Got this RTed on my timeline, and it seems to sum up the situation pretty well given the polling data we're seeing:
I think you're creating an ideal image for the man. He doesn't owe the party that allowed him to run on their infrastructure anything? He was helped and mostly treated with respect from day 1. They could have buried him last year and he would have been a smaller Ron Paul.
Trump isn't winning PA, sorryI wouldn't underestimate Trump's ability to win those states.
There Are More White Voters Than People Think. Thats Good News for Trump.
Bullshit. If Romney couldn't get enough white voters to overcome Hispanic and black voters in Florida in 2012, there's no way Trump will get enough to overcome them.I wouldn't underestimate Trump's ability to win those states.
There Are More White Voters Than People Think. Thats Good News for Trump.
Well, one can either idealise him as some sort of crusader who fought on despite losing months ago.And no, I'm not idealizing him.
Bullshit. If Romney couldn't get enough white voters to overcome Hispanic and black voters in Florida in 2012, there's no way Trump will get enough to overcome them.
And PA: lol.
Trump isn't winning PA, sorry
Bullshit. If Romney couldn't get enough white voters to overcome Hispanic and black voters in Florida in 2012, there's no way Trump will get enough to overcome them.
And PA: lol.
Got this RTed on my timeline, and it seems to sum up the situation pretty well given the polling data we're seeing:
PA has not gone republican in a presidential election since 1988, but someone it's always considered a swing states.
You can't threaten anyone as a one-time state senator failed statewide candidate from the district of who the hell cares.
A great, common-sense graph on California that showed up on FB:
Trump is doing really poorly with white women compared to Romney, so even though he's getting more white men it's a wash overall.
And he does worse with people of color
A great, common-sense graph on California that showed up on FB:
PA has not gone republican in a presidential election since 1988, but someone it's always considered a swing states.
I could understand both Obama and Hilary having hurt feelings after 2008 and I could understand disappointment for Bernie, but I don't know how his feelings could be hurt when no one even touched him
So, Obama was apparently actually planned to be out on the campaign trail in like April.
What a mess.
I could understand both Obama and Hilary having hurt feelings after 2008 and I could understand disappointment for Bernie, but I don't know how his feelings could be hurt when no one even touched him
The Sanders supporters I talk to think Hillary and surrogates went hard negative against him, before he did.
I do not understand that.
The "Pennslytucky" area that makes up the space between Pittsburgh and Philly is probably why people think it can be a swing state.
Well, one can either idealise him as some sort of crusader who fought on despite losing months ago.
Or denigrate him as an idiot who didn't realise he lost months ago.
In both scenarios he lost months ago and has had months to let it sink in.
Or take the middle-ground reality that the thrill of the crowd is hard to give up. That it's fun to meet the Pope. And have a bunch of college kids hang off your every word and give you their lunch money so you can fly around the country.
The Sanders supporters I talk to think Hillary and surrogates went hard negative against him, before he did.
I do not understand that.
For Bernie-of-Bust voters who are going to vote for Trump, isn't the whole point behind Bernie-or-Bust that you're, ya know, only going to vote for Bernie or not at all?
If you stack the Supreme Court with judges that will overturn Citizen's United, then you can (eventually) get rid of Super PACs and go back to the $2700 limit per individual being the most anyone can give to a campaign. I believe you could still give $2700 to every race in the country if you were rich enough, but it's not as powerful or flexible as a Super PAC.
For Bernie-of-Bust voters who are going to vote for Trump, isn't the whole point behind Bernie-or-Bust that you're, ya know, only going to vote for Bernie or not at all?
But how do you stop people spending money on related stuff? Like the example I gave of holding rallies on your dime and simply "inviting" a candidate to speak?
You think Romney hit peak white voters? C'mon.Bullshit. If Romney couldn't get enough white voters to overcome Hispanic and black voters in Florida in 2012, there's no way Trump will get enough to overcome them.
And PA: lol.
rasnmussen is a joke of a poller
That doesn't include a 3rd party candidate.Wow Rasmussen..
National:
Clinton 42% (+4)
Trump 38%
A 3 point shift towards Clinton in a week
Yeah I think the reality is you're better off requiring disclosures and full transparency than trying to wall off the money entirely, just because there were so many loopholes even before Citizens made it ludicrous.But how do you stop people spending money on related stuff? Like the example I gave of holding rallies on your dime and simply "inviting" a candidate to speak?
