I was right: President Elect Trump

[djAdvocate]

Sept 15, 2016 16:04:02 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Could be why trust in the media hit an all time low recently-- most notably among Republicans

that is part of what has me worried this year- reliance on "non news" to inform voter choices.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 15, 2016 16:06:09 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Sept 15, 2016 15:59:45 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

accountability to whom?  voters?  no way.  that is not the objective of parties.

if you want to get into this at length, we should start a thread on it, but it goes back to the idea of a Republic.

Sure- and I think we agree on the objective of the parties. 

we probably do.  in a nutshell to accrete power for themselves and those that back them.

[billisonboard]

Sept 15, 2016 16:05:01 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Sept 15, 2016 15:58:42 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

this is precisely the issue i was responding to.  there is smoke there, but no fire.

even if Sanders got every vote in question (it is not clear he would have), he would have fallen short.

I will have to do some research, but my understanding is that Hillary only won via "super delegates".

Looking forward to seeing the results of that research.

[tallguy]

Sept 15, 2016 16:05:01 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Sept 15, 2016 15:58:42 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

this is precisely the issue i was responding to.  there is smoke there, but no fire.

even if Sanders got every vote in question (it is not clear he would have), he would have fallen short.

I will have to do some research, but my understanding is that Hillary only won via "super delegates".

No, that is false.  She beat him by several hundred regular delegates as well.  It is true that if every superdelegate had gone for Sanders that he would have won, but that is a serious stretch.  The site I checked showed that Clinton had a 602-48 advantage in superdelegates, and her total winning margin was over 900.

[Deleted]

Sept 15, 2016 19:38:04 GMT -5 tallguy said:

Sept 15, 2016 16:05:01 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

I will have to do some research, but my understanding is that Hillary only won via "super delegates".

No, that is false.  She beat him by several hundred regular delegates as well.  It is true that if every superdelegate had gone for Sanders that he would have won, but that is a serious stretch.  The site I checked showed that Clinton had a 602-48 advantage in superdelegates, and her total winning margin was over 900.

500 superdelegates would be a 1000 count swing. If she lost 500 but they just vanished... she'd still be 400 ahead (based on your "900"). However, if those 500 she lost went to increase Sanders number... she'd lose by 100.

A lot of people forget that part of tabulation math.

[tallguy]

Sept 15, 2016 20:49:20 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Sept 15, 2016 19:38:04 GMT -5 tallguy said:

No, that is false.  She beat him by several hundred regular delegates as well.  It is true that if every superdelegate had gone for Sanders that he would have won, but that is a serious stretch.  The site I checked showed that Clinton had a 602-48 advantage in superdelegates, and her total winning margin was over 900.

500 superdelegates would be a 1000 count swing. If she lost 500 but they just vanished... she'd still be 400 ahead (based on your "900"). However, if those 500 she lost went to increase Sanders number... she'd lose by 100.

A lot of people forget that part of tabulation math.

Did you completely miss the third sentence, or are you confirming it?  

[Deleted]

Sept 15, 2016 20:51:35 GMT -5 tallguy said:

Sept 15, 2016 20:49:20 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

500 superdelegates would be a 1000 count swing. If she lost 500 but they just vanished... she'd still be 400 ahead (based on your "900"). However, if those 500 she lost went to increase Sanders number... she'd lose by 100.

A lot of people forget that part of tabulation math.

Did you completely miss the third sentence, or are you confirming it?  

Questioning how much of a "stretch" it would be.

If she lost all 608, and the difference was that 900 you used (yeah, I know you said "over 900"... but it's a nice easy number for math)... she'd lose by 316. I don't call that "a stretch"...

And if you are suggesting that her losing all of them is the "stretch"... well... you could have a point, but she wouldn't have had to lose anywhere near "all of them" for it to make a difference. 476 (I believe?) would have sufficed (assuming she won by 900 as you were saying "over 900").

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

In my opinion, Bernie Sanders was the best shot the Democratic Party had to avoid a Trump landslide. However for reasons similar to the Republican establishment's objection to Trump, the Democratic party was never going to let that happen while they had any control over it. I was actually worried for awhile that he might pull it off because Bernie Sanders is a political threat. 

I'm not in the habit of offering Democrats advice on how to win elections, but there may be a very simple solution, and a very short window of time left to execute it: Bernie Sanders.

