Why Trump will Win the General Election, and Not just the Primary

[RhodyPatriot]

That you look at Biden and think "crime boss" is immensely amusing.

Yeah.

I think something more along the lines of "dumbshit senile pervert" better comports with reality.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Are you still patriotically defending ----- someone? something?

Great dodge

 

[RhodyPatriot]

More likely they will think " That orange bastard is a crook and only wants the presidency to avoid prison and to exact revenge."

No.

That's just you.

Normal people haven't been mind raped by the very thought of him.

 

[Curried Goats]

Yeah.

I think something more along the lines of "dumbshit senile pervert" better comports with reality.

That description doesn't fit with Biden masterminding all these supposed Deep State cover ups. So which is it? Is Biden a crime boss or a senile old man?

 

[RhodyPatriot]

That description doesn't fit with Biden masterminding all these supposed Deep State cover ups. So which is it? Is Biden a crime boss or a senile old man?

Ew I love an interrogation!

And I could go on and on about how Biden is definitely senile, but also unwaveringly corrupt.

And how the Deep State tells him what to do.

But I'd rather point out that you're an anti-white racist scumbag who has called for violence on this message board on several occasions.

What repugnant filth.

 

[Curried Goats]

Ew I love an interrogation!

Those are called questions. You aren't strapped down with single light bulb bobbing over head. Do you folks ever take a break from cosplay?

And I could go on and on about how Biden is definitely senile, but also unwaveringly corrupt.

Those don't seem like complimentary characteristics.....

And how the Deep State tells him what to do.

Well that wouldn't make him corrupt. It would make him an unwitting accomplice. If you're senile you can't really be held responsible for your actions, can you?

But I'd rather point out that you're an anti-white racist scumbag who has called for violence on this message board on several occasions.

What repugnant filth.

What violence have I called for?

 

[Michael1985]

First of all, let's all agree that Trump will win the GOP primary, barring his own death.

View attachment 821163

The indict, indict, indict, indict again, strategy is falling on its ass. Support for Trump goes up when they attack him through the weaponized justice system. The mugshot was a Hail Mary pass to make Trump look bad. It not only increased support due to the absurd lack of necessity for a picture of Trump with which to identify him, it gave his campaign an image so effective that they would have had to pay a handsome fee to a professional photog for it.

That's the primary. As to the general:

I'm seeing claims on here that only thirty-something percent of the voters support Trump for president. That makes sense if Reps and Dems roughly split the electorate in half and 62% of the GOP voters support Trump. Half of 62 is 31. Ok, simple math tells you Trump will only get about a third of the popular vote, giving Biden the biggest landslide in U.S. history.

So goes the wishful logic.

But . . . that doesn't take into account that as Republican challengers drop out, their voters are most likely to turn to Trump as they did in the 2016 Primary. Once their ideal candidate is gone, and it is Biden v. Trump, they will have no choice but support Trump. So, we go to the general divided among the usual party lines.

Trump won't just get the Trump primary supporters, he will also get all of the anti-Biden vote. That number will grow, as the economy continues its decline, Democrats appear to want to ramp up COVID restrictions again, and more and more of what little resources we have left are spent on illegal aliens and on propping up the unelected Ukrainian regime.

Trump has a core of voters that will vote for him no matter what. Biden has no such following, not among U.S. citizens. If the Biden family were not such obvious crooks at this point, Trump's indictments might weigh against him, among undecideds.

Most importantly, undecided will ask themselves, "was I better off under Trump, or under Biden."

What a comedian you are. Got any more hilarious jokes you wanna tell?

 

[BluesLegend]

View attachment 821251

Ah, a post from the depraved left. It says so much about THEM.

 

[forkup]

First of all, let's all agree that Trump will win the GOP primary, barring his own death.

View attachment 821163

The indict, indict, indict, indict again, strategy is falling on its ass. Support for Trump goes up when they attack him through the weaponized justice system. The mugshot was a Hail Mary pass to make Trump look bad. It not only increased support due to the absurd lack of necessity for a picture of Trump with which to identify him, it gave his campaign an image so effective that they would have had to pay a handsome fee to a professional photog for it.

