• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2015-2016 |OT3| If someone named PhoenixDark leaves your party, call the cops

Status
Not open for further replies.
U

User 463088

Banned
I eagerly await President Trump's Twitter poll asking if he should deliver the State of the Union or not.

Actually, a Trump State of the Union would be.....

Look? We're winning, right? We're winning so hard. I know you're all sick of it. I won't let us stop winning for a....and we gotta take the oil, right? I want the oil, so we win, but we gotta put it on this side of the wall. I wanted to be clear on that. Because, most of you in here are just stupid, except for the newest Supreme Court Justice, Ivanka. She's beautiful, and not a loser. She's great. America is great. I'm great.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
Trump is the product of 8 years of GOP obstruction. The tea party, the committed filibuster and blocking of every policy by Democrats and Obama in the Congress have led to the unrelenting GRIDLOCK IN CONGRESS!! media narrative which in turn made more people fed up with politics-as-usual. The republicans are fully responsible for everything you see on the debate stage. But the republicans ostensibly think Obama is a dictator passing laws issuing orders and their congresscritters are the proverbial Davids in the fight against Obamagoliath. Just shows you the force with which the GOP reckons the media.

Bernie however, is not affected by this mania regardless of what media likes to say. His support is purely McGovern in nature. He is exciting the liberal base by throwing...blue meat? at it. Liberals are just bummed out they dont have money growing like during the 90s, which is a legitimate concern. The corporations and wall st have grown stronger, bigger, richer every day while we continue to get saddled with college debt and apply for $10/hr entry level jobs. I dont think this changes for a while until the supply is less than the demand. I dont know how to fix it. But what I do know is that Hillary 2016 supporters are the little more grown up Obama 2008 supporters. They have seen the politics for 8 years and believe Bernie's magical socialism panacea is DOA. Which it is.
 
I

Into

Member
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
Hey, if you think Trump wanting to deport 11 million brown people and ban Jews 3.0 (Muslims) from entering the nation controlled by Jews 2.0 (Christians) is because of not-racism, then I think that's just because you are tremendously racist.

Know who thinks Trump is a racist? Non-white people:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...nd-latinos-in-how-they-perceive-donald-trump/
Click to expand...


I take issue with you calling me a racist, since ive been called every single racist shit in the book. As a refugee who has fled my home nation, by people wanting to kill my family due to our religion and then treated like shit as a refugee because of my skin color, i ask of you not to do that.

My interest in Trump is purely from a character and strategic perspective. I am fascinated by how he has run his campaign. I have no horse in the race, since i am not american.
 
U

ugaboga232

Member
Into said:
Considering the ratings viewership of GOP debates, i think Trump is visible to most Americans. Unlike Hillary his numbers have gradually gone up, meaning that more people see him, the more they tend to like him. With Hillary its the opposite.

Dems have tried hard to smear him. And its not sticking at all. And i think they are frustrated, because they are yelling racist and sexist as loud as possible and nobody is paying attention. In fact they have yelled this for so long that come GE it will be a tired attack nobody except hardcore leftists will care about.

Similarly to how right wingers will yell about Benghazi and emails in 6 months and most of America will roll their eyes, if they arent already.
Click to expand...

Did you really compare benghazi vs banning all muslims? I have a lot of family who wouldn't be able to come here and let me tell you: they are most assuredly not terrorists (just annoying sometimes).

Edit: fair enough @ your above comment, but don't you see how Trump is starting to tread the path toward those who are racially intolerant? I see on second read that you were more remarking instead of agreeing. I do agree a lot of people are tired of hearing about racism and sexism (still is a huge problem but humans get tired of things, its just how our brains are).
 
J

Joe Shlabotnik

Banned
Into said:
Considering the ratings viewership of GOP debates, i think Trump is visible to most Americans. Unlike Hillary his numbers have gradually gone up, meaning that more people see him, the more they tend to like him. With Hillary its the opposite.

