• 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 |OT| Keep Calm and Diablos On

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

NeoXChaos

Member
ivysaur12 said:
The Ohio Dems plan to be take back the state:

http://www.nationaljournal.com/2016...hio-and-how-they-plan-to-win-it-back-20150803

Good article by the National Journal.
Click to expand...

Jim Ruvolo, who was highly respected as state party chairman 1982 to 1991, has called for a complete rebuilding of the party infrastructure and thinks the 2016 nominee can help force that. "The Ohio Democratic party is not where it needs to be," he said. "Obama was able to win in spite of that. But it would be helpful if the party were in better shape."
Click to expand...

true and you can replace Ohio for Florida as well as the countless other state parties dead in the water like the South and Plains.

"The Florida Democratic party is not where it needs to be," he said. "Obama was able to win in spite of that. But it would be helpful if the party were in better shape."
Click to expand...
 
B

BertramCooper

Banned
ivysaur12 said:
The Ohio Dems plan to be take back the state:

http://www.nationaljournal.com/2016...hio-and-how-they-plan-to-win-it-back-20150803

Good article by the National Journal.
Click to expand...

It's so hard to be even remotely optimistic about the future of the ODP. It's just a fucking mess.

There are many potentially great Democratic candidates in Ohio; they just never run, or run for the wrong office. (Like Sittenfeld. Why is he running for U.S. Senate? He should be running for a statewide office like Treasurer or Auditor, not the fucking Senate.)
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
BertramCooper said:
It's so hard to be even remotely optimistic about the future of the ODP. It's just a fucking mess.

There are many potentially great Democratic candidates in Ohio; they just never run, or run for the wrong office. (Like Sittenfeld. Why is he running for U.S. Senate? He should be running for a statewide office like Treasurer or Auditor, not the fucking Senate.)
Click to expand...

or Tim Ryan who does not run at all lol. The party begs him cycle after cycle but he never caves. The moment he does decide to run for statewide office I bet he runs in the wrong year. I hope you guys can somehow get it together between now and 2018. We need you guys for 2020 redistricting.

Sherrod Brown and Bill Nelson know how to win. Why the State Democratic party in their respective states don't I can't understand.
 
D

dramatis

Member
KingGondo said:
I think that's true to a degree, except Bernie has actual policy proposals that could work if he had a cooperative congress to help enact them.

Trump is talking about strong-arming China by siccing Carl Icahn on them.
Click to expand...
It's not a comparison of the candidates. It's a comparison of voters with the 'dream candidate' that can just ride into Washington and change everything. Right there you still had to caveat that Bernie's policies can only work if he has a cooperative congress—that applies to all candidates and presidents. Donald Trump can have policies that get passed if he has a cooperative congress. And that right there is the hard part, isn't it? Cooperation isn't part of the fantasy that one guy can change everything. Politics isn't as simple as having your Hero in the White House.
 
C

Chichikov

Member
Today I learned that a Seattle city council candidate created a campaign gopher site to appeal to nerds.

Democracy may have gone too far.
 
C

Coriolanus

Banned
dramatis said:
It's not a comparison of the candidates. It's a comparison of voters with the 'dream candidate' that can just ride into Washington and change everything. Right there you still had to caveat that Bernie's policies can only work if he has a cooperative congress—that applies to all candidates and presidents. Donald Trump can have policies that get passed if he has a cooperative congress. And that right there is the hard part, isn't it? Cooperation isn't part of the fantasy that one guy can change everything. Politics isn't as simple as having your Hero in the White House.
Click to expand...

Then again, given the current political trends, there is no reason whatsoever to believe that a moderate candidate would achieve different/better results when it comes to getting stuff through congress.

Way things are currently set, cockblocking is the name of the game.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
pigeon said:
Probably because there is no drop. She's +34 for the nomination in the new WSJ poll, which is right in line with existing polls. So there's no news in the poll, which is why they wrote an entire story about favorability numbers instead. But if her favorability numbers move but her actual poll numbers stayed the same, why should we care?

