Innnnteresting I hadn't heard that tale before. That will sure be grist to the Dem mill.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/life...d96816-ae7f-11e5-9ab0-884d1cc4b33e_story.html
2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran are here to talk about a frustrating 2 points dropped at Crystal Palace. They then discuss the regeneration of Old Trafford. Finally, Nik is joined by special guest Michael Statham from the Football Oranje podcast - who gives us a more in depth look at our EL opposition FC Twente, and then runs through the (many) Dutch connections currently at United.
- Status
Innnnteresting I hadn't heard that tale before. That will sure be grist to the Dem mill.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/life...d96816-ae7f-11e5-9ab0-884d1cc4b33e_story.html
Best case scenario. None of them wins the nomination on the first voting, and then in second voting the delegates might vote however they want. Rubio and Cruz join forces, Trump feels betrayed and runs as independent, Hillary win the entire election.
In fact, this is the second best scenario. Best scenario is like that, but with Bernie instead of Hillary.
So is it official that you do indeed need more than 50%?
In your last scenario you have to add Bloomberg into the equation. This is a highly complex year with many twists and turns ahead yet. Still waiting on Warren. I'm wondering if she will come out this week and push the Bern!
Wait is there an actual chance that Trump might win the nomination?
I know little about American politics but I've read the last few pages and have another question. Why should the republican party care whether Trump or Cruz gets elected?
Won't cruz's voters just vote for Trump in the final election and vice versa?
Similarly for the demcoratic candidates. Wouldn't Bernie's supporters simply want a democratic candidate in office (Hilary) rather than not vote at all and see Trump get elected?
I imagined that the entire party and supporters would just throw their weight behind whoever wins the nomination, but I get the impression that isn't the case.
I know little about American politics but I've read the last few pages and have another question. Why should the republican party care whether Trump or Cruz gets elected?
Won't cruz's voters just vote for Trump in the final election and vice versa?
Similarly for the demcoratic candidates. Wouldn't Bernie's supporters simply want a democratic candidate in office (Hilary) rather than not vote at all and see Trump get elected?
I imagined that the entire party and supporters would just throw their weight behind whoever wins the nomination, but I get the impression that isn't the case.
Yeah Bloomberg would be a certainty to run in a Bernie/Trump/Rubio race.
I'm guessing Warren will come out for Bernie in the run up to the Massachusetts primary on Super Tuesday, PPP had him leading there and he needs a win given Hillary's likely to win big elsewhere that day.
Trump is hilarious. I hope he wins
Trump... yes, very much so.
I think it relates to turnout for the second part of your post. Imagine the black turnout for Clinton for instance if Obama had lost to Clinton. Sure, she would get the black vote but far fewer would show.
You probably haven´t heard either of Jeb´s crackhead daughter Noelle who´s been in all kinds of drug related felonies, nor of Ted Cruz´s drug addict half sister who died, nor of any the George W. Bush tales of alcoholism and cocaine use, and very probable cocaine selling. These are the leaders of the drug war party who continually clamor for harsher sentences and bigger budgets for the drug warriors. Not to mention the family values party.
@Raoul
I remember now. The term "brokered" was the part I heard was wrong and we should use "contested". Probably just semantics. Something about the convention doesn't have a bunch of stock exchange like brokers running around trying to get votes.
This could get really interesting come July. How glorious would a GOP meltdown be?
THE CONVENTION: July 18, 2016 — Cleveland, Ohio
If no candidate has the required number of delegates on the first ballot, balloting will continue until a nominee emerges with a majority of delegates. Most delegates are freed from their bindings after the first ballot or if released by the candidate. Others are held for longer.
I remember now. The term "brokered" was the part I heard was wrong and we should use "contested". Probably just semantics. Something about the convention doesn't have a bunch of stock exchange like brokers running around trying to get votes.
This could get really interesting come July. How glorious would a GOP meltdown be?
THE CONVENTION: July 18, 2016 — Cleveland, Ohio
If no candidate has the required number of delegates on the first ballot, balloting will continue until a nominee emerges with a majority of delegates. Most delegates are freed from their bindings after the first ballot or if released by the candidate. Others are held for longer.