Dems have tried hard to smear him. And its not sticking at all. And i think they are frustrated, because they are yelling racist and sexist as loud as possible and nobody is paying attention. In fact they have yelled this for so long that come GE it will be a tired attack nobody except hardcore leftists will care about.

Similarly to how right wingers will yell about Benghazi and emails in 6 months and most of America will roll their eyes, if they arent already.
Click to expand...

The Democratic machine has pretty much done the bare minimum against Trump so far. They want him to be the nominee.

They've gone after him just enough to fend off some Clinton stuff and to legitimize him in the Republican primary.
 
I

Into

Member
ugaboga232 said:
Did you really compare benghazi vs banning all muslims? I have a lot of family who wouldn't be able to come here and let me tell you: they are most assuredly not terrorists (just annoying sometimes).
Click to expand...


I am comparing political attacks from both sides that fizzle out and eventually become old news, yes.

I am not comparing the two situations in all their complexities, no.

Edit: fair enough @ your above comment, but don't you see how Trump is starting to tread the path toward those who are racially intolerant? I see on second read that you were more remarking instead of agreeing. I do agree a lot of people are tired of hearing about racism and sexism (still is a huge problem but humans get tired of things, its just how our brains are).
Click to expand...

Absolutely. I think calling him a bigot, racist and sexist has already lost any weight it might have had. And the GE has not even begun. I am interested in how he is able to be immune from that, because i dont think any politician, at any point in modern history would be able to get away from that.
 
A

Allard

Member
Into said:
Considering the ratings viewership of GOP debates, i think Trump is visible to most Americans. Unlike Hillary his numbers have gradually gone up, meaning that more people see him, the more they tend to like him. With Hillary its the opposite.

Dems have tried hard to smear him. And its not sticking at all. And i think they are frustrated, because they are yelling racist and sexist as loud as possible and nobody is paying attention. In fact they have yelled this for so long that come GE it will be a tired attack nobody except hardcore leftists will care about.

Similarly to how right wingers will yell about Benghazi and emails in 6 months and most of America will roll their eyes, if they arent already.
Click to expand...

I lol at the bolded. If anything they are hoping to pull a Mccaskill and openly hope he gets nominated because they feel he is the most toxic for the GE. Everytime they have spoken about trump they always go the extra length of tieing all his other opponents in a similar line so as to damage down ticket races later in the GE when they stay quiet or 'agree' with trump in the primary season. If you think they have tried to smear him, get ready for the GE, whether its Bernie Sanders or Hilary there is enough ammo to last a decade long campaign season against him for all he has said both in the past and this primary season, stuff that thanks to his constant media exposure he WONT be able to simply roll back on go toward the center.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
No Republicans have called Trump a racist in this race. Democrats have called Trump and a racist, and guess what? His favorables with non-Republicans are complete shit. Everyone hates him other than the racists who are Republicans.
 
C

Cybit

FGC Waterboy
Into said:
Considering the ratings viewership of GOP debates, i think Trump is visible to most Americans. Unlike Hillary his numbers have gradually gone up, meaning that more people see him, the more they tend to like him. With Hillary its the opposite.

Dems have tried hard to smear him. And its not sticking at all. And i think they are frustrated, because they are yelling racist and sexist as loud as possible and nobody is paying attention. In fact they have yelled this for so long that come GE it will be a tired attack nobody except hardcore leftists will care about.

Similarly to how right wingers will yell about Benghazi and emails in 6 months and most of America will roll their eyes, if they arent already.
Click to expand...

I think that if Trump is actually in this race to win; that he deliberately went full crazy at the beginning for the bolded reason alone. He knows the populace has a super short attention span and gets tired of the same stories quickly. Go full crazy now, so that the impact won't be nearly as rough come time for the General Election.
 
I

Into

Member
Cybit said:
I think that if Trump is actually in this race to win; that he deliberately went full crazy at the beginning for the bolded reason alone. He knows the populace has a super short attention span and gets tired of the same stories quickly. Go full crazy now, so that the impact won't be nearly as rough come time for the General Election.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with you.