I'm not sure what people are expecting to happen here. Hillary is in this race in the position of an incumbent. Were people criticizing Obama in late 2011 because he wasn't making enough ads? There's no reason for Hillary to do anything or spend any money now, over a year before the election. What possible benefit would she get? Waiting until next year or even later next year is the obviously rational thing to do. I'm glad she's doing it.
Click to expand...
She is absolutely doing fine. Trump is doing all the work for her so why even bother. Polls here on out mean nothing anyway.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
538 take on debate participants
--------
The five most recent national live-interview polls put these candidates in the top 10:

Donald "Maybe it says he's a Muslim" Trump: 23.2 percent
Jeb Bush: 12.8 percent
Scott Walker: 10.6 percent
Ben Carson: 6.6 percent
Mike Huckabee: 6.6 percent
Ted Cruz: 6.2 percent
Marco Rubio: 5.2 percent
Rand Paul: 4.8 percent
Chris Christie: 3.4 percent
John Kasich: 2.8 percent

Rick Perry, in 11th place with 2.0 percent, falls just short.

------------
http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/the-fox-news-gop-debate-lineup-looks-pretty-set/

Love that Chrome extension.
 
S

speculawyer

Member
Maddow suggested that Fox just have two debates with 8 & 9 candidates picked at random. Seemed like a nice and non-biased suggestion.

But then again, Maddow suggesting it is probably like Obama suggesting it . . . they'll then vow to do the opposite.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
I could be wrong but I'd imagine Ohio dems will have to wait for another economic downturn to come back - but they need to lay the structural foundation to be ready to take advantage. I think Michigan democrats are in a similar situation, and also haven't done a good job of preparing.

Rick Snyder is rather similar to Kaish. Both are seen as wonkish with regard to budgets, both have avoided most of the partisan battles their party wants to fight, and both are more popular than their party. And both states are seeing economic improvements and most voters can remember back to the "bad times" associated with the other party.
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
Fox News host compares Donald Trump to a 'pit bull,' Jeb Bush to a 'metrosexual purse dog'

Fox News Radio host Todd Starnes finally answered the question that political pollsters have been struggling to answer: Why is Donald Trump so popular across so many demographic groups? His theory is that while "everybody is trying to be the kinder, gentler, you know, the compassionate conservative," that's not what the "average American" actually wants.

He broke it down further, using a dog analogy. "The average American," Starnes explained, "they don't want one of those metrosexual purse dogs, they want a pit bull in the White House." Donald Trump, presumably, is the pit bull. A candidate such as Jeb Bush, in Starnes' opinion, is the "metrosexual purse dog."
Click to expand...
http://theweek.com/speedreads/57000...trump-pit-bull-jeb-bush-metrosexual-purse-dog

I eagerly await photoshops of the Koch brothers as Paris Hilton & that-other-girl-whose-name-escapes-me, with Jeb (and maybe others) in their handbags. What a great image for this guy to paint..
 
K

KingGondo

Banned
dramatis said:
It's not a comparison of the candidates. It's a comparison of voters with the 'dream candidate' that can just ride into Washington and change everything. Right there you still had to caveat that Bernie's policies can only work if he has a cooperative congress—that applies to all candidates and presidents. Donald Trump can have policies that get passed if he has a cooperative congress. And that right there is the hard part, isn't it? Cooperation isn't part of the fantasy that one guy can change everything. Politics isn't as simple as having your Hero in the White House.
Click to expand...
True. Point taken.

BertramCooper said:
Vox: Scott Walker is carrying some ridiculously high-interest credit card debt
Click to expand...
The party of fiscal responsibility.
 
P

Poodlestrike

Banned
HylianTom said:
http://theweek.com/speedreads/57000...trump-pit-bull-jeb-bush-metrosexual-purse-dog

I eagerly await photoshops of the Koch brothers as Paris Hilton & that-other-girl-whose-name-escapes-me, with Jeb (and maybe others) in their handbags. What a great image for this guy to paint..
Click to expand...

Hm. Raises an interesting question:

Can dogs be metrosexual? They don't (generally) wear shirts, so the typically salmon indicator flags are out, and they don't pick their body care products, so that's out too.
 
B

BertramCooper

Banned
Maybe he's still got some lingering college debt for that Marquette degree he never finished.

That would boost his appeal with millennials. Totes. For realsies.
 
C

Cheebo

Banned
dramatis said:
I remember reading an article supporting Scott Walker that mentioned this, so I knew about his credit card debt before all of these financial disclosure news.