Funnily enough, I did know those, though maybe not the dealing by Bush. Hasn't Cruz been using the sister story on the campaign trail?
This is actually getting scary now...Donald Trump could very well be the GOP nomination for president......Donald Trump!!!
Some people will vote for the party they support regardless, but there are a lot of people who don't identify with either party, and in addition, there are some people who would vote only if their preferred candidate is on the election.
The entire point of primaries is to choose an electable candidate. A candidate that unifies the members of the party, but also gets the vote from the center. For this reason, Hillary and Bush were massive favorites, but Bush's bad performances meant that Rubio stole his place as establishment's choice, while e-mail scandal decreased Hillary's support from the democrats. Still think that Hillary and Rubio have the best chance of winning the election from all choices. Trump and Cruz are very divisive and would struggle to get even republicans votes, while I think that Sanders is unacceptable for people who identify themselves in the center.
Historically speaking, candidates who were nearer to the center did well that those who were on both extremes (Sanders and Cruz are on opposite poles this time). Trump is hard to say, he has done everything someone has to do to lose voters, but is till going strong. In addition, he doesn't even have policies bar kill Muslims and deport illegal immigrants.
Also Laura Bush killed a guy
All his racist, xenophobic bluster is just a show. He'll be terrific.
Where's the whiter than white text?
Yep, you need to have the majority of delegates to win the nomination.
In that scenario, Bloomberg certainly candidates, though I don't think that he'll get near as many votes as Trump. Heck, he might even get some of the Republican votes considering that despite he was a lifelong democrat, he was New York mayor for 12 years as a Republican.
Actually, a four horse race would be brilliant. Will finally a non Democrat/Republican candidate at least win a state?
He'll get smashed by Hillary.
It is too white for the naked eye to see
He was serious.
Completely agree with Raoul that Trump is saying those things just to get the nutters vote for him. In some things he is as liberal as Clinton, if not Bernie. He even thought that the TV presenter was talking for him when she pointed Bernie's policies.
Nine times out of ten.
The other time something bad happens, America subsequently loses its tiny mind and before we know it they've invaded Poland.
Or have created a mess in Syria that leads to WWW3
Ninety-nine times out of a hundred. And that hundredth time is only if aliens come down and start meddling.
I lack your confidence in the Americans ability to maintain a sense of proportion if a major terrorist attack strikes at the right time.
I'd say that would actually hurt Trump further, his lack of experience would be highlighted. Plus Hillary's pretty hawkish.
The basic idea is that you can't do as badly among minorities and women as Trump would do, and have any hope of winning. If it was Cruz I'd be more worried, because I can see potential (though unlikely) paths to victory for him.
What about several high profile murders by Mexicans? Trump it is!
How much do you think Trump would have to spend to cause one at the right time?
Yeesh, hope I don't look back at this post in horror in a few months time...
I reckon even several high profile murders by Hillary wouldn't be enough to get him elected.
He could offer to nuke the entire Middle East though. Whoever from the other candidates has the balls for it?
What about several high profile murders by Trump? If he picks the right targets it could be a serious boost.
Maybe they can just have the election about who can do the most murdering, like Battle Royale.
If Trump is actually a liberal, then he's a genius.
His campaign is being directed by Chris Morris.
So despite the triumphant rhetoric by Rubio and Cruz, neither won even a single delegate.
From what I can gather 5 people won the 2 races yesterday.
Yup, and Rubio's likely stronger states are mainly in the second half of the primaries. By then Trump's perceived momentum could be difficult to stop, particularly if he beats Rubio in Florida (another winner-takes-all state). He also needs to clear 20% in Texas to get any delegates there, where Cruz is likely to be very strong and Trump will attract his usual crowd. People are definitely underestimating the difficulty he's in.
This is the most epic troll of republicans ever.
Rubio will win Florida. With the money from Bush going to him, and him being from Florida, while also Bush endorsing him, I think that he'll comfortably win it.
Texas is an another matter though.
I agree. I will need to hear what his economic plans are in the Generals, before he gets my vote.
Polls from a month back give Trump a big lead over even combined Rubio+Bush. Rubio will no doubt have been boosted since then, but it's not exactly a vote of confidence for him. There's a good chance he'll take it, but Trump's support seems cockroach-like.
- Status