To use the "anchor baby" comment, that he has used in regards to immigrants, he threw a anchor in one direction and got as many people as he could. I predict that he will pull that anchor back and proceed to the center.

And like you said, go crazy now, let it lose its effect and steam and thus take that away from the inevitable dem attacks.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
Cybit said:
I think that if Trump is actually in this race to win; that he deliberately went full crazy at the beginning for the bolded reason alone. He knows the populace has a super short attention span and gets tired of the same stories quickly. Go full crazy now, so that the impact won't be nearly as rough come time for the General Election.
Click to expand...

.... I don't think things have gotten any better for his GE chances. He's at -50 in terms of net favorability for Latinos ever since the "They're rapists!" speech despite being at -20 before. No Latinos have forgotten that he hates them and wants them out of the country and will deport the ones he politically could.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
The fact that Trump is crazy may be old news by the time he's the nominee.

That does not change the fact that people will view him as crazy and not a viable candidate.

As mentioned his comments about Hispanics have destroyed his chances in Colorado, Nevada and probably Florida too. His unfavorable numbers are ridiculously high with independents and Democrats.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
538's national polling average is out now:

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/election-2016/national-primary-polls/republican/

Trump has an 18 point lead right now and Hillary has a 21 point lead. How often do candidates with national leads >15 points this late in the race lose? Genuinely interested.
Click to expand...

Clinton 08 losing to Obama, Wallace 76 losing to Carter, Kennedy 80 losing to Carter. Never happened on the Republican side.

EDIT: That's from and including '76, system was so different before then comparisons aren't really fair. But yeah, it's happened in 3/8 Democratic primaries in the modern era; it's not that uncommon to have a shock Dem winner.
 
U

User 85168

Banned
R

RustyNails

Member
Two people I absolutely unequivocally cannot stand to watch/hear debates: Fiorina and Christie. The righteous indignation is too much for me and it goes from being barely tolerable to "for fuck's sake" territory. I really hope those two harpys are out.
 
U

User 463088

Banned
Crab said:
Clinton 08 losing to Obama, Wallace 76 losing to Carter, Kennedy 80 losing to Carter. Never happened on the Republican side.

EDIT: That's from and including '76, system was so different before then comparisons aren't really fair.
Click to expand...

Hillary's lead at this point in 08 wasn't anywhere near where it is now. If we adjust for the later caucus, and look at polls from Dec her lead was, on average, around 5-9 points, depending on the poll. Plus,she was consistently below 50%. Actually, during the entire 2008 primary, there was only one national poll in which Hillary ever got 50% of the vote, and it was a late April outlier. Now, there are almost zero polls showing Hillary below 50%. (Well, there's that adorable Zogby one that shows Martin at 10% nationally and Bernie at 27% with 14% undecided....but, you know...)

But, ya, national polls in a primary don't really matter that much. Except that it shows Hillary's support is more broad, whereas Bernie's is probably more regional.
 
C

Cesare Borgia

Banned
Black Republican said:
RIP Undercard Debates Feb+

Breaking: No undercard debate for upcoming ABC News GOP debate in New Hampshire, source tells CBS

https://twitter.com/JaxAlemany/status/692077828691525632
Click to expand...

On one hand I'm looking forward to the end of Fiorina's truly disgusting campaign...but unfortunately I think this is just the beginning of her media spotlight. Assuming Hillary wins the nomination and presidency there is going to be a big industry for (white) female commentators who criticize Hillary Clinton from a gender perspective. Just as black conservatives have done very well over the last 8 years I'd expect women like Fiorina to do very well.

Even if Hillary is a great president the gender pay gap will persist, women with children will still struggle to find affordable child care options, etc. And Fiorina and others will be trotted out to blame Hillary for all of this and argue women are worse off now.
 