The article author said this is a PLUS in Walker's favor, because it makes him seem more like the average American.

Yes, this was an actual argument for Walker.
Click to expand...

You are talking about a country that voted for Bush because his lack of smarts made him seem like "someone you could have a drink with" in 2000. Sadly, this is the norm.

And this was something to a degree used in Obama's favor too. He mentioned very often on the trail in 2008 how he & Michelle just paid off the last of his college debt within the last year or two (circa 2008 obviously) and how he knew what it is like to live with debt, that he wasn't far removed from it.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
Cheebo said:
You are talking about a country that voted for Bush because his lack of smarts made him seem like "someone you could have a drink with" in 2000. Sadly, this is the norm.

And this was something to a degree used in Obama's favor too. He mentioned very often on the trail in 2008 how he & Michelle just paid off the last of his college debt within the last year or two (circa 2008 obviously) and how he knew what it is like to live with debt, that he wasn't far removed from it.
Click to expand...

Which is exactly why a Walker or Bush victory is always within the realm of possibility if the country is desperate enough for a change.

"Hillary isnt the right woman to become the first woman president so we will elect another white guy like we have always done since the beginning. Obama was an exception"
 
R

RDreamer

Member
Cheebo said:
You are talking about a country that voted for Bush because his lack of smarts made him seem like "someone you could have a drink with" in 2000. Sadly, this is the norm.
Click to expand...

This is one of the things I kind of worry about if Walker gets the nod. He already plays that up quite a bit. Against Hillary, that might be quite an effective strategy, really. Make the choice about voting for a lifetime political elite vs everyday guy. Dumbness will pick the everyday guy waaaaay too often just for that reason.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
On the topic of favorables...

imrs.php
Click to expand...

CBS news poll:

GOP nominee: Trump 24%, Jeb 13%, Walker 10%
GOP nominee you would be most dissatisfied with: Trump 27%, Jeb 18%
GOP nominee with best chance of winning the general: Trump 26%, Jeb 23%, Walker 8%
Trump favorables among GOP: 47% fav, 37% unfav, 16% unsure
Jeb favorables among GOP: 47% fav, 22% unfav, 31% unsure
Walker favorables among GOP: 37% fav, 4% unfav, 45% unsure

FOX news poll:

GOP nominee: Trump 26%, Jeb 15%, Walker 9%
GOP nominee second choice: Jeb 14%, Trump 12%, Walker 10%
GOP nominee if every Jeb voter switched to their second choice: Trump 28%, Walker 9%, Carson 8%
Trump "voting favorability" for GOP nomination: 34% definitely vote for, 22% might vote for, 33% never vote for (up from 8% definitely, 15% might, 59% never in May-June)

Trump isn't just winning in the polls temporarily. He's the most popular candidate in the Republican Party. He is within a few good debate zingers of being the next Republican candidate for President of the United States of America.
 
T

titiklabingapat

Member
Yup, it's amazing how Trump went from that guy who is just enjoying his fifteen minutes of fame to actual front runner now. He is the GOP guy to beat at this point in time.
 
G

Grexeno

Member
At what point does it go from "Donald Trump will inevitably flame the fuck out" to "Holy shit Donald Trump is the actual favorite for the Republican nomination"
 
T

titiklabingapat

Member
Grexeno said:
At what point does it go from "Donald Trump will inevitably flame the fuck out" to "Holy shit Donald Trump is the actual favorite for the Republican nomination"
Click to expand...

It started happening this weekend when the new polls came out and confirmed today by the newer ones. Almost every single poll that came out in the last 48 hours have been really consistent in showing the surge and durability of Trumpmentum. Not to mention a whole bunch of state polling from IA, NH and SC showing the same things.

Something that happened between him insulting McCain to today solidified his lead. Wonder what it was? His trip to Laredo? His constant harping on the Kock brothers?
 
G

Grexeno

Member
titiklabingapat said:
It started happening yesterday when the new polls came out and confirmed today by the newer ones. Almost every single poll that came out in the last 48 hours have been really consistent in showing the surge and durability of Trumpmentum.
Click to expand...
I feel like the "flavor of the month" candidates last go-round were as popular even longer, though.
 
R

RDreamer

Member
Grexeno said:
I feel like the "flavor of the month" candidates last go-round were as popular even longer, though.
Click to expand...

I was actually going to ask here if anyone had a chart of some of the poll toppers from last time? I feel like Herman Cain was on top quite a bit, and then Santorum was a bit longer than anyone really wanted, too.

I'd like to compare that to this.
 
T

titiklabingapat

Member
Grexeno said:
I feel like the "flavor of the month" candidates last go-round were as popular even longer, though.
Click to expand...

They were pretty quick to flame out after they said something stupid though. Trump said many stupid things already that would have sunk lesser candidates. Plus his favorability is actually going up, and GOP voters are increasingly starting to believe he will get the nomination. The last two largely didn't happen to the flavor of the month types in 2012. I suppose with the debates coming up, it could make or break Trump's front runner status.
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
He will flame out. It's just a matter of when. I am not getting my hopes up. When he gets a campaign infrastructure, negative ads are ran against him, he starts running ads himself and still after all that he survives in the polls till February I will be in shock.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
pigeon said:
A few hours ago.

Edit: Here's the WaPo article I took that chart from, which is headlined "Boy, was I wrong about Donald Trump. Here's why."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...d-trump-heres-why/?postshare=8031438700288869
Click to expand...

A partial counter: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/05/u...perch-atop-the-polls.html?abt=0002&abg=0&_r=0

Trump's ability to flip his negatives is pretty startling. But it's way too early to determine if he can sustain this long term. It's also sooooo early.

I think this debate is important. If he fucks up, somehow, he's done forever. But if not, then he has a real chance to last. But I won't label him as a frontrunner (or anyone else) this early in such a weird contest.

I'll just re-state what I recently said. I think the GOP is at a big crossroads and that means everything is at play. Conventional wisdom doesn't matter so yes, Trump can win the nomination.
 
M

Maledict

Member
I have to laugh at Politico's article today on Biden's stance on the school buss issue during desegregation.

Last week we hear the rumours about him contemplating a run, and this week suddenly a story that paints him as a racist in a certain light appears on the front page of politico. It's hardly subtle...
 
T

thefro

Member
Black Mamba said:
I think this debate is important. If he fucks up, somehow, he's done forever. But if not, then he has a real chance to last. But I won't label him as a frontrunner (or anyone else) this early in such a weird contest.

I'll just re-state what I recently said. I think the GOP is at a big crossroads and that means everything is at play. Conventional wisdom doesn't matter so yes, Trump can win the nomination.
Click to expand...

I can't see Trump majorly messing up... he's used to talking on camera and getting in his points in a limited time-frame. I'm sure he's been well-prepped as well.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Black Mamba said:
A partial counter: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/05/u...perch-atop-the-polls.html?abt=0002&abg=0&_r=0

Trump's ability to flip his negatives is pretty startling. But it's way too early to determine if he can sustain this long term. It's also sooooo early.

I think this debate is important. If he fucks up, somehow, he's done forever. But if not, then he has a real chance to last. But I won't label him as a frontrunner (or anyone else) this early in such a weird contest.

I'll just re-state what I recently said. I think the GOP is at a big crossroads and that means everything is at play. Conventional wisdom doesn't matter so yes, Trump can win the nomination.
Click to expand...

I think this is pretty reasonable. I don't think much of the article's argument that the media will "turn negative" and kill Trump, though. Are these people not noticing that the media is already incredibly negative about Trump?

Basically, I can believe that a sudden shock will end Trump's campaign in theory, but in practice, what would that shock actually be? It's not going to be Trump saying something stupid about Latino voters. It won't be Trump visibly warring with the GOP or criticizing war heroes. It's not going to be a series of mocking profile articles that reveal the fundamental ridiculousness of his campaign, or multiple media voices on both the left, right, and mainstream media saying that there's no possible way he could win either the nomination or the general. All these things already happened and he got stronger!

So, genuine question, what do you think it would take to kill Trump's campaign? I guess if he just got stomped in the debates it might do it, but I think when we think of losing a debate we think of saying stuff that's inflammatory or ignorant, and I just don't think those standards seem to apply to Trump.
 
F

Farmboy

Member
pigeon said:
FOX news poll:

GOP nominee: Trump 26%, Jeb 15%, Walker 9%
GOP nominee second choice: Jeb 14%, Trump 12%, Walker 10%
GOP nominee second choice, not including Jeb: Trump 28%, Walker 9%, Carson 8%
Click to expand...

That last metric seems pretty arbitrary. Did they ask this 'not including x' question with every candidate, or just Jeb? If the latter, that's pretty blatant. I guess Fox really is in the tank for The Donald.
 
P

pigeon

Banned
Farmboy said:
That last metric seems pretty arbitrary. Did they ask this 'not including x' question with every candidate, or just Jeb? If the latter, that's pretty blatant. I guess Fox really is in the tank for The Donald.
Click to expand...

They did it for Trump and Jeb, who were the two leading candidates.

Actually, I think I misunderstood the tab originally. That tab is probably supposed to be "GOP nominee assuming every Jeb voter switched to their second choice."
 
N

NeoXChaos

Member
More Polls courtesy of PPP and its in Minnesota. The Primary for Minnesota is March 1st.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2015/08/walker-clinton-lead-in-minnesota-general-looks-like-2004.html

Donald Trump may be running the table in national polls these days, but PPP's new Minnesota poll finds that Scott Walker is continuing to hold his own in the Midwest. Walker narrowly leads the GOP field in the state with 19% to 18% for Trump, 15% for Jeb Bush, 11% for Ben Carson, 7% for Ted Cruz, 6% for Mike Huckabee, 5% each for Rand Paul and Marco Rubio, 4% for Chris Christie, and 3% each for Carly Fiorina and John Kasich. Rounding out the GOP field with minimal support are Bobby Jindal at 1%, Jim Gilmore, Lindsey Graham, George Pataki, and Rick Santorum with less than 1%, and Rick Perry with literally no supporters.

Walker's lead in the horse race is narrow, but he has a wide advantage when it comes to which candidates are the most broadly liked by Republican voters in the state. 68% have a favorable opinion of Walker to only 16% with a negative one. That puts him 10 points ahead of the next most popular candidate, which is Rubio at 58/16. Others over 50% are Huckabee at 55/28, Trump at 55/32, Carson at 53/18, and Paul at 51/24.

On the Democratic side Hillary Clinton leads with 50% to 32% for Bernie Sanders, 4% for Martin O'Malley, 3% for Lincoln Chafee, and 2% for Jim Webb. This is the most support we've found for Sanders in any state so far this year. It's not surprising that would come in Minnesota for him- he has tended to do much better with white voters than African Americans or Hispanics, and the Democratic electorate in Minnesota is far whiter than in the country as a whole.

Clinton dominates Sanders with seniors (66/14), women (56/27), and voters identifying themselves as either 'somewhat liberal' (54/29), or moderates (50/27). But Sanders is keeping things pretty competitive with young voters (44/38), men (40/39), and voters identifying themselves as 'very liberal' (46/42).

Barack Obama won Minnesota easily in both of his elections- by 10 points in 2008 and then by 8 points in 2012. Our early general election polling in the state finds things looking more like 2004 when John Kerry beat George W. Bush by 3 points in the state- Hillary Clinton does lead the entire Republican field, but most of the match ups are pretty closely contested.

Paul comes the closest to Clinton, trailing by just a single point at 43/42. Bush (44/42), Huckabee (44/42 also), and Rubio (42/40) all do similarly well, with deficits of only 2 points to Clinton. With the exception of Fiorina who's down by 11 points at 44/33, all the other GOP hopefuls trail Clinton by 4 or 5 points. It's 46/42 for Walker, 44/39 for Carson, Cruz, and Trump, and 43/38 for Christie.
We also tested Bernie Sanders in head to heads with some of the leading Republicans- he trails Bush 41/40, but leads Walker 41/40, Rubio 39/37, and Trump 45/37. In some places we've found Sanders doing substantially worse than Clinton in match ups against the leading Republicans, but in Minnesota his average performance is only about one point worse than hers.
Click to expand...
 
F

Farmboy

Member
Ah, that makes sense. In the meantime I looked up the 'without Trump' number and in that case it's mostly Jeb that benefits, though not as much as vice versa. I guess a lot of that is still name recognition.
 
C

Cheebo

Banned
Trump could do awful in the debate and change the course of everything for all we know.

It is too soon for the Trump has moved beyond the flavor of the month movement to take hold, we need to at least get through the first debate.
 
R

RDreamer

Member
pigeon said:
So, genuine question, what do you think it would take to kill Trump's campaign?
Click to expand...

Poor debate performance, possibly with multiple people pummeling him on things like past/current more "liberal" stances coupled with the overwhelmingly huge amount of money Jeb! has.

I'm really curious how the debate goes with him.

I also think the longer Trump stays in the lead the more it hurts Walker. Jeb!'s got a lot of money in the bank, and I think once Trump topples he'll ride upwards. Walker I think needs to introduce himself to more people in the party across the country and he won't get much of a chance to do that if Trump stays ahead for longer.

Basically, if Trump somehow toppled tomorrow, there's a good chance the GOP would flirt with Bush a bit and maybe then get bored and go with Walker once they know him. If Trump continues longer that flirt with Bush will just solidify into "what the hell, we know he's going to win it" territory.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
pigeon said:
I think this is pretty reasonable. I don't think much of the article's argument that the media will "turn negative" and kill Trump, though. Are these people not noticing that the media is already incredibly negative about Trump?

Basically, I can believe that a sudden shock will end Trump's campaign in theory, but in practice, what would that shock actually be? It's not going to be Trump saying something stupid about Latino voters. It won't be Trump visibly warring with the GOP or criticizing war heroes. It's not going to be a series of mocking profile articles that reveal the fundamental ridiculousness of his campaign, or multiple media voices on both the left, right, and mainstream media saying that there's no possible way he could win either the nomination or the general. All these things already happened and he got stronger!

So, genuine question, what do you think it would take to kill Trump's campaign? I guess if he just got stomped in the debates it might do it, but I think when we think of losing a debate we think of saying stuff that's inflammatory or ignorant, and I just don't think those standards seem to apply to Trump.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I think we might finally be at the point where the GOP as we know it is imploding. The Southern Strategy has been getting weaker and weaker with each passing election, winning white men over the age of 40 just isn't enough anymore. Normally we'd see a transitional candidate, but there's no one that would be able to create a new constituency running. They've just become more and more insular, pushing out anyone with a moderate view on anything. I know we've all been saying this for a while, but the climate feels about right for a fracture followed by a rebuilding of the party.

RDreamer said:
Poor debate performance, possibly with multiple people pummeling him on things like past/current more "liberal" stances coupled with the overwhelmingly huge amount of money Jeb! has.
Click to expand...

Trump would just brush any criticism like that aside and say he's either had a come to Jesus moment due to Obama's presidency or he'd just attack everyone else and make them look even dumber. So long as he keeps that bravado he'll be fine, his campaign is a cult of personality not one of ideas.
 
B

Black Mamba

Member
pigeon said:
I think this is pretty reasonable. I don't think much of the article's argument that the media will "turn negative" and kill Trump, though. Are these people not noticing that the media is already incredibly negative about Trump?

Basically, I can believe that a sudden shock will end Trump's campaign in theory, but in practice, what would that shock actually be? It's not going to be Trump saying something stupid about Latino voters. It won't be Trump visibly warring with the GOP or criticizing war heroes. It's not going to be a series of mocking profile articles that reveal the fundamental ridiculousness of his campaign, or multiple media voices on both the left, right, and mainstream media saying that there's no possible way he could win either the nomination or the general. All these things already happened and he got stronger!

So, genuine question, what do you think it would take to kill Trump's campaign? I guess if he just got stomped in the debates it might do it, but I think when we think of losing a debate we think of saying stuff that's inflammatory or ignorant, and I just don't think those standards seem to apply to Trump.
Click to expand...

I largely agree with you. If there's something, I think it could be his response to Obamacare. I think he could screw that question up badly and then be attacked for it and lose support. Not saying that it will happen but I think that's the one topic that has potential to trip him up.

I think Trump is more likely to lose when the field becomes small and more people flock somewhere else because they just can't believe he'd have a chance to win. And when the media focuses on 2 or 3 guys rather than just Trump and ignoring 140593 other guys.

I actually think Scott Walker is much more susceptible to flailing in the debate and going away than Trump.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

GAF Museum - The Greatest OTs of All Time (or at least, some of the great ones)
|OT|
4
2K
Komatsu replied
  • 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
Top Bottom