Why I think That Trump Will Win the General Election

[gipper]

The American people got duped into voting for Obama because he was new, unknown, and black. If they vote in a known liar, warmonger, owned by the 1% and well known to Americans, they can't ever be confused with smart informed people. Of course, the Rs nominated idiots in McCain and Romney...and maybe Trump will fall into the category too.

Uh, guy, I'm taking you off ignore because this was especially silly.

Obama won in 2008 because McCain really couldn't promise anything but "more of the same". Wars and Recessions? Nobody wanted more of that.

He won in 2012 because that weird Mormon Robot you nominated couldn't hid his contempt for most working people.

Now, Hillary was VERY beatable. All you needed to do was run someone with a reasonably clean record who didn't say crazy shit.

And you couldn't even hit that low standard.

If the Rs can't beat a lying corrupt criminal owned by the 1%, they as a party should disappear.

 

[80zephyr]

Jim, this is another replay of 2012, when many threads were explaining how Romney was going to win easily. The arguments then were also essentially subjective, i.e., "the polls are wrong, and people won't vote for Obama because they shouldn't want to, in my opinion".

What voters hate, and that's a large portion of your argument, is baked into the polls already. Online enthusiasm, ditto.

The only facts that matter to any degree between now and the election are the polls in the swing states.
.

MAC I remember the bullshit arguments people were making, but how do you simply dismiss the over sampling of Democrats, the 'tweaking' of the polls in point 2, and the reliance on data polling samples known to be skewed against Trump all year so far and that is registered previous voters?

Trump does not equate to Romney. Trump is appealing to a much wider section of the electorate than Romney's 52% and Trump is not going to suddenly stop campaigning like Romney did either. Plus Romney had no appeal to the more populist end of the conservative elitist-to-populism spectrum, again completely unlike Romney.

Other than that Romney is from the same party as Trump, they have little in common.

Or is it that you just think no Republican can ever again win the White House?

There was all kinds of poll parsing back in 2012, and much of it seemed relatively reasonable & plausible. Then, once the ballots were counted, it turned out that professional pollsters had a better grasp of their profession than Republicans did. Is it different this time? It could be, I guess, but 2012 left a pretty indelible mark on my memory, and I'd need to see it to believe it.

I think that Republicans could easily beaten Hillary by running Kasich/Rubio. The Dems are running the most vulnerable candidate they could have come up with, and the GOP has brilliantly responded by shooting themselves in the foot while jumping over a cliff.

A sane, moderate Republican administration might have convinced America that the GOP had the answers, and the pendulum may have begun to swing back. Instead, 40% of the party allowed themselves to be convinced that such a ticket isn't pure enough and blew the party's golden opportunity.
.

Translation: You can vote for the Democrats, and get liberalism faster, or you can vote in RINO's, and get liberalism a little slower.

Not much of a choice. Personally, I like this election. Lets put our cards on the table. If we are to become a socialist state, lets be quick about it so the collapse and rebuilding can start that much faster.

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

There simply aren't enough angry old white guys for Trump to be elected.

Sure there are.

Supplemented by a slim portion of the other demographics and taking 48% of white women, Trump wins if he still holds 80% of white men, dude.

Trump is polling 1-2% among blacks and underperforming Romney among Hispanics. He's trailing among college-educated whites, a cohort the Dems have never won since exit polling began in 1976. He's leading among all whites by about 10%, lagging Romney, and trailing among women by over 20%.

He can't win appealing only to angry old white males.

If Trump doesn't change dramatically - and I don't think he will - he is going to get crushed.

But, the hildabeast has the energy of a slug....

And beating him handily.

In the primaries, polls consistently showed that Trump did worse versus Hillary than all the other candidates.

But the base was more interested in teaching the establishment a lesson than winning the general election against a very beatable Clinton.

Beating a liberal by running a liberal against him isn't really much of a choice.

Mark

 

[Mac1958]

Jim, this is another replay of 2012, when many threads were explaining how Romney was going to win easily. The arguments then were also essentially subjective, i.e., "the polls are wrong, and people won't vote for Obama because they shouldn't want to, in my opinion".

What voters hate, and that's a large portion of your argument, is baked into the polls already. Online enthusiasm, ditto.

The only facts that matter to any degree between now and the election are the polls in the swing states.
.