That's the primary. As to the general:

I'm seeing claims on here that only thirty-something percent of the voters support Trump for president. That makes sense if Reps and Dems roughly split the electorate in half and 62% of the GOP voters support Trump. Half of 62 is 31. Ok, simple math tells you Trump will only get about a third of the popular vote, giving Biden the biggest landslide in U.S. history.

So goes the wishful logic.

But . . . that doesn't take into account that as Republican challengers drop out, their voters are most likely to turn to Trump as they did in the 2016 Primary. Once their ideal candidate is gone, and it is Biden v. Trump, they will have no choice but support Trump. So, we go to the general divided among the usual party lines.

Trump won't just get the Trump primary supporters, he will also get all of the anti-Biden vote. That number will grow, as the economy continues its decline, Democrats appear to want to ramp up COVID restrictions again, and more and more of what little resources we have left are spent on illegal aliens and on propping up the unelected Ukrainian regime.

Trump has a core of voters that will vote for him no matter what. Biden has no such following, not among U.S. citizens. If the Biden family were not such obvious crooks at this point, Trump's indictments might weigh against him, among undecideds.

Most importantly, undecided will ask themselves, "was I better off under Trump, or under Biden."

This is a very testable hypothesis.

If these indictments are actually good for him imagine how good actual trials would be.

We know Trump is fighting tooth and nail to postpone. To the point of asking all his court dates post election upto 2026 for him going to trial on the third indictment.

Why do you imagine that is the case? After all the publicity of an aquittal would undoubtedly solidify his support even more.

Seems dumb to me if this whole indict,indict,indict,indict thing is actually politically advantageous.



Here's another theory. For the MAGA faithful the whole "Trump's a criminal" thing is considered victimization porn. Something along the lines off " The government indicting Trump, is just a sign the dreaded deep state is afraid of him, and they will stop at nothing to stop him." Or "we know he's a crook, but they all are so we will vote for him anyway." So for these people him getting charged entrenches them more.

For those who haven't drunk the cool-aid. 91 Felony counts. Most of them supported by a fact set laid out in speaking indictments show that Trump is guilty as sin and therefore not fit to be president. And those that haven't drunk the "cool-aid" outnumber those that have.

That's my theory. And a theory more supported by actual reality I think.

Just like considering taking a mugshot as simply SOP for someone who got indicted is more reality than considering it as some type of Democratic plot to make Trump look bad.

Let me ask you Seymour. Besides Trump do you have any other person you can think of who got out of that particular procedure when being processed in after indictment?

 

[GMCGeneral]

No.

That's just you.

Normal people haven't been mind raped by the very thought of him.

Actually, BULLSHIT is HALF right. Trump won't go to prison and will exact revenge. I want to see the first year of his second term devoted to that.

 

[Seymour Flops]

This is a very testable hypothesis.

If these indictments are actually good for him imagine how good actual trials would be.

We know Trump is fighting tooth and nail to postpone. To the point of asking all his court dates post election upto 2026 for him going to trial on the third indictment.

Why do you imagine that is the case? After all the publicity of an aquittal would undoubtedly solidify his support even more.

His lawyers need time to sort through the evidence. The prosectution has had years to do that, why should the defense only have a few weeks?

Seems dumb to me if this whole indict,indict,indict,indict thing is actually politically advantageous.

To Trump, it clearly is.

Here's another theory. For the MAGA faithful the whole "Trump's a criminal" thing is considered victimization porn. Something along the lines off " The government indicting Trump, is just a sign the dreaded deep state is afraid of him, and they will stop at nothing to stop him." Or "we know he's a crook, but they all are so we will vote for him anyway." So for these people him getting charged entrenches them more.

For those who haven't drunk the cool-aid. 91 Felony counts. Most of them supported by a fact set laid out in speaking indictments show that Trump is guilty as sin and therefore not fit to be president. And those that haven't drunk the "cool-aid" outnumber those that have.

