Why I think That Trump Will Win the General Election

[tigerred59]

There are solid reasons for believing that Trump *Can* win, but I think he *will* win, and here is why.

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.

2. The polls are 'tweaked to favor Hillary by a media that is totally committed to seeing her win. Here is one example:
Hillary Lead Over Trump Surges After Reuters "Tweaks" Poll | Zero Hedge
Over the past week, there was a troubling development for the establishment: Trump was soaring in the polls. In fact, in the widely watched, Reuters/IPSOS poll, for the first time Trump had taken an inexcusable 1 point lead following the Republican National convention.
So, as we reported last night, something had to be done. And something was done: Reuters "tweaked" its polling methodology.
As Reuters explained, "in a presidential campaign notable for its negativity, the option of “Neither” candidate appears to be an appealing alternative, at least to participants in the Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll. Many voters on both sides have been ambivalent in their support for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and Republican nominee Donald Trump, complicating the task of the pollsters trying to track the race. That sentiment may help explain an apparent skew that recently emerged in the Reuters/Ipsos poll results. Given the choice, a relatively large group of voters opted for “Neither/Other” candidate compared with other major polls, leading to an underreporting of several percentage points for one or other of the two major contenders at times in the race."

As a result, Reuters/Ipsos is amending the wording of the choice and eliminating the word “Neither,” bringing the option in line with other polls.
Here is the real reason for the methodology change: according to Reuters "the inclusion of the word “Neither” is capturing Soft Trump supporters who, if given such an option, prefer not to make a choice. Here it is important to note that the soft supporter phenomenon also affects Clinton, but to a much lesser degree."
As a result, the latest Reuters/Ipsos poll - pre Friday evening - had Trump 40.2%, Clinton 38.5%, but, on a "pro forma" basis,eliminating "Neither" from the "Neither/Other" answer produced a different result. In that case, Clinton was ahead, 40% to 36%.​

In other words, the real reason for the "tweak" was to push Hillary back in the lead simply due to a change in the question phrasing methodology.
With the first new poll under the new polling "approach" due to be released last night, we predicted that it would show a dramatic rebound for Hillary, just as Trump was picking up steam, and in doing so changing the entire frontrunner narrative from the ground up.
Sure enough, here are the results of the "revised" poll released on Friday night.

From Reuters: Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton held a 6- percentage-point lead over Republican rival Donald Trump, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll with new wording that was released on Friday, the day after she formally accepted her party's nomination for the Nov. 8 election.
Nearly 41 percent of likely voters favor Clinton, 35 percent favor Trump, and 25 percent picked "Other," according to the new July 25-29 online poll of 1,043 likely voters, which overlapped with the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. The poll has a credibility interval of 4 percentage points.​

The presidential tracking poll reflects a slight change of wording from previous surveys, replacing the “Neither/Other” option given to respondents with just “Other.” An internal review had found the word “Neither” has, at times, siphoned support away from one or the other candidate.

Other tweaks found are A) over representing Democrats in the sample, and B) only using registered voters who voted in the last Presidential election. Both of these are known to diminish Trumps support showing up in the polls.

3) There is a huge difference in enthusiasm for Trump vrs Clinton. Trump attends rallies with thousands and thousands of people, while the press ballyhoos 50 people turning out for Hillary. 50. People.

4) Americans are sick to death of the Professional Political Class, especially the talentless and moronic Talking Heads on TV. The media are completely committed to keeping Trump out of the White House as he leads/represents this unwashed mass of people. This is working in Trumps favor by bringing in new voters who have been sick of this nonsense for decades.

5) Trump is dominating in social media, and though this does not prove Trump will win like this guy does here: SPREAD THIS: Media RIGGING The Polls, Hiding New Evidence Proving Trump Is WINNING it is an interesting contrast where Hillary is not getting half the fervor that Trump is and the Democrats are supposed to be the high tech party, lol.

6) The Corporate Crony Network is solidly backing Hillary, it is obvious, and people HATE the Corporate Crony Network and for good reason too; they are the reason that American wages have been stagnant since 1970.

7) Hillary Clinton is as crooked and dishonest as any politician I have ever read about, worse than LBJ was. People are sick to death of lying, conniving, professional politicians that have done nothing concrete in their whole lives.