That's just crazy talk. Next time they bring it up ask them if they've ever heard of Sierra Blanca. If she wanted to go hard against him she'd have hit him with that and ended it in one punch.
You think Romney hit peak white voters? C'mon.
I'm assuming, hypothetically that if Kasich was the nominee you think he couldn't win PA either?
Let's give Rasmussen the benefit of the doubt for this election cycle. At least for the time being.
That doesn't include a 3rd party candidate.
Getting rid of Super PACs won't solve the issue of money in politics, but Super PACs made that problem even worse. So we should still get rid of them, even if it isn't a magic bullet.
The key issue with Super PACs is that they're dark money and you literally don't know where it's coming from. It removes any transparency with regards to knowing WHO is pumping in all the money, which before super PACs we had a much better understanding of. Politicians were being bought and sold, but at least we knew who to.
If you hold a rally on your dime and invite the candidate to speak at it... we'll know who you are. That's the distinction.
Yeah I think the reality is you're better off requiring disclosures and full transparency than trying to wall off the money entirely, just because there were so many loopholes even before Citizens made it ludicrous.
the other side of the coin is drastically shortening election times so they aren't as expensive and thus reduce the incentive for this funding.
Speaking of the 2000s, a decade so terrible there isn't even a useful abbreviation for it, one thing that the Bernie folks remind me of right now is the intense conviction, which I still see in my peer group, that Bush must have stolen the elections in 2000 and 2004 with Diebold's voting machines.
I find it a little embarrassing how many otherwise pretty rational people are still completely convinced that this national fraud happened and all the evidence was perfectly suppressed, because they can't believe that people would just vote for George W. Bush.
The Bernie people aren't so different from us!
It doesn't need to in order for it to indicate a shift back towards Clinton.
Rasmussen are still showing Republican candidates doing much better than other polls. So I'm not going to give them the benefit of the doubt. It still appears that they have a republican bias. If when the results come in, they turn out to have been right... they'll get the benefit of the doubt *next* time they make a prediction.
But it sure looks like they're making the same mistake last time, since they continue to put out polls that show much more republican support than average of all the polls.
Speaking of the 2000s, a decade so terrible there isn't even a useful abbreviation for it, one thing that the Bernie folks remind me of right now is the intense conviction, which I still see in my peer group, that Bush must have stolen the elections in 2000 and 2004 with Diebold's voting machines.
I find it a little embarrassing how many otherwise pretty rational people are still completely convinced that this national fraud happened and all the evidence was perfectly suppressed, because they can't believe that people would just vote for George W. Bush.
The Bernie people aren't so different from us!
This is the biggest problem I'm seeing with the young left and a lot of Bernie supporters. They literally lack the ability to understand (I'm not saying agree) that someone might not hold their views on college, foreign policy, health care.Speaking of the 2000s, a decade so terrible there isn't even a useful abbreviation for it, one thing that the Bernie folks remind me of right now is the intense conviction, which I still see in my peer group, that Bush must have stolen the elections in 2000 and 2004 with Diebold's voting machines.
I find it a little embarrassing how many otherwise pretty rational people are still completely convinced that this national fraud happened and all the evidence was perfectly suppressed, because they can't believe that people would just vote for George W. Bush.
The Bernie people aren't so different from us!
Trump has gone racist too early, he needs to lay low and keep his racist after July.
I don't want the GOP to kick him out at the Convention.
the last thing we need is the GOP picking a Kasich or a Rubio at the Convention and dumping Trump. I know that Rubio is a robot but I fear that he could actually win.
gutter_trash, I disagree.
Them changing their minds and electing someone else at this point would be an epic disaster up and down ticket. They won't do it.
When Cruz suspended, that was it. There was no going back.
He has no cash to run 3rd party.If the GOP did that, it would just split the right's vote. Trump would absolutely run third party just to stick it to them.
If polls end of June show a big gap (7-10 points), you can bet they will take away the nomination.
gutter_trash, I disagree.
Them changing their minds and electing someone else at this point would be an epic disaster up and down ticket. They won't do it.
When Cruz suspended, that was it. There was no going back.
This is the biggest problem I'm seeing with the young left and a lot of Bernie supporters. They literally lack the ability to understand (I'm not saying agree) that someone might not hold their views on college, foreign policy, health care.
They KNOW they are right and everyone agrees with them so when they face the reality that they're wrong they tend to come up with all these reasons why they're actually not: rigging, media blackout, slander, stupid.