I think Hilary can find some common ground regarding tax cuts that will enable of her pursue/pay the initiatives she promised.
 
She has an electorate that she must represent, so yes, she'll have to raise taxes on the 1%, if not to the extent Warren of Bernie wants. Donald Trump can walk in the WH, give the middle finger to the gullibles who vote him in and walk out unscathed. It's often pointed out that politicians are influenced by special interests and lobbyists, but they do have to perform a balancing act to keep their office, none of that applies to Donald Trump.
Equally though most presidents will have very strong support from their party colleagues in the two elected houses... Will the trump be able to carry Republican support - particularly for some of his policies which may be too left for some of the GoP plus the bat shit crazy ideas which surely many career politicians won't want to vote for as they know it will be used against the m in the future.
Won't Trump have to keep the GoP and thus party donors on side anyway?
 
Equally though most presidents will have very strong support from their party colleagues in the two elected houses... Will the trump be able to carry Republican support - particularly for some of his policies which may be too left for some of the GoP plus the bat shit crazy ideas which surely many career politicians won't want to vote for as they know it will be used against the m in the future.
Won't Trump have to keep the GoP and thus party donors on side anyway?

It was never about actual governance with the Donald though, is it? His political aspiration is just a self-validation endeavour. Anyhow, he can piss off both parties and their donors, get nothing done for 4 years, then blame gridlock and go back to his business, and someone else has to pick up the pieces again.

I just don't understand why thinking rational beings should let them self be used as pawns for this tosser's ego trip. There's nothing in his character, public persona and past actions to suggest that he'll act with any principle or integrity for those less fortunate than him.
 
BTW...there's a new Bush PAC poll floating around that suggests Trump 26 / Cruz 24 (with Jeb a distant 3rd) in South Carolina. Could be trouble brewing ahead for Trump.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.