MAC I remember the bullshit arguments people were making, but how do you simply dismiss the over sampling of Democrats, the 'tweaking' of the polls in point 2, and the reliance on data polling samples known to be skewed against Trump all year so far and that is registered previous voters?

Trump does not equate to Romney. Trump is appealing to a much wider section of the electorate than Romney's 52% and Trump is not going to suddenly stop campaigning like Romney did either. Plus Romney had no appeal to the more populist end of the conservative elitist-to-populism spectrum, again completely unlike Romney.

Other than that Romney is from the same party as Trump, they have little in common.

Or is it that you just think no Republican can ever again win the White House?

There was all kinds of poll parsing back in 2012, and much of it seemed relatively reasonable & plausible. Then, once the ballots were counted, it turned out that professional pollsters had a better grasp of their profession than Republicans did. Is it different this time? It could be, I guess, but 2012 left a pretty indelible mark on my memory, and I'd need to see it to believe it.

I think that Republicans could easily beaten Hillary by running Kasich/Rubio. The Dems are running the most vulnerable candidate they could have come up with, and the GOP has brilliantly responded by shooting themselves in the foot while jumping over a cliff.

A sane, moderate Republican administration might have convinced America that the GOP had the answers, and the pendulum may have begun to swing back. Instead, 40% of the party allowed themselves to be convinced that such a ticket isn't pure enough and blew the party's golden opportunity.
.

Translation: You can vote for the Democrats, and get liberalism faster, or you can vote in RINO's, and get liberalism a little slower.

Not much of a choice. Personally, I like this election. Lets put our cards on the table. If we are to become a socialist state, lets be quick about it so the collapse and rebuilding can start that much faster.

Mark

The country is clearly moving to the Left, and that didn't happen overnight.

You have to slow the ship and convince people it's the right thing to do, before you can reverse it.

You can't change it overnight.
.

 

[dannyboys]

The American people got duped into voting for Obama because he was new, unknown, and black. If they vote in a known liar, warmonger, owned by the 1% and well known to Americans, they can't ever be confused with smart informed people. Of course, the Rs nominated idiots in McCain and Romney...and maybe Trump will fall into the category too.

Uh, guy, I'm taking you off ignore because this was especially silly.

Obama won in 2008 because McCain really couldn't promise anything but "more of the same". Wars and Recessions? Nobody wanted more of that.

He won in 2012 because that weird Mormon Robot you nominated couldn't hid his contempt for most working people.

Now, Hillary was VERY beatable. All you needed to do was run someone with a reasonably clean record who didn't say crazy shit.

And you couldn't even hit that low standard.

If the Rs can't beat a lying corrupt criminal owned by the 1%, they as a party should disappear.

I 100% agree.
The old bitch couldn't even win her own nomination without the corrupt DNC 'fixing' her nomination.
If Trump can't beat Hillary the USA is fucked!
Trump is up against the LIB MSM. The DNC. The REP party 'elites'.
If he wins there's going to be "a reckoning" within the GOP Party.
Some people within the GOP 'elite' better start thinking about 'packing light'.
I 100% guarantee that Hillary will NEVER debate Trump live on a debate stage.
The bitch will attempt to 'phone it in' from her private hospital bed.
The bitch isn't beyond stinking low enough to suddenly have a 'minor' health problem the day before the first debate and ask the moderators if she can do the debate from the 'sun-room'.
Surely Mr. Trump wouldn't be so "mean" as to not allow the 'Virgin Queen' to debate via streaming video.
Her 'handlers' will have their paws on the buttons to guarantee the entire debate is manipulated.
If I were Trump I would refuse to get 'played'. I'd tell Hillary and her MSM ass lickers he'll be OK with waiting until Hillary 'feels well enough' to appear on stage.

 

[JimBowie1958]

And beating him handily.

Oh bullshit, the polls are fluid. Hell in one day three polls came out that showed Trump simultaneously behind Hillary by 10%, 4% and 1% each. These things only approximate the feelings of the public and are very 'tweakable' to get desired results as when Reuters dropped the 'Neither' option in their polls and gave a 6% swing in Hillaries favor that they KNEW was going to happen as their previous polls all showed the impact of said change. Other 'tweaks' include only including registered voters or voters that voted in the previous Presidential election, where Trump loses about 10% and always has or stacking the poll with Democrats.