That's my theory. And a theory more supported by actual reality I think.

Your theory relies on Trump having taken specific actions that violated a specific criminal statute.

Quote the criminal statute and tell me what action Trump took that violated that statute. Don't worry if you cannot do that. None of the other anti-Trumpers have been able to either.

Just like considering taking a mugshot as simply SOP for someone who got indicted is more reality than considering it as some type of Democratic plot to make Trump look bad.

Let me ask you Seymour. Besides Trump do you have any other person you can think of who got out of that particular procedure when being processed in after indictment?

Yes. Trump himself "got out of it," in the previous indictments. It was a courtesy extended by the previous prosecutors to show respect for the Democratic process and the office of the president. That was put aside in hopes that a mugshot would humiliate Trump.

As you have seen, it backfired badly.

H. Clinton and other Democrats get out of ever being mugshotted by never being indicted at all in our two-tiered justice system.

 

[forkup]

His lawyers need time to sort through the evidence. The prosectution has had years to do that, why should the defense only have a few weeks?

To Trump, it clearly is.

Your theory relies on Trump having taken specific actions that violated a specific criminal statute.

Quote the criminal statute and tell me what action Trump took that violated that statute. Don't worry if you cannot do that. None of the other anti-Trumpers have been able to either.

Yes. Trump himself "got out of it," in the previous indictments. It was a courtesy extended by the previous prosecutors to show respect for the Democratic process and the office of the president. That was put aside in hopes that a mugshot would humiliate Trump.

As you have seen, it backfired badly.

H. Clinton and other Democrats get out of ever being mugshotted by never being indicted at all in our two-tiered justice system.

His lawyers need time to sort through the evidence. The prosectution has had years to do that, why should the defense only have a few weeks?

They need to 2026 to sort through the evidence? Right. Since a supposed billionaire can't hire any of the hundreds of firms that specialize in sorting out discovery?

To Trump, it clearly is.

It's so clear it the premise doesn't make sense. But hey as long as you can beg the question right?

Your theory relies on Trump having taken specific actions that violated a specific criminal statute.

Quote the criminal statute and tell me what action Trump took that violated that statute. Don't worry if you cannot do that. None of the other anti-Trumpers have been able to either.

I don't know why you think this is some kind of gotcha question that warrants that sort of condescension? 3 Of the 4 indictments are speaking indictments. Meaning they don't just spell out the specific statutes but explain why they apply in great detail. Furthermore, not only have a spelled out some of these statutes. I did so to you personally.

Obstructing an official proceeding

18 U.S. Code § 1505 - Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees

www.law.cornell.edu

He wanted the certification of the election results stopped

Inciting a rebellion

18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection

www.law.cornell.edu

He had a rally in which he riled up his supporters, and send them to the Capitol although he was aware they were armed and mad.

Conspiracy to defraud the government

923. 18 U.S.C. § 371—Conspiracy to Defraud the United States

www.justice.gov

He and his cronies tried to execute a multi-pronged scheme to prevent his successor to assume power after Trump lost the election in which the events of Jan 6th were one prong.

So, when you claim no one has been able to explain it to you what you're actually saying is that you are perfectly willing to lie about previous posts to you, in order to keep your narrative going.

As you noted in a previous post to me. I have a good memory. Test it at your peril.

Yes. Trump himself "got out of it," in the previous indictments. It was a courtesy

A "courtesy" not been granted to anyone you can name. And a "courtesy" you apparently demand. That isn't a "courtesy." That is called entitlement.

 

[Seymour Flops]

They need to 2026 to sort through the evidence? Right. Since a supposed billionaire can't hire any of the hundreds of firms that specialize in sorting out discovery?

There are four separate indictments in four different locations. The prosecution just announced that they have shared 12.8 million documents as part of discovery. How many lawyers will it take to go through them?

Let’s do the math:

12,800,000 documents. Average one hour per document just for the initial examination.