There are more registered Democrats than registered Republicans on the voter rolls. For the Democratic Party to win a national election is as simple as turning out their base and letting the rank and file do the rest. It's just math.

I believe Bernie Sanders would still have a real shot at beating Donald Trump. He's no further left than Hillary, he's a little grumpy- but as Norman Lear proved, that can be endearing. Young voters love him, and the rest of the party would fall in line.

Democrats: It's decision time.




thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/polls/296189-polls-darken-for-democrats

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Sept 16, 2016 10:39:24 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Democrats made their decision quite a while ago Paul, thanks.

If Bernie were the nominee he would be absolutely pilloried.  He is quite a bit "more left" than Hillary, and America is nt ready for a Democratic Socialist.

All Democrats, and a good number of Republicans are socialist. Bernie's only crime is being honest about it- which is a factor I think would bode well for him: he's honest. I don't like him, but I would have no problem trusting him, and in fact I would actually consider changing my vote if he were the Democratic nominee-- and I suspect I'm not alone.

In the meantime, you can read about why the Trump campaign is going to stun a lot of people in November.

www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2016/09/15/the_trump_campaign_is_sneaking_up_on_the_people_who_don_t_understand_it

The Trump Campaign Is Sneaking Up on the People Who Don't Understand It
September 15, 2016



RUSH: The polling data today continues to roll in. We have audio sound bites coming up. We have some people who think that the race is over. It's essentially over. Let's start here with... Grab 20 and 21. We'll start with Frank Luntz. Normally, what I would do is tell you that I've got these and then I would wait 'til they come up naturally, but I'm not gonna make you wait. This is Luntz last night with O'Reilly on The O'Reilly Factor.

Question: "What do you think about the CNN poll just released about Florida, Trump 47, Hillary 44?" By the way, speaking of which, I have to correct myself on something. We had a call within the last couple of weeks, somebody asking me about third parties, and I said, "Nah-nah-nah. Third-party candidates are always going to hurt the Republican." It's not the case. Gary Johnson, the Libertarian candidate, is taking major votes away from Hillary, 'cause he sounds more like a lib.

He sounds more like Bernie Sanders than he sounds like a Libertarian. He is, actually -- according to polling data -- taking votes away from Hillary. There are a lot of things lining up here that are shocking, surprisingly, and stunning to the political scientists and analysts that we've all become accustomed to and familiar with over the last 20 years. Anyway, here's Luntz. O'Reilly says: CNN poll, Trump in Florida 47, Hillary 44. "It seems like the trend is everywhere. Trump's gaining, Hillary losing."

By the way, she was losing before Sunday.

The Drive-Bys are trying to say, "It's just a temporary blip and it's all based on the video of Hillary having the seizure." And another thing. You know it could well be that she hasn't seen that and some of the comments that she and Bill have made, maybe they haven't seen that video but everybody else has seen it. Maybe that's why there's such a disconnect with what they're saying versus what people think is wrong with her. So, anyway, then Luntz cites the Monmouth poll: 66% of Trump supporters are appalled by Hillary. They're so appalled by Hillary, they're gonna support Trump until the end. Frank Luntz, what's going on here?

LUNTZ: I believe that the polling is going to move even further in Trump's direction over the next 72 hours because of what happened this weekend. They don't like her insults. They don't think she told the truth about her health. We see this trend everywhere. If Donald Trump can continue his discipline and continue his focus on policy without the traditional insults? You're gonna see him go ahead in states like Iowa, you're gonna see him catch up in New Hampshire -- and the state that I'm watching in particular, Pennsylvania. I am convinced that he's gonna start to close the gap there as well.

[swamp]

If Donald Trump can continue his discipline and continue his focus on policy without the traditional insults?

[happyhoix]

Sept 16, 2016 10:16:01 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

In my opinion, Bernie Sanders was the best shot the Democratic Party had to avoid a Trump landslide. However for reasons similar to the Republican establishment's objection to Trump, the Democratic party was never going to let that happen while they had any control over it. I was actually worried for awhile that he might pull it off because Bernie Sanders is a political threat. 

I'm not in the habit of offering Democrats advice on how to win elections, but there may be a very simple solution, and a very short window of time left to execute it: Bernie Sanders.

There are more registered Democrats than registered Republicans on the voter rolls. For the Democratic