Summation; Hillary's numbers will start to tank and she loses to Trump in another shocking landslide like Carter did to Reagan did after months of Reagan being lied about by the Media almost exactly like these shitstains are doing to Trump.

THE FACT YOU CLAIM TO HAVE A BRAIN, AUTOMATICALLY RENDERS YOUR ASSESSMENT AS PURE BULLSHIT....NEXT!

 

[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.
.

Sure but the opponent was 0bama. Hillary is unlikable, corrupt, and bad TV.

But there it is again - three opinions.
.

What? You are trying to imply that Hillary is the same as 0bama was in 2012? She is not and therefor comparisons are a waste of time.

But the behaviors here by conservatives are remarkably similar to those of 2012:

"The polls are all wrong", and "Hillary will lose because I don't like her".

That's confusing fact with opinion.
.

Yeah you are tailoring their arguments then to fit your argument today.

Precisely what did I say that was incorrect?
.

 

[Toro]

Sure but the opponent was 0bama. Hillary is unlikable, corrupt, and bad TV.

But there it is again - three opinions.
.

What? You are trying to imply that Hillary is the same as 0bama was in 2012? She is not and therefor comparisons are a waste of time.

But the behaviors here by conservatives are remarkably similar to those of 2012:

"The polls are all wrong", and "Hillary will lose because I don't like her".

That's confusing fact with opinion.
.

Yeah you are tailoring their arguments then to fit your argument today.

Precisely what did I say that was incorrect?
.

You didn't. You are absolutely correct.

Perhaps Trump will win, but "conservatives" are making the exact same arguments they made four years ago.

 

[Roudy]

There is a reason why the Hillary campaign is spending money running ads in so called secure blue states. Despite all the anti Trump propaganda being spread by the main stream media, they realize there is an unaccountable ground swell of silent voters who will come out and vote for Trump.

 

[PredFan]

Sure but the opponent was 0bama. Hillary is unlikable, corrupt, and bad TV.

But there it is again - three opinions.
.

What? You are trying to imply that Hillary is the same as 0bama was in 2012? She is not and therefor comparisons are a waste of time.

But the behaviors here by conservatives are remarkably similar to those of 2012:

"The polls are all wrong", and "Hillary will lose because I don't like her".

That's confusing fact with opinion.
.

Yeah you are tailoring their arguments then to fit your argument today.

Precisely what did I say that was incorrect?
.

I have already shown you but just look at your previous post. "Remarkably similar"?? That's your opinion and it tailors their argument to fit what you are saying. Plus, you could say that about every election every time one side is behind. Sorry, if you have a case at all, it's extremely thin.

 

[PredFan]

But there it is again - three opinions.
.

What? You are trying to imply that Hillary is the same as 0bama was in 2012? She is not and therefor comparisons are a waste of time.

But the behaviors here by conservatives are remarkably similar to those of 2012:

"The polls are all wrong", and "Hillary will lose because I don't like her".

That's confusing fact with opinion.
.

Yeah you are tailoring their arguments then to fit your argument today.

Precisely what did I say that was incorrect?
.

You didn't. You are absolutely correct.

Perhaps Trump will win, but "conservatives" are making the exact same arguments they made four years ago.

And the GOP made 4 years before that, and the Democrats 4 years before and again 4 years before that and then the GOP and on and on. It is meaningless and does nothing at all to make his point.

 

[Mac1958]

But there it is again - three opinions.
.

What? You are trying to imply that Hillary is the same as 0bama was in 2012? She is not and therefor comparisons are a waste of time.

But the behaviors here by conservatives are remarkably similar to those of 2012:

"The polls are all wrong", and "Hillary will lose because I don't like her".

That's confusing fact with opinion.
.

Yeah you are tailoring their arguments then to fit your argument today.

Precisely what did I say that was incorrect?
.

I have already shown you but just look at your previous post. "Remarkably similar"?? That's your opinion and it tailors their argument to fit what you are saying. Plus, you could say that about every election every time one side is behind. Sorry, if you have a case at all, it's extremely thin.

You were here in 2012. Romney supporters were constantly saying the polls were wrong, that they were skewed, that they under-sampled and over-sampled, that Romney was going to win going away. Just like now.

And, just like now, they were predicting a Romney win and gave purely subjective, partisan reasoning for it, just like this thread.

Are you saying that didn't happen?
.

 

[PredFan]

What? You are trying to imply that Hillary is the same as 0bama was in 2012? She is not and therefor comparisons are a waste of time.

But the behaviors here by conservatives are remarkably similar to those of 2012:

"The polls are all wrong", and "Hillary will lose because I don't like her".

That's confusing fact with opinion.
.

Yeah you are tailoring their arguments then to fit your argument today.

Precisely what did I say that was incorrect?
.

I have already shown you but just look at your previous post. "Remarkably similar"?? That's your opinion and it tailors their argument to fit what you are saying. Plus, you could say that about every election every time one side is behind. Sorry, if you have a case at all, it's extremely thin.

You were here in 2012. Romney supporters were constantly saying the polls were wrong, that they were skewed, that they under-sampled and over-sampled, that Romney was going to win going away. Just like now.

And, just like now, they were predicting a Romney win and gave purely subjective, partisan reasoning for it, just like this thread.

Are you saying that didn't happen?
.

You can say that about every election, but comparing this one to 2012 is silly. 0bama was FAR more popular that Hillary is today. Are you saying that isn't true?

 

[skookerasbil]

Lets not forget s0ns..........we still got a massive amount of Assange dump stuff coming so the progressives have to stay in the daily throw your shit stained shorts into the washer mode. With the debates fast approaching, will probably be seeing this dump in the next 3-4 weeks!! No wonder Hilda cant make it up the stairs.......if you were worried about a house falling out of the sky and square onto your head, you'd have shaky knees too!!

 

[Mac1958]

But the behaviors here by conservatives are remarkably similar to those of 2012:

"The polls are all wrong", and "Hillary will lose because I don't like her".

That's confusing fact with opinion.
.

Yeah you are tailoring their arguments then to fit your argument today.

Precisely what did I say that was incorrect?
.

I have already shown you but just look at your previous post. "Remarkably similar"?? That's your opinion and it tailors their argument to fit what you are saying. Plus, you could say that about every election every time one side is behind. Sorry, if you have a case at all, it's extremely thin.

You were here in 2012. Romney supporters were constantly saying the polls were wrong, that they were skewed, that they under-sampled and over-sampled, that Romney was going to win going away. Just like now.

And, just like now, they were predicting a Romney win and gave purely subjective, partisan reasoning for it, just like this thread.

Are you saying that didn't happen?
.

You can say that about every election, but comparing this one to 2012 is silly. 0bama was FAR more popular that Hillary is today. Are you saying that isn't true?

Straw man.

I haven't brought up the popularity of the candidates - and it's in the toilet for both.

I said the behavior of the Republicans is the same,that was my point, and I'm right.
.

 

[PredFan]

Yeah you are tailoring their arguments then to fit your argument today.

Precisely what did I say that was incorrect?
.

I have already shown you but just look at your previous post. "Remarkably similar"?? That's your opinion and it tailors their argument to fit what you are saying. Plus, you could say that about every election every time one side is behind. Sorry, if you have a case at all, it's extremely thin.

You were here in 2012. Romney supporters were constantly saying the polls were wrong, that they were skewed, that they under-sampled and over-sampled, that Romney was going to win going away. Just like now.

And, just like now, they were predicting a Romney win and gave purely subjective, partisan reasoning for it, just like this thread.

Are you saying that didn't happen?
.

You can say that about every election, but comparing this one to 2012 is silly. 0bama was FAR more popular that Hillary is today. Are you saying that isn't true?

Straw man.

I haven't brought up the popularity of the candidates - and it's in the toilet for both.

I said the behavior of the Republicans is the same,that was my point, and I'm right.
.

You were trying to make an argument against the OP. I showed you how the popularity of the candidates then (2012) and now, make your argument almost moot. The behavior is the same, yes, yes, it's always the same every single election, blah blah blah, that doesn't help your point at all. It's silly to compare this election to 2012 because of the FACT that Hillary is not 0bama. I don't know how I can make that more clear for you.