But keep on going, the mental whiplash you get on November 9th will be interesting to watch, dude,

 

[JimBowie1958]

The country is clearly moving to the Left, and that didn't happen overnight.

You have to slow the ship and convince people it's the right thing to do, before you can reverse it.

You can't change it overnight.
.

It isnt that the country is moving left, it is that what was once defined as 'right' has changed so much.

Reagan, for example, supported Free AND FAIR trade, not jsut 'free for all' trade like we have now. But the neocons got this Open borders free trade nonsense packed as part of what is essential conservatism and are working to drop civic nationalism and anti-abortion stances instead. That is not 'conservative' in any genuine sense of the word. IT is only a self-serving twisting of it to suit the corporate interests that neocons are tethered to.

The American people are waking up and saying that whether this is conservative or not they dont like it, then internet commentators like yourself seem to think that is a move to the left.

 

[JimBowie1958]

There simply aren't enough angry old white guys for Trump to be elected.

Sure there are.

Supplemented by a slim portion of the other demographics and taking 48% of white women, Trump wins if he still holds 80% of white men, dude.

Trump is polling 1-2% among blacks and underperforming Romney among Hispanics. He's trailing among college-educated whites, a cohort the Dems have never won since exit polling began in 1976. He's leading among all whites by about 10%, lagging Romney, and trailing among women by over 20%.

He can't win appealing only to angry old white males.

If Trump doesn't change dramatically - and I don't think he will - he is going to get crushed.

But, the hildabeast has the energy of a slug....

And beating him handily.

In the primaries, polls consistently showed that Trump did worse versus Hillary than all the other candidates.

But the base was more interested in teaching the establishment a lesson than winning the general election against a very beatable Clinton.

Beating a liberal by running a liberal against him isn't really much of a choice.

Mark

Hell, if Trump is a liberal then I am a liberal and 80% of America too.

Fortunately Trump is not a fucking liberal, goofball.

 

[gipper]

The American people got duped into voting for Obama because he was new, unknown, and black. If they vote in a known liar, warmonger, owned by the 1% and well known to Americans, they can't ever be confused with smart informed people. Of course, the Rs nominated idiots in McCain and Romney...and maybe Trump will fall into the category too.

Uh, guy, I'm taking you off ignore because this was especially silly.

Obama won in 2008 because McCain really couldn't promise anything but "more of the same". Wars and Recessions? Nobody wanted more of that.

He won in 2012 because that weird Mormon Robot you nominated couldn't hid his contempt for most working people.

Now, Hillary was VERY beatable. All you needed to do was run someone with a reasonably clean record who didn't say crazy shit.

And you couldn't even hit that low standard.

If the Rs can't beat a lying corrupt criminal owned by the 1%, they as a party should disappear.

I 100% agree.
The old bitch couldn't even win her own nomination without the corrupt DNC 'fixing' her nomination.
If Trump can't beat Hillary the USA is fucked!
Trump is up against the LIB MSM. The DNC. The REP party 'elites'.
If he wins there's going to be "a reckoning" within the GOP Party.
Some people within the GOP 'elite' better start thinking about 'packing light'.
I 100% guarantee that Hillary will NEVER debate Trump live on a debate stage.
The bitch will attempt to 'phone it in' from her private hospital bed.
The bitch isn't beyond stinking low enough to suddenly have a 'minor' health problem the day before the first debate and ask the moderators if she can do the debate from the 'sun-room'.
Surely Mr. Trump wouldn't be so "mean" as to not allow the 'Virgin Queen' to debate via streaming video.
Her 'handlers' will have their paws on the buttons to guarantee the entire debate is manipulated.
If I were Trump I would refuse to get 'played'. I'd tell Hillary and her MSM ass lickers he'll be OK with waiting until Hillary 'feels well enough' to appear on stage.

It may be as simple as the following:

The Establishment knows Hillary will do their bidding. They fear Trump will not, so they are backing her. I don't much care for the Establishment and I know Hillary is a lying corrupt criminal. Trump is a wild card and could turn out to be huge mistake, but we all know Hillary will be a huge mistake.

 

[JimBowie1958]

It may be as simple as the following:

The Establishment knows Hillary will do their bidding. They fear Trump will not, so they are backing her. I don't much care for the Establishment and I know Hillary is a lying corrupt criminal. Trump is a wild card and could turn out to be huge mistake, but we all know Hillary will be a huge mistake.