M

Makai

Member
How can protectionism be compatible with right wing ideology? High taxes, government intervention, trade restrictions, etc.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
adam387 said:
Hillary's lead at this point in 08 wasn't anywhere near where it is now. If we adjust for the later caucus, and look at polls from Dec her lead was around 5-9 points, depending on the poll. Plus,she was consistently below 50%. Actually, during the entire 2008 primary, there was only one national poll in which Hillary ever got 50% of the vote, and it was a late April outlier. Now, there are almost zero polls showing Hillary below 50%. (Well, there's that adorable Zogby one that shows Martin at 10% nationally and Bernie at 27% with 14% undecided....but, you know...)
Click to expand...

Pew Research 12/19 - 12/30 556 RV 26 46 -- -- -- Clinton +20
FOX News 12/18 - 12/19 RV 20 49 -- -- -- Clinton +29
Cook/RT Strategies 12/15 - 12/17 RV 26 38 -- -- -- Clinton +12
NBC/WSJ 12/14 - 12/17 Adults 23 45 -- -- -- Clinton +22
USA Today/Gallup 12/14 - 12/16 513 A 27 45 -- -- -- Clinton +18
Rasmussen 12/13 - 12/16 750 LV 27 40 -- -- -- Clinton +13
Reuters/Zogby 12/12 - 12/14 436 LV 32 40 -- -- -- Clinton +8
Hotline/FD 12/10 - 12/14 336 LV 30 35 -- -- -- Clinton +5
Battleground 12/9 - 12/12 LV 23 47 -- -- -- Clinton +24
ARG 12/9 - 12/12 600 LV 22 41 -- -- -- Clinton +19
CNN 12/6 - 12/9 RV 30 40 -- -- -- Clinton +10
CBS News/NY Times 12/5 - 12/9 417 LV 27 44 -- -- -- Clinton +17
AP-Ipsos 12/3 - 12/5 469 RV 23 45 -- -- -- Clinton +22

That's every poll from December (i.e., this time's January) that RCP has. Yes, Clinton never had above 50, but there were 3 candidates, that's kind of "no, duh". The point is her lead over Obama was bigger than her lead over Sanders at this point. She also had a lead in the Iowa polls on the day of Iowa; again by a bigger margin than she leads over Sanders now.

I'm not saying that will happen again, I'm just pointing out the truth of the matter. To be precise, her RCP average for December was +16.9 over Obama. Right now it's +14.6 over Sanders, and will probably go lower before the end of January. In Iowa, her lead over Obama was +1.6 on December 31st. Right now it's +0.6 over Sanders, and again, I expect that to be lower by January 31st.
 
B

Basileus777

Member
Makai said:
How can protectionism be compatible with right wing ideology? High taxes, government intervention, trade restrictions, etc.
Click to expand...
It's no more contradictory than the hundreds of other things conservatives like their governments to impose on society. Right wing =/ libertarian, in fact conservatism and protectionism have long been associated with each other. Liberal parties used to be the pro-free trade ones, and still are in much of the world.
 
D

Daniel B·

Banned
RustyNails said:
Trump is the product of 8 years of GOP obstruction. The tea party, the committed filibuster and blocking of every policy by Democrats and Obama in the Congress have led to the unrelenting GRIDLOCK IN CONGRESS!! media narrative which in turn made more people fed up with politics-as-usual. The republicans are fully responsible for everything you see on the debate stage. But the republicans ostensibly think Obama is a dictator passing laws issuing orders and their congresscritters are the proverbial Davids in the fight against Obamagoliath. Just shows you the force with which the GOP reckons the media.

Bernie however, is not affected by this mania regardless of what media likes to say. His support is purely McGovern in nature. He is exciting the liberal base by throwing...blue meat? at it. Liberals are just bummed out they dont have money growing like during the 90s, which is a legitimate concern. The corporations and wall st have grown stronger, bigger, richer every day while we continue to get saddled with college debt and apply for $10/hr entry level jobs. I dont think this changes for a while until the supply is less than the demand. I dont know how to fix it. But what I do know is that Hillary 2016 supporters are the little more grown up Obama 2008 supporters. They have seen the politics for 8 years and believe Bernie's magical socialism panacea is DOA. Which it is.
Click to expand...

vtBjUUm.jpg


As can be seen from the snapshot I took from the PS3 Bookmarklet's Subs XMB (rating indicators follow video view counts), that's not likely as I, and the majority of the 2.53 M TYT (and Secular Talk) subscribers, see it, as we are very clear about Obama's shortcomings, and have little doubt that Hillary would absolutely be a continuation of Obama's corporate (inc. Wall St.) friendly agenda.