 

[OnePercenter]

There is a reason why the Hillary campaign is spending money running ads in so called secure blue states. Despite all the anti Trump propaganda being spread by the main stream media, they realize there is an unaccountable ground swell of silent voters who will come out and vote for Trump.

Trump is creating his own anti-Trump propaganda. Remember, he's not out to win, he's out to make sure a Republican DOESN'T make it to the White House.

 

[Mac1958]

Precisely what did I say that was incorrect?
.

I have already shown you but just look at your previous post. "Remarkably similar"?? That's your opinion and it tailors their argument to fit what you are saying. Plus, you could say that about every election every time one side is behind. Sorry, if you have a case at all, it's extremely thin.

You were here in 2012. Romney supporters were constantly saying the polls were wrong, that they were skewed, that they under-sampled and over-sampled, that Romney was going to win going away. Just like now.

And, just like now, they were predicting a Romney win and gave purely subjective, partisan reasoning for it, just like this thread.

Are you saying that didn't happen?
.

You can say that about every election, but comparing this one to 2012 is silly. 0bama was FAR more popular that Hillary is today. Are you saying that isn't true?

Straw man.

I haven't brought up the popularity of the candidates - and it's in the toilet for both.

I said the behavior of the Republicans is the same,that was my point, and I'm right.
.

You were trying to make an argument against the OP. I showed you how the popularity of the candidates then (2012) and now, make your argument almost moot. The behavior is the same, yes, yes, it's always the same every single election, blah blah blah, that doesn't help your point at all. It's silly to compare this election to 2012 because of the FACT that Hillary is not 0bama. I don't know how I can make that more clear for you.

I'm not comparing elections. I'm comparing behaviors.
.

 

[Skylar]

There are solid reasons for believing that Trump *Can* win, but I think he *will* win, and here is why.

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.

2. The polls are 'tweaked to favor Hillary by a media that is totally committed to seeing her win. Here is one example:
Hillary Lead Over Trump Surges After Reuters "Tweaks" Poll | Zero Hedge
Over the past week, there was a troubling development for the establishment: Trump was soaring in the polls. In fact, in the widely watched, Reuters/IPSOS poll, for the first time Trump had taken an inexcusable 1 point lead following the Republican National convention.
So, as we reported last night, something had to be done. And something was done: Reuters "tweaked" its polling methodology.
As Reuters explained, "in a presidential campaign notable for its negativity, the option of “Neither” candidate appears to be an appealing alternative, at least to participants in the Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll. Many voters on both sides have been ambivalent in their support for Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and Republican nominee Donald Trump, complicating the task of the pollsters trying to track the race. That sentiment may help explain an apparent skew that recently emerged in the Reuters/Ipsos poll results. Given the choice, a relatively large group of voters opted for “Neither/Other” candidate compared with other major polls, leading to an underreporting of several percentage points for one or other of the two major contenders at times in the race."

As a result, Reuters/Ipsos is amending the wording of the choice and eliminating the word “Neither,” bringing the option in line with other polls.
Here is the real reason for the methodology change: according to Reuters "the inclusion of the word “Neither” is capturing Soft Trump supporters who, if given such an option, prefer not to make a choice. Here it is important to note that the soft supporter phenomenon also affects Clinton, but to a much lesser degree."
As a result, the latest Reuters/Ipsos poll - pre Friday evening - had Trump 40.2%, Clinton 38.5%, but, on a "pro forma" basis,eliminating "Neither" from the "Neither/Other" answer produced a different result. In that case, Clinton was ahead, 40% to 36%.​

In other words, the real reason for the "tweak" was to push Hillary back in the lead simply due to a change in the question phrasing methodology.
With the first new poll under the new polling "approach" due to be released last night, we predicted that it would show a dramatic rebound for Hillary, just as Trump was picking up steam, and in doing so changing the entire frontrunner narrative from the ground up.
Sure enough, here are the results of the "revised" poll released on Friday night.

From Reuters: Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton held a 6- percentage-point lead over Republican rival Donald Trump, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll with new wording that was released on Friday, the day after she formally accepted her party's nomination for the Nov. 8 election.
Nearly 41 percent of likely voters favor Clinton, 35 percent favor Trump, and 25 percent picked "Other," according to the new July 25-29 online poll of 1,043 likely voters, which overlapped with the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. The poll has a credibility interval of 4 percentage points.​

The presidential tracking poll reflects a slight change of wording from previous surveys, replacing the “Neither/Other” option given to respondents with just “Other.” An internal review had found the word “Neither” has, at times, siphoned support away from one or the other candidate.