12.8 million hours divided by 8 equal 1.6 million workdays.

Divide by 260 work days in a year (which assumes no holidays at all), and that is 6,153 years for one lawyer, 615 years for 10 lawyers, 61.5 years for a hundred lawyers, 6.1 years for a thousand lawyers, or .61 years for ten thousand lawyers.

So - theoretically - ten thousand lawyers working at full efficiency with no holidays could theoretically do the initial examination of the documents in order to sort them in six or seven months. Just to meet the election-based timeline that the prosecutors are pursuing.

That’s just the initial sort, it doesn’t cover analysis of those found to actually be relevant and not smoke screens by the prosecution. It doesn’t cover motions, pre-trial arguments, witness selection and preparation, strategy setting, and all of the other pre-trial activities that every other defendant is allowed to do.

All it would take would be one of those thousands of lawyers having a bad day (perhaps annoyed at working on Labor Day) to miss a vital point in one of the millions of documents and cause the Trump team to fail to recognize exculpatory evidence in that document.

That is the Jan 6th indictment alone.

The prosecution is using the standard trick of overwhelming the defense with a flood of documents. It is not usually coupled with insisting on an early trial date to prevent the defense from having any chance to prepare.

That’s what happens when the prosecution aims at an election result instead of a trial result.

It's so clear it the premise doesn't make sense. But hey as long as you can beg the question right?

The premise that the indictments are helping Trump politically? That premise is not really in doubt.

I don't know why you think this is some kind of gotcha question that warrants that sort of condescension? 3 Of the 4 indictments are speaking indictments. Meaning they don't just spell out the specific statutes but explain why they apply in great detail. Furthermore, not only have a spelled out some of these statutes. I did so to you personally.

So, when you claim no one has been able to explain it to you what you're actually saying is that you are perfectly willing to lie about previous posts to you, in order to keep your narrative going.

As you noted in a previous post to me. I have a good memory. Test it at your peril.

Yes, you tried to answer a similar question. More than your fellow Dems did.

But you did not cite the part of the indictments that cited those laws, and listed those actions.

A "courtesy" not been granted to anyone you can name. And a "courtesy" you apparently demand. That isn't a "courtesy." That is called entitlement.

Entitlement was H. Clinton keeping thousands of classified documents in an unsecure location, refusing to turn them over, destroying the servers and other devices on which she had unlawfully stored them and being let off by a politically motivated DOJ, right after the head of the DOJ had a private conference on the tarmac with B. Clinton.

 

[BULLDOG]

There are four separate indictments in four different locations. The prosecution just announced that they have shared 12.8 million documents as part of discovery. How many lawyers will it take to go through them?

Let’s do the math:

12,800,000 documents. Average one hour per document just for the initial examination.

12.8 million hours divided by 8 equal 1.6 million workdays.

Divide by 260 work days in a year (which assumes no holidays at all), and that is 6,153 years for one lawyer, 615 years for 10 lawyers, 61.5 years for a hundred lawyers, 6.1 years for a thousand lawyers, or .61 years for ten thousand lawyers.

So - theoretically - ten thousand lawyers working at full efficiency with no holidays could theoretically do the initial examination of the documents in order to sort them in six or seven months. Just to meet the election-based timeline that the prosecutors are pursuing.

That’s just the initial sort, it doesn’t cover analysis of those found to actually be relevant and not smoke screens by the prosecution. It doesn’t cover motions, pre-trial arguments, witness selection and preparation, strategy setting, and all of the other pre-trial activities that every other defendant is allowed to do.

All it would take would be one of those thousands of lawyers having a bad day (perhaps annoyed at working on Labor Day) to miss a vital point in one of the millions of documents and cause the Trump team to fail to recognize exculpatory evidence in that document.

That is the Jan 6th indictment alone.

The prosecution is using the standard trick of overwhelming the defense with a flood of documents. It is not usually coupled with insisting on an early trial date to prevent the defense from having any chance to prepare.