For anyone who's been following Obama reasonably closely since 08, and was sold on the "change we can believe in" bullshit, we know in our bones that, in Bernie, we now have the genuine article :).
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
RustyNails said:
Two people I absolutely unequivocally cannot stand to watch/hear debates: Fiorina and Christie. The righteous indignation is too much for me and it goes from being barely tolerable to "for fuck's sake" territory. I really hope those two harpys are out.
Click to expand...

Christie especially is a huge asshole. Large swaths of Jersey were still underwater from the storm and he goes off to campaign in New Hampshire acting like everything's fine. There's been a few editorials in Jersey papers floating the idea that a law should be passed saying that if a governor wants to run for president they need to resign first, all because Christie is an asshole and has been ignoring his job just so he can lose a primary to Donald Fucking Trump.
 
B

Basileus777

Member
B-Dubs said:
Christie especially is a huge asshole. Large swaths of Jersey were still underwater from the storm and he goes off to campaign in New Hampshire acting like everything's fine. There's been a few editorials in Jersey papers floating the idea that a law should be passed saying that if a governor wants to run for president they need to resign first, all because Christie is an asshole and has been ignoring his job just so he can lose a primary to Donald Fucking Trump.
Click to expand...

It's a pretty amazing situation, with a sitting governor downplaying and dismissing damage done to his own state despite there being photographic evidence of how he's lying.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
Given the conservatism generally means 'protecting elite privileges', tariffs were a conservative policy in the era that elites were determined by ownership of land, not capital. E.g., the Corn Law Repeal Act famously split the British Conservative Party between the old aristocratic faction and the rising capitalist faction; Britain was not land-advantaged compared to other countries and so aristocrats stood to lose out, but Britain was capital-advantaged, so capitalists stood to gain. This issue split the Conservatives time and time and time again - Winston Churchill left the party for a while because of it, as late as the early 1900s.

Same in America. The Republican Party up til now has been anti-tariff because it represented the wealthy elite. Trump doesn't; he represents (or at least seeks the vote of) the frustrated and frightened poor and middle class that has always been the largest part of the Republican party by numbers but weakest by influence. They stand to gain from tariffs, and lo, Trump supports tariffs. Having said that, it's no longer because it is conservative - if anything, it's because it isn't. That, I think, is again a testament to how Trump represents something fundamentally new to American politics. He's the part of the Republican party that never had a proper champion until now.
 
F

Four_Chamber

Member
Fiorina is just a disgusting human being. Her pandering to the right on the Planned Parenthood stuff likely contributed to real world hate.

Also she is a perpetual loser. She loses at everything she involves herself in. She needs to give up already.

Christie annoys me but the real dislike is for Fiorina and slimeball Cruz. The mop statement will ensure that he will become even less popular in Jersey (if that's possible).
 
B

Basileus777

Member
Crab said:
Same in America. The Republican Party up til now has been anti-tariff because it represented the wealthy elite. Trump doesn't; he represents (or at least seeks the vote of) the frustrated and frightened poor and middle class that has always been the largest part of the Republican party by numbers but weakest by influence. They stand to gain from tariffs, and lo, Trump supports tariffs. Having said that, it's no longer because it is conservative - if anything, it's because it isn't. That, I think, is again a testament to how Trump represents something fundamentally new to American politics.
Click to expand...

How is it new when Pat Buchanan and Ross Perot were doing the same thing in the 90s? Opposition to free trade on the right didn't emerge on the scene with Trump.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Basileus777 said:
It's a pretty amazing situation, with a sitting governor downplaying and dismissing damage done to his own state despite there being photographic evidence of how he's lying.
Click to expand...