Other tweaks found are A) over representing Democrats in the sample, and B) only using registered voters who voted in the last Presidential election. Both of these are known to diminish Trumps support showing up in the polls.

3) There is a huge difference in enthusiasm for Trump vrs Clinton. Trump attends rallies with thousands and thousands of people, while the press ballyhoos 50 people turning out for Hillary. 50. People.

4) Americans are sick to death of the Professional Political Class, especially the talentless and moronic Talking Heads on TV. The media are completely committed to keeping Trump out of the White House as he leads/represents this unwashed mass of people. This is working in Trumps favor by bringing in new voters who have been sick of this nonsense for decades.

5) Trump is dominating in social media, and though this does not prove Trump will win like this guy does here: SPREAD THIS: Media RIGGING The Polls, Hiding New Evidence Proving Trump Is WINNING it is an interesting contrast where Hillary is not getting half the fervor that Trump is and the Democrats are supposed to be the high tech party, lol.

6) The Corporate Crony Network is solidly backing Hillary, it is obvious, and people HATE the Corporate Crony Network and for good reason too; they are the reason that American wages have been stagnant since 1970.

7) Hillary Clinton is as crooked and dishonest as any politician I have ever read about, worse than LBJ was. People are sick to death of lying, conniving, professional politicians that have done nothing concrete in their whole lives.

Summation; Hillary's numbers will start to tank and she loses to Trump in another shocking landslide like Carter did to Reagan did after months of Reagan being lied about by the Media almost exactly like these shitstains are doing to Trump.

Because your predictions follow the outcome you want rather than the outcome the evidence suggests?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Why I think That Trump Will Win the General Election

You dropped too much acid in the 70s?

Haha, I never dropped acid, dude.

It is rude to project your issues onto those you disagree with.

 

[JimBowie1958]

That tactic has been used for decades, with nothing to show for it. Like I said, if we are to devolve into socialism, lets get it done with.

The oncoming Robotics Revolution is going to put a severe shock on the psyche of Americas Middle Class as jobs simply evaporate, taken over by autonomous mobile robots equipped with Strong AI programming and capable of being able to do ANY job from ditch digger to painter to engineer to lawyer and doctor.

We will likely wind up in some form of Nordic Socialist Capitalism if we are lucky and handle the crisis well.

If we have leaders that continue a Pollyanna fantasy that jobs are still plentiful and will always be plentiful we will have a Marxist government instead.

People will not themselves into starvation.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Perhaps Trump will win, but "conservatives" are making the exact same arguments they made four years ago.

Trump is making exactly the opposite arguments from what Romney made 4 years ago, Rip.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You were here in 2012. Romney supporters were constantly saying the polls were wrong, that they were skewed, that they under-sampled and over-sampled, that Romney was going to win going away. Just like now.
.

Was Romney a populist?

Was Romney promising to change the tax structure to lure over seas money back to America?

Was Romney promising to refocus our national policies on keeping Americans able to work?

No, they were not the same arguments or style of candidate either.

 

[Toro]

Perhaps Trump will win, but "conservatives" are making the exact same arguments they made four years ago.

Trump is making exactly the opposite arguments from what Romney made 4 years ago, Rip.

And doing worse.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Perhaps Trump will win, but "conservatives" are making the exact same arguments they made four years ago.

Trump is making exactly the opposite arguments from what Romney made 4 years ago, Rip.

And doing worse.

No, that is merely your opinion he is doing worse.

There is an entirely different attitude toward him outside the Professional Political Class Echo Chamber.

Polls taken of Likely voters that include people who have never voted before show a 10%+ slide in Trumps favor over the polls that are of only Registered voters who voted in the last Presidential election. Using an a distribution of Democrats, independents, liberals, conservatives, moderates and independents that reflect the general population and Trump is still tight with Clinton, and that bodes poorly for Hillary. With her name recognition nad 30 years in the public eye, she should not have a close race with Trump at all.