BiNGO!

 

[Toro]

And beating him handily.

Oh bullshit, the polls are fluid. Hell in one day three polls came out that showed Trump simultaneously behind Hillary by 10%, 4% and 1% each. These things only approximate the feelings of the public and are very 'tweakable' to get desired results as when Reuters dropped the 'Neither' option in their polls and gave a 6% swing in Hillaries favor that they KNEW was going to happen as their previous polls all showed the impact of said change. Other 'tweaks' include only including registered voters or voters that voted in the previous Presidential election, where Trump loses about 10% and always has or stacking the poll with Democrats.

But keep on going, the mental whiplash you get on November 9th will be interesting to watch, dude,

skewedpolls.com

Successfully describing poll results to Republicans since 2012.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LuckyDuck]

I just wish there was a political party called the "Centrist Party." A party that took elements from both sides and didn't swing too far to the left or right; just some sort of balanced normality.

 

[JimBowie1958]

And beating him handily.

Oh bullshit, the polls are fluid. Hell in one day three polls came out that showed Trump simultaneously behind Hillary by 10%, 4% and 1% each. These things only approximate the feelings of the public and are very 'tweakable' to get desired results as when Reuters dropped the 'Neither' option in their polls and gave a 6% swing in Hillaries favor that they KNEW was going to happen as their previous polls all showed the impact of said change. Other 'tweaks' include only including registered voters or voters that voted in the previous Presidential election, where Trump loses about 10% and always has or stacking the poll with Democrats.

But keep on going, the mental whiplash you get on November 9th will be interesting to watch, dude,

skewedpolls.com

Successfully describing poll results to Republicans since 2012.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Trump is not Romney.

Sent from my iDesktop using WhackaLib

 

[Toro]

And beating him handily.

Oh bullshit, the polls are fluid. Hell in one day three polls came out that showed Trump simultaneously behind Hillary by 10%, 4% and 1% each. These things only approximate the feelings of the public and are very 'tweakable' to get desired results as when Reuters dropped the 'Neither' option in their polls and gave a 6% swing in Hillaries favor that they KNEW was going to happen as their previous polls all showed the impact of said change. Other 'tweaks' include only including registered voters or voters that voted in the previous Presidential election, where Trump loses about 10% and always has or stacking the poll with Democrats.

But keep on going, the mental whiplash you get on November 9th will be interesting to watch, dude,

skewedpolls.com

Successfully describing poll results to Republicans since 2012.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Trump is not Romney.

Sent from my iDesktop using WhackaLib

No kidding.

Romney knew what he was doing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jc456]

1. Trump has more healthy energy than Hillary Clinton does. Trump is out having a couple of rallies in a single day and having multiple interviews while Hillary has not had even one full blown news conference in almost a year. This difference in energy is huge for a campaign and as Trump settles down to the reality that the Media would like to put his head on a pike in the Washington Mall, he is learning to more more reticent. This bodes well for any candidate three months from Election Day.

The thing is, you are mistaking attendence at rallies for support at the polls. Most people who vote will never attend a rally.

Here's the problem... the "Reality TV Demographic" is exceptionally fickle. Trump is like the guy who eats cockroaches on TV. Might be shocking once, but people will grow tired of it.

sure,..........that's it.

 

[Syriusly]

7) . People are sick to death of lying, conniving, professional politicians that have done nothing concrete in their whole lives..

Then why do you want to elect a lying, conniving amateur politician who has never done anything for anyone else but himself in his entire life?

 

[Syriusly]

There simply aren't enough angry old white guys for Trump to be elected.

Sure there are.

Supplemented by a slim portion of the other demographics and taking 48% of white women, Trump wins if he still holds 80% of white men, dude.

True, not one conservative female is going to vote for that loopy kunt... Hildabeast

Spoken like a true Trumpster- women are just 'c*nts' to you.

 

[charwin95]

Trump supporters are having a big meltdown..... Poll of polls Hillary lead by 10 points.......
Today 50 top GOP national security experts signed a letter opposing Trump as dangerous and reckless to America.


50 GOP national security experts oppose Trump
50 GOP national security experts oppose Trump - CNNPolitics.com

 

[AceRothstein]

Feels over reals.

Bookmarked.

 

[Zander]

Can Trump win? Yes.


Will he win? Maybe.


Ask me again on Nov 9th......