You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics … ge%2Fstory
Clinton leads Trump 50 percent to 41 percent among registered voters and has made steady progress against her potential rival over the past six months. Her margin over Trump has increased from three points last September to six points in December to the current nine points.
Clinton getting 14% of Republicans and nearly half the independents while The Donald gets 9% of Democrats.
Trump also trails in most major candidate attributes.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
Cramer wrote:Probably too little too late, but they are starting...
Hidden Text:Comment section isn't buying it much.
Seems many will vote Trump simply because he is not establishment.
Trump supporters, similar to tea party types, are the most vocal online. I don't think it means much.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
Not sure if serious, but if you watched the Trump speech last night this is glorious.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
polluxlm wrote:Cramer wrote:Probably too little too late, but they are starting...
Hidden Text:Comment section isn't buying it much.
Seems many will vote Trump simply because he is not establishment.
Trump supporters, similar to tea party types, are the most vocal online. I don't think it means much.
I have heard that only about 5% of the population bothers enough about politics to comment about it online, so probably you are correct that it doesn't mean much. But I am still surprised to see how many of them there are.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won … democrats/
"Despite apparent tension between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders -- including a heated exchange in a debate in Michigan before the primary there on Tuesday -- recent surveys suggest that Democratic voters remain firmly united as a party and would stand behind either candidate in a general election. The data on the state of the party is a striking contrast to the chaos that threatens to overwhelm Republicans, especially after another good day at the polls for Donald Trump."
"Large majorities told pollsters they would be satisfied with either candidate as a nominee for the party -- 63 percent for Clinton and 73 percent for Sanders, according to an exit poll by the Associated Press and major television networks."
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
I have heard that only about 5% of the population bothers enough about politics to comment about it online, so probably you are correct that it doesn't mean much. But I am still surprised to see how many of them there are.
They trained the Tea Party members to post online years ago. Comment sections all over the net haven't been the same since, ESPECIALLY liberal blogs. Even NPR is overrun with angry right wing posters these days.
This is just a short clip, I can't find the whole thing.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
Donald J. Trump drew closer to grasping the Republican presidential nomination with his victories in three states Tuesday night, and the chances of party leaders’ wresting it from his hands at a contested convention were a bit more remote on Wednesday.
By winning Michigan, Mississippi and Hawaii, Mr. Trump captured the greatest share of the 150 delegates at stake Tuesday, and his mathematical path to a majority of 1,237 delegates needed to secure the nomination is increasingly brighter than his rivals. He needs about 54 percent of outstanding delegates; his closest rival, Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, needs 62 percent.
But Mr. Trump gained something even more valuable than delegates on Tuesday: momentum as the race heads into a watershed moment, March 15, when the first states that award delegates winner-take-all hold their primaries. They include Senator Marco Rubio’s home state, Florida, and Gov. John Kasich’s, Ohio. Both men have their backs to the wall, fighting for their political lives.
“The only person that has a shot of getting 1,237 is us, given how well we did last night,” said Barry Bennett, a senior adviser to Mr. Trump, who is closely tracking the delegate race for him. He said “the clock is ticking” on other candidates but “not necessarily on us.”
“After Florida and Ohio,” Mr. Bennett said, “if we win both those states, Cruz will be 300 delegates behind. The winner-take-all states are the rocket fuel.”
Mr. Cruz did better than polls predicted in Michigan and Mississippi, and he won a commanding victory in Idaho. In all, he netted an estimated 57 delegates to Mr. Trump’s 71.
But Mr. Cruz, who trails Mr. Trump in delegates awarded so far by an estimated 462 to 358, is facing a primary map of big states in the North and West that are demographically more favorable to Mr. Trump. He seemed to acknowledge the difficulty of overtaking Mr. Trump before the convention even if the race becomes the two-man contest he has long sought.
“Look, Reagan and Ford battled it out in a contested convention,” Mr. Cruz told Fox News in an interview released Wednesday morning. “That’s what conventions are for.”
Tuesday’s results were a reversal for Mr. Cruz, who performed well in four states that voted on Saturday, winning two, Kansas and Maine, and emerging ahead of Mr. Trump in the day’s delegate haul.
Mr. Kasich’s third-place finish in Michigan, a blow after he predicted as late as Tuesday night that he would come in second, is a sign of potential trouble for him in Ohio because of the demographic similarity of the two states.
Mr. Kasich’s chief strategist, John Weaver, sought to make the case that the governor was in a good position as the nominating race moves away from the South.
“After March 15, more than 1,000 delegates will still be available, and the electoral map shifts significantly in our favor, with the delegate-rich states fitting Governor Kasich’s profile,” Mr. Weaver wrote in a strategy memo late Tuesday.
But even if Mr. Kasich wins Ohio and its 66 delegates, along with some of the others at stake on the same day in Illinois, Missouri and North Carolina, his chances of gaining a majority of 1,237 is close to a mathematical impossibility. Only 1,000 delegates will remain after March 15.
“His path to the nomination during regulation time, primary season, is narrow enough to be invisible,” said Joshua T. Putnam, a political science lecturer at the University of Georgia with an expertise in delegate selection. “His only path is to survive with some delegates into the convention.”
Similarly, Mr. Rubio is facing a daunting mathematical roadblock. In failing to reach 15 percent of the votes in Michigan and Mississippi, and 20 percent in Idaho, he was shut out of delegates entirely in the three states holding primaries on Tuesday. He may have picked up only as few as two in Hawaii.
Mr. Trump’s rivals seized on a new poll from The Wall Street Journal and NBC News on Tuesday showing a tight race among all four candidates in states that had not yet held primaries or caucuses. Mr. Trump was the favorite of 30 percent of likely Republican primary voters in those states. Mr. Cruz was favored by 27 percent, Mr. Kasich 22 percent and Mr. Rubio 20 percent.
The poll also suggested that if the race were to narrow to a one-on-one contest, Mr. Trump could be in trouble. In two-person matchups, all of Mr. Trump’s three rivals were preferred by voters.
“Next week will give us our first real clear indication,” Mr. Putnam said. On Tuesday, Mr. Kasich said that if Mr. Trump had a plurality of delegates coming into the convention, the Republican Party should not assume he deserved the nomination.
But Republicans would be playing with fire if Mr. Trump is leading the delegate race and is denied the nomination at a contested convention.
“It would tear the party in two,” Mr. Bennett said. “Whoever gave his sham acceptance speech would be doing it to a lot of empty chairs.”
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
pollux from a European stand point. Which republican candidate is least likely to start a nuclear war or at least another Iraq that I should cheer on at 2:AM in the morning while watching CNN?
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
pollux from a European stand point. Which republican candidate is least likely to start a nuclear war or at least another Iraq that I should cheer on at 2:AM in the morning while watching CNN?
I consider nuclear war very unlikely for any candidate. Nobody can profit from it, so therefore nobody wants it. Even if someone like Cruz was the religious extremist he portrays himself as (which I doubt), and for some reason wanted to start a war for his God or whatever, he would get little to no support by the people around him. Imo he would be impeached or assassinated before he could reach the button.
A conventional war against someone like Iran is more probable, but I think any such scenario would depend a lot more on external events than the personal proclivities of a single candidate. If the popular support for another war should arise I see any President jumping on the opportunity. War is good for votes, but only if the war is being perceived as just.
If Trump wins though we are treading new ground in politics. Who knows what will happen? If you are looking for a 2 AM real life action movie he will probably be your best bet, whether it be war or something else.