That’s what happens when the prosecution aims at an election result instead of a trial result.

The premise that the indictments are helping Trump politically? That premise is not really in doubt.

Yes, you tried to answer a similar question. More than your fellow Dems did.

But you did not cite the part of the indictments that cited those laws, and listed those actions.

Entitlement was H. Clinton keeping thousands of classified documents in an unsecure location, refusing to turn them over, destroying the servers and other devices on which she had unlawfully stored them and being let off by a politically motivated DOJ, right after the head of the DOJ had a private conference on the tarmac with B. Clinton.

So he's wasting too much time on the golf course. The lazy bastard should get to work before they lock his ass up.

 

[forkup]

There are four separate indictments in four different locations. The prosecution just announced that they have shared 12.8 million documents as part of discovery. How many lawyers will it take to go through them?

Let’s do the math:

12,800,000 documents. Average one hour per document just for the initial examination.

12.8 million hours divided by 8 equal 1.6 million workdays.

Divide by 260 work days in a year (which assumes no holidays at all), and that is 6,153 years for one lawyer, 615 years for 10 lawyers, 61.5 years for a hundred lawyers, 6.1 years for a thousand lawyers, or .61 years for ten thousand lawyers.

So - theoretically - ten thousand lawyers working at full efficiency with no holidays could theoretically do the initial examination of the documents in order to sort them in six or seven months. Just to meet the election-based timeline that the prosecutors are pursuing.

That’s just the initial sort, it doesn’t cover analysis of those found to actually be relevant and not smoke screens by the prosecution. It doesn’t cover motions, pre-trial arguments, witness selection and preparation, strategy setting, and all of the other pre-trial activities that every other defendant is allowed to do.

All it would take would be one of those thousands of lawyers having a bad day (perhaps annoyed at working on Labor Day) to miss a vital point in one of the millions of documents and cause the Trump team to fail to recognize exculpatory evidence in that document.

That is the Jan 6th indictment alone.

The prosecution is using the standard trick of overwhelming the defense with a flood of documents. It is not usually coupled with insisting on an early trial date to prevent the defense from having any chance to prepare.

That’s what happens when the prosecution aims at an election result instead of a trial result.

The premise that the indictments are helping Trump politically? That premise is not really in doubt.

Yes, you tried to answer a similar question. More than your fellow Dems did.

But you did not cite the part of the indictments that cited those laws, and listed those actions.

Entitlement was H. Clinton keeping thousands of classified documents in an unsecure location, refusing to turn them over, destroying the servers and other devices on which she had unlawfully stored them and being let off by a politically motivated DOJ, right after the head of the DOJ had a private conference on the tarmac with B. Clinton.

1,200,000 documents. Average one hour per document just for the initial examination.

1.2 million hours divided by 8 equal 150,000 workdays.

Or you can hire a firm that processes those documents in bulk by sorting them through a scanner after which they are automatically catalogued and cross-referenced. This by the dozens of pieces of software designed for the task by one of the hundreds of firms who do it for a living.

he premise that the indictments are helping Trump politically? That premise is not really in doubt.

Still begging the question, I see. It helps him in the primary. In the general it's more likely to be an Albatross. See most non-cult members are likely to consider someone up on 91 felony counts as not optimal to be president. But I forget only MAGA people vote.

But you did not cite the part of the indictments that cited those laws, and listed those actions.

Yes and I also didn't kill the butler with a candlestick in the library. Moving the goalposts doesn't help you with your demonstrable lie.

The indictments are available to the public. I read them. I will not however cite stuff that you will simply refuse to acknowledge for whatever BS reason you will undoubtably come up with.

The problem with your type of intellectual dishonesty is that after a while it makes you lose any ability to be taken seriously. Talking to you will be recognized for what it is... A waste of time.

Entitlement was H. Clinton keeping thousands of classified documents in an unsecure location

This is another example. I don't care how many appeals to hypocrisy you throw up in order to deflect from the fact that you are demanding that Trump gets a preferential treatment under the law.

Seymour. Grow up.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Or you can hire a firm that processes those documents in bulk by sorting them through a scanner after which they are automatically catalogued and cross-referenced. This by the dozens of pieces of software designed for the task by one of the hundreds of firms who do it for a living.

What is your estimated processing time for 12.8 Million Documents?

If such a sorting hat approach actually worked, what percent of those 12.8 million documents will turn out to be legitimate as far as probative of Trump's guilt? How long will it take lawyers to read whatever percent that is?

Or you could hire a psychic medium to hold handfuls of documents to her head to guess which ones are actually important and which ones are the paper version of radar jamming. Or how about one of those water dowsers to wave his stick over each of the tens of thousands of boxes of documents?

You have to be kidding with that. If I'm on trial for my life, I want my lawyer to look at each document that the prosecution says will convict me. You're not even being serious with that, so I will not mock that answer further.

Still begging the question, I see. It helps him in the primary. In the general it's more likely to be an Albatross. See most non-cult members are likely to consider someone up on 91 felony counts as not optimal to be president. But I forget only MAGA people vote.

Not agreeing to your answer is not the same as begging the question. Trump needs the MAGA people to win the primary. In the general, he will get all the MAGA people, plus all the people who know that they are worse off under Biden than they were under Trump. Sounds like a landslide in the making.

Yes and I also didn't kill the butler with a candlestick in the library. Moving the goalposts doesn't help you with your demonstrable lie.

The indictments are available to the public. I read them. I will not however cite stuff that you will simply refuse to acknowledge for whatever BS reason you will undoubtably come up with.

The problem with your type of intellectual dishonesty is that after a while it makes you lose any ability to be taken seriously. Talking to you will be recognized for what it is... A waste of time.

This is another example. I don't care how many appeals to hypocrisy you throw up in order to deflect from the fact that you are demanding that Trump gets a preferential treatment under the law.

I knew you could not answer about Hillary.

Seymour. Grow up.

I'll wait on your answer to the processing time and percent of valid documents. By that time, I'll be old and grey. Will that count?

 

[mamooth]

What is your estimated processing time for 12.8 Million Documents?

60 days, if you hire a competent team.

According to your caculations, it would have taken the government ten thousand years to create those documents. Since it didn't, your caclulations are clearly nonsense.

 

[Seymour Flops]

60 days, if you hire a competent team.

12,800,000 divided by 60 = 213,333 documents per day.

If each lawyer can process one document per hour and works twelve hours per day including weekends and holidays, you would need 17,777 hard working lawyers to meet such a deadline.

Requiring that would be asking for reversible error.

According to your caculations, it would have taken the government ten thousand years to create those documents. Since it didn't, your caclulations are clearly nonsense.

Math is not nonsense just because you aren't good at it.

The DOJ really does have more than a hundred thousand lawyers and no one knows how many are assigned to Operation Get Trump.

No one knows what most of those documents actually are. No doubt the overwhelming majority are meaningless time wasting filler to hide what the prosecution may actually use.

But each page has to be examined carefully since the claim is that the will convict Trump. That takes time, regardless of an election based schedule.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

That's not how it is done, Seymour Flops. "each page" does not have "to be examined" individually. It is all digital, so it is searchable by topic. AI machines, depending on the queiries, will make short work of the examination.

 

[Seymour Flops]

That's not how it is done, Seymour Flops. "each page" does not have "to be examined" individually. It is all digital, so it is searchable by topic. AI machines, depending on the queiries, will make short work of the examination.

No, sir.

If the prosecution hands me documents and says, "these are the pages that are going to convict you, Seymour," you better believe I want my lawyer to look at each and ever page of every document.

The scan and sort may help to prioritize documents, but that would just be the first step. Each document would have to be read thoroughly, and the ones that are actually valid, read more than once, by more than one lawyer.

That "AI will handle it" is a deliberate fantasy, created only for the purpose of justifying an election-based trial schedule.