Trump must carry WI, OH, PA, MI to win the national election

  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #3
The 30% of Americans who support Trump simply don’t believe, stupidly, that the other 70% of American will not electorally boot them squarely in the seat of their pants if they don’t acting like Americans worthy of their heritage.
 
The 30% of Americans who support Trump simply don’t believe, stupidly, that the other 70% of American will not electorally boot them squarely in the seat of their pants if they don’t acting like Americans worthy of their heritage.

Spoken like a true NAZI.
 
Trump's Keys to the Keystone State | RealClearPolitics

The Democratic candidate is Clinton, the most flawed candidate in modern history.

Except for Trump.

And therein lies the rub.

I see it as the opposite Jake. I see Clinton as the ultimate threat to our Nation. She is a UN rep. on steroids.
They want open access to our country, which they call a "free movement" country. They want us disarmed, they want our wealth. And she'll promote the global initiative to the hilt. It is profitable for her.
Trump wants to see America prosper. He wants to insure our safety. He may not get everything right, but he's at least on the right mission.
Let him.
 
Last edited:
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #9
Other than LGBT, you and I agree on a bunch. Yes, Kasich would have taken three of them for sure and possible WI.
 
Trump must carry WI, OH, PA, MI to win the national election

Don't think Trump can do that. But I know Kasich can.

Kasich will perform better than Trump but the rust belt states have fewer white voters than they did in 2012. It will be much harder for any Republican to come in expecting to sweep those states.
 
Trump must carry WI, OH, PA, MI to win the national election

Don't think Trump can do that. But I know Kasich can.

Kasich will perform better than Trump but the rust belt states have fewer white voters than they did in 2012. It will be much harder for any Republican to come in expecting to sweep those states.
Unless it is a respected rust belter like Kasich. He would take most of the purple states from HRC: very easily.
 
Unless it is a respected rust belter like Kasich. He would take most of the purple states from HRC: very easily.


As a democrat, I would really have had a very hard choice for whom to vote for had it been Clinton vs. Kasich.

Trump makes the choice a hell of a lot "easier' if not ideal.
 
Trump must carry WI, OH, PA, MI to win the national election

Don't think Trump can do that. But I know Kasich can.

Kasich will perform better than Trump but the rust belt states have fewer white voters than they did in 2012. It will be much harder for any Republican to come in expecting to sweep those states.
Unless it is a respected rust belter like Kasich. He would take most of the purple states from HRC: very easily.

Conjecture and I wouldn't be so sure about that. Romney beat Obama 53-45 in Michigan among working class whites. Trump or anyone else will have to get 62-36 to obtain the same results based on changing demographics.
 
Other than LGBT, you and I agree on a bunch. Yes, Kasich would have taken three of them for sure and possible WI.
A true conservative believes in traditional families. Not two dudes butt-ramming each other and depriving children involved of a mother for life via binding contract. You don't cut the muster for a conservative.
 
Trump must carry WI, OH, PA, MI to win the national election

Don't think Trump can do that. But I know Kasich can.

Kasich will perform better than Trump but the rust belt states have fewer white voters than they did in 2012. It will be much harder for any Republican to come in expecting to sweep those states.
Unless it is a respected rust belter like Kasich. He would take most of the purple states from HRC: very easily.

Conjecture and I wouldn't be so sure about that. Romney beat Obama 53-45 in Michigan among working class whites. Trump or anyone else will have to get 62-36 to obtain the same results based on changing demographics.
Kasich is not Romney, and the rust belters support their own.

I know, Juan, it is hard for you, but the evidence reveals that JK would hand HRC her head in those four stes.
 
As a democrat, I would really have had a very hard choice for whom to vote for had it been Clinton vs. Kasich.

Trump makes the choice a hell of a lot "easier' if not ideal.

No difficulty for me at all. If it's Trump v Hillary, it will be Hillary, the more conservative of the two. If it's Hillary vs Kasich, it's Kasich, the more conservative of the two.
 
Trump must carry WI, OH, PA, MI to win the national election

Don't think Trump can do that. But I know Kasich can.

Kasich will perform better than Trump but the rust belt states have fewer white voters than they did in 2012. It will be much harder for any Republican to come in expecting to sweep those states.
Unless it is a respected rust belter like Kasich. He would take most of the purple states from HRC: very easily.

Conjecture and I wouldn't be so sure about that. Romney beat Obama 53-45 in Michigan among working class whites. Trump or anyone else will have to get 62-36 to obtain the same results based on changing demographics.
Kasich is not Romney, and the rust belters support their own.

I know, Juan, it is hard for you, but the evidence reveals that JK would hand HRC her head in those four stes.

Well those four states are important no doubt, but you can't win an election on 4 states and just white voters.
 
Trump must carry WI, OH, PA, MI to win the national election

Don't think Trump can do that. But I know Kasich can.

Kasich will perform better than Trump but the rust belt states have fewer white voters than they did in 2012. It will be much harder for any Republican to come in expecting to sweep those states.
Unless it is a respected rust belter like Kasich. He would take most of the purple states from HRC: very easily.

Conjecture and I wouldn't be so sure about that. Romney beat Obama 53-45 in Michigan among working class whites. Trump or anyone else will have to get 62-36 to obtain the same results based on changing demographics.
Kasich is not Romney, and the rust belters support their own.

I know, Juan, it is hard for you, but the evidence reveals that JK would hand HRC her head in those four stes.

Well those four states are important no doubt, but you can't win an election on 4 states and just white voters.
The white voters will decide the election. If enough go with HRC, she wins. If enough go with Trump he wins. I think it will be HRC. If it has been Kasich, she would not have received 220 EV.
 
Kasich will perform better than Trump but the rust belt states have fewer white voters than they did in 2012. It will be much harder for any Republican to come in expecting to sweep those states.
Unless it is a respected rust belter like Kasich. He would take most of the purple states from HRC: very easily.

Conjecture and I wouldn't be so sure about that. Romney beat Obama 53-45 in Michigan among working class whites. Trump or anyone else will have to get 62-36 to obtain the same results based on changing demographics.
Kasich is not Romney, and the rust belters support their own.

I know, Juan, it is hard for you, but the evidence reveals that JK would hand HRC her head in those four stes.

Well those four states are important no doubt, but you can't win an election on 4 states and just white voters.
The white voters will decide the election. If enough go with HRC, she wins. If enough go with Trump he wins. I think it will be HRC. If it has been Kasich, she would not have received 220 EV.

White voters will not decide the election period. The RNC was warned in 2012 that they needed to do much better with minorities if the wanted to win future elections simply because of the dying off of the white vote and the growth of minorities. They ignored that and have offended nearly every demographic with abortion laws, wage wars, gay marriage battles, immigration threats etc. You stuck to your principles but it cost you the presidency for the next generation.
 

Forum List

Back
Top