My mind is fucking broken and I thank god I live in Queens and not New Jersey. If he was my governor I'd be tempted to find him in New Hampshire and punch him in the face for this shit. People are under inches of water and he's all "everything's good." I have no idea why Jersey voted for this guy twice.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
Basileus777 said:
How is it new when Pat Buchanan and Ross Perot were doing the same thing in the 90s? Opposition to free trade on the right didn't emerge on the scene with Trump.
Click to expand...

Ross Perot and Pat Buchanan were't part of the Republican establishment, though; nor did they seriously threaten it. I guess what I'm trying to say is that Trump is the first time that the Republican establishment have come under genuine threat from this. They've been able to ignore this voice for a very long time.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
C

Cybit

FGC Waterboy
Makai said:
How can protectionism be compatible with right wing ideology? High taxes, government intervention, trade restrictions, etc.
Click to expand...

Because Trump isn't fighting with ideology, he's fighting with identity. Lower middle class / ex factory workers / anyone who has ever been hosed by globalization (primarily white) is the target he's looking for. He's breaking one of the Republican seams apart (big business and lower middle class / poor rural whites) and grabbing the latter.

Into said:
I completely agree with you.

To use the "anchor baby" comment, that he has used in regards to immigrants, he threw a anchor in one direction and got as many people as he could. I predict that he will pull that anchor back and proceed to the center.

And like you said, go crazy now, let it lose its effect and steam and thus take that away from the inevitable dem attacks.
Click to expand...

ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
.... I don't think things have gotten any better for his GE chances. He's at -50 in terms of net favorability for Latinos ever since the "They're rapists!" speech despite being at -20 before. No Latinos have forgotten that he hates them and wants them out of the country and will deport the ones he politically could.
Click to expand...

It's a long time between now and November; and depending who he faces, he could make an identity play against both HRC and Sanders

HRC: He hits Clinton on being sexist (I know, it's ridiculous, but it could easily work) - the people who would be made upset by that are already in HRC's camp, and you start going after men age 20-30 (who are less likely to have a college degree, and if not married, earn less than their unmarried women counterparts who are more like to have college degrees). Play to the lowest common denominator; pound on "PC" and "false rape accusations" and <insert MRA panding shenanigans> here.

Sanders: He goes after being out of touch and a hippy NE who doesn't know anything about the rest of the country (irony alert, in that Trump is a big business NE); and uses his deal-making "expertise" and leading a big company resume. Also, this turns into an economic policy election, and for all of Trump's idiocy - he does know international business well, and Sanders would be in for tough economic debates with a prepared Trump. Also - there's a chance at this point that Bloomberg also runs, which would probably hand the presidency over to Trump due to Bloomberg / Sanders splitting votes.

On both - he goes after those hit the hardest economically over the last 16 years (thanks GWB!) and tries to grab lower middle class / small business and turn them against the "elites & chinese" or whatever economic bogeyman he sees fit.

Honestly - I can see at least a potential path for a Trump presidency, and that scares the crap out of me.
 
H

Holmes

Member
Listen, I had the unfortunate privilege of listening to The Young Turk's "analysis" of the town hall last night as I was falling asleep while my husband was listening to it. It was basically just praising everything Sanders said and how he'll so obviously win now, and how Clinton doesn't care about campaign finance reform or climate change. They brought up the right-wing talking point of Benghazi against her and further legitimized it. And they didn't even talk about O'Malley's responses at all, they just criticised him for standing up and rolling up his sleeves, and shrugged him off. So it's like whatever. They can have their hugbox, that's fine, but obviously like-minded people are going to be attracted to that and it's no big surprise that their videos have 30k views.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Cybit said:
It's a long time between now and November; and depending who he faces, he could make an identity play against both HRC and Sanders

HRC: He hits Clinton on being sexist (I know, it's ridiculous, but it could easily work) - the people who would be made upset by that are already in HRC's camp, and you start going after men age 20-30 (who are less likely to have a college degree, and if not married, earn less than their unmarried women counterparts who are more like to have college degrees). Play to the lowest common denominator; pound on "PC" and "false rape accusations" and <insert MRA panding shenanigans> here.

Sanders: He goes after being out of touch and a hippy NE who doesn't know anything about the rest of the country (irony alert, in that Trump is a big business NE); and uses his deal-making "expertise" and leading a big company resume. Also, this turns into an economic policy election, and for all of Trump's idiocy - he does know international business well, and Sanders would be in for tough economic debates with a prepared Trump. Also - there's a chance at this point that Bloomberg also runs, which would probably hand the presidency over to Trump due to Bloomberg / Sanders splitting votes.

On both - he goes after those hit the hardest economically over the last 16 years (thanks GWB!) and tries to grab lower middle class / small business and turn them against the "elites & chinese" or whatever economic bogeyman he sees fit.

Honestly - I can see at least a potential path for a Trump presidency, and that scares the crap out of me.
Click to expand...

Look on the bright side, at least he's not Ted Cruz.
 
C

Cybit

FGC Waterboy
B-Dubs said:
Look on the bright side, at least he's not Ted Cruz.
Click to expand...

Cruz might be the single biggest reason why Trump wins the nomination. If Cruz wasn't around, I suspect the party might unite and deal with Trump. But everyone in the GOP hates Cruz so much, they'd rather nominate Trump than deal with Cruz.

People must absolutely despise that man.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Cybit said:
Cruz might be the single biggest reason why Trump wins the nomination. If Cruz wasn't around, I suspect the party might unite and deal with Trump. But everyone in the GOP hates Cruz so much, they'd rather nominate Trump than deal with Cruz.

People must absolutely despise that man.
Click to expand...

Been saying that for weeks now. If Cruz wasn't poised to take Trump's support the establishment would unload everything they have on him.
 
J

Joe Shlabotnik

Banned
Cybit said:
It's a long time between now and November; and depending who he faces, he could make an identity play against both HRC and Sanders

HRC: He hits Clinton on being sexist (I know, it's ridiculous, but it could easily work) - the people who would be made upset by that are already in HRC's camp, and you start going after men age 20-30 (who are less likely to have a college degree, and if not married, earn less than their unmarried women counterparts who are more like to have college degrees). Play to the lowest common denominator; pound on "PC" and "false rape accusations" and <insert MRA panding shenanigans> here.
Click to expand...

This would do nothing except lose more women than gain men. The bitter MRA types are already in Trump's camp, and sure as shit aren't in Hillary's. Conversely, there are probably a lot more women (and men) across the spectrum, except for dyed-in-the-wool anti-feminists of both genders who would be turned off by absurd accusations of sexism towards Hillary.
 
A

Abinash117

Member
Into said:
Considering the ratings viewership of GOP debates, i think Trump is visible to most Americans. Unlike Hillary his numbers have gradually gone up, meaning that more people see him, the more they tend to like him. With Hillary its the opposite.

Dems have tried hard to smear him. And its not sticking at all. And i think they are frustrated, because they are yelling racist and sexist as loud as possible and nobody is paying attention. In fact they have yelled this for so long that come GE it will be a tired attack nobody except hardcore leftists will care about.

Similarly to how right wingers will yell about Benghazi and emails in 6 months and most of America will roll their eyes, if they arent already.
Click to expand...

Dems have not tried to smear him like it is an election or republicans doing Hillary with the emails, it is no were near close. Plus, the democrats candidates barely mention Trump directly even during debates. I only ever seen them is making statements criticizing him and that's it. Also do you have proof that the more that people hear the more they like him? To me it is stagnant or very much negative.
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/donald-trump-favorable-rating#!estimate=custom

http://www.gallup.com/poll/187607/donald-trump-known-not-liked.aspx

http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polli...rats-independents-negative-gop-candidate.aspx
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom