2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wednesday at Stoke said:
That's a single poll and too much variance from the rest.
Click to expand...

Possibly. I just sense that Rubio will do significantly better than some expect, possibly surging into 2nd and possibly threatening Trump in SC. He had an exceptionally strong town hall two nights ago and has the support of Nikki Haley, Tim Scott, and Trey Gowdy - all big time SC political heavyweights. He's quickly becoming the establishment candidate of choice.
 
FromTheBench said:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...ina_republican_presidential_primary-4151.html

Looking at the dates on those polls all the 3 recent ones have Rubio in 2nd now. Seems the endorsement has given him a kick though still Trump seems ahead.

Seems to be doing very well on 2nd preference choice too which finishes the gap with trump.
Click to expand...

There are now clearly 3 lanes in the GOP race - Establishment (Rubio, Bush, Kasich), Conservative (Cruz, Carson), and Populist (Trump). I expect Rubio to do well in SC and have that momentum carry propel him forward to Super Tuesday, at which point Bush and Kasich may bow out and give Rubio a lot higher numbers. Its completely plausible that he could pass Trump at some point.
 
Raoul said:
There are now clearly 3 lanes in the GOP race - Establishment (Rubio, Bush, Kasich), Conservative (Cruz, Carson), and Populist (Trump). I expect Rubio to do well in SC and have that momentum carry propel him forward to Super Tuesday, at which point Bush and Kasich may bow out and give Rubio a lot higher numbers. Its completely plausible that he could pass Trump at some point.
Click to expand...

Dunno about Kasich but If Bush does badly in South Carolina and Nevada, i'd guess he will bow out after that anyway ? Would be under pressure and have little to gain from carrying on.
 
Red Dreams said:
She will use them of course. Sure. She is the lesser of the two evils. But she is offering no real benefits to ordinary people. If she wants to be for ordinary people as she claims, she needs to prove she is only answerable to the voters and not to special interests.
Click to expand...

How does she prove that, without disenchanting moderates in her party base as well as the ge independents?

And let's say she moves closer or takes up Sanders's position, wouldn't she then be vilified as fake to court vote, again?

There's an oversimplification of the process going on here. Sanders's supporters like to claim that FDR was similar to him, but that's false. He was an affluent, highly influential establishment politician, not some sort of idealistic upstart who by his will and his integrity lead the US to glory.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
How does she prove that, without disenchanting moderates in her party base as well as the ge independents?

And let's say she moves closer or takes up Sanders's position, wouldn't she then be vilified as fake to court vote, again?

There's an oversimplification of the process going on here. Sanders's supporters like to claim that FDR was similar to him, but that's false. He was an affluent, highly influential establishment politician, not some sort of idealistic upstart who by his will and his integrity lead the US to glory.
Click to expand...

Its not about moderates or progressives though. Its about her taking money from special interest. FDR was similar to Sanders. The fact FDR was affluent has nothing to do with it. FDR was also focused on the plight of ordinary people.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Lord Nate of House Silver hath spoken

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/primary-forecast/nevada-democratic/

Hillary to win Nevada, SC and sweep 10/12 of Super Tuesday states.
Click to expand...

There are not any recent and representative polls for the Super Tuesday states apart from the PPP ones, something that his model relies on. Nevada is a crapshoot because the polling is really bad.

SC seems like a done deal for Hillary though. All depends on how much damage limitation Bernie can do. I suspect she will do well in the southern states on Super Tuesday. The fact that the recent PPP polls show her holding her lead despite Sanders' surge nationally is not good for him.
 
Last edited:
Ole's_toe_poke said:
There are not many recent and representative polls for the Super Tuesday states, something that his model relies on. Nevada is a crapshoot because the polling is really bad.

SC seems like a done deal for Hillary though. All depends on how much damage limitation Bernie can do. I suspect she will do well in the southern states on Super Tuesday.
Click to expand...

I think Nevada will be close, but not Iowa-close, that's why the Clinton team has been downplaying expectation a bit there to claim the comeback narrative in SC. the Super Tuesday states seems about right, Sanders should take Massachusetts, Oklahoma is a toss up.
 
I think Nevada could be anywhere between a 5-point win for either candidate, massive uncertainty and seems to hinge on whether Sanders gets enough people registered in time to caucus.
 
Super Tuesday mainly winner take all for repubs? If all stay in after SC Trump is sitting pretty. If 1 or 2 establishment drop he may be toast. I imagine deals ongoing. Like a game of chicken.
 
Ubik said:
And what was Citizens United being fought over? A GOP group wanting to air a film that attacked Hillary. Quite literally, Super-Pacs came into existence to attack Hillary Clinton. If you think she really likes them, I'd say you're grossly mistaken. She's going to use them to level the playing field to beat the scumbag GOP, then she'll kill them off.
Click to expand...

And you accuse Sanders supporters of being naive.
How would the very donors, that are contributing enough to her super-pac to help her rival Republican spending, feel if she declared war on them?
 
Other emails show Clinton seeming to personally lobby her former Democratic colleagues in the Senate to support free trade agreements (FTAs) with Colombia, Panama and South Korea. She had previously told voters she would work to block the Colombian and South Korean pacts.

An email Oct. 8, 2011, to Clinton from her aide Huma Abedin gave notes about the state of play in Congress on the proposed trade pacts. The notes provided Clinton “some background before you make the calls” to legislators.

Two days later in an email titled “FTA calls,” Clinton wrote to aides indicating she had spoken to Sens. Jack Reed of Rhode Island and Jim Webb of Virginia, both Democrats. She told the aides she had talked with “Webb who is strong in favor of all 3” trade agreements, and then asked, “So why did I call him?” — indicating she was otherwise phoning to try to convince wavering lawmakers to support the deals.

Only three years earlier, Clinton wooed organized labor during her presidential campaign with promises to oppose those same deals. She called the South Korea agreement “inherently unfair.” She also said, “I will do everything I can to urge the Congress to reject the Colombia Free Trade Agreement.” Clinton has lately courted organized labor’s support for her current presidential bid by pledging to oppose the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, a deal she repeatedly toutedwhile secretary of state.
Click to expand...

http://www.ibtimes.com/hillary-clin...ns-new-york-times-trade-bill-lobbying-2315809

The only reason she has trust issues with voters is because sexism, right? /s
 
CbjrQx5UcAAX3p9.jpg

:lol:
 
berbatrick said:
And you accuse Sanders supporters of being naive.
How would the very donors, that are contributing enough to her super-pac to help her rival Republican spending, feel if she declared war on them?
Click to expand...
Probably the same as they feel about Obama, whose Super-Pac (Priorities USA Action, the same as Hillary's) raised $80m in 2012. I'm just as sure he'd strike down Citizens United if he could, as well (indeed, he actually appointed Elena Kagan to SCOTUS, and she was involved in the case against it).
 
Predictions for this week:

Dem Nevada: Sanders, Clinton (Sanders +1)
Dem South Carolina: Clinton, Sanders (Clinton +19)

GOP South Carolina: Trump, Rubio, Cruz, Bush, Kasich, Carson (Trump +6)
GOP Nevada: Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich, Carson, Bush (Trump +13)
 
17-year-old raised by conservatives campaigns for Republican shocker.

Bernie Bros.
 
Ubik said:
17-year-old raised by conservatives campaigns for Republican shocker.

Bernie Bros.
Click to expand...
At 17, if she agreed and campaigned for someone who opposed the Civil Rights Act, she can expect some criticism.
17 isnt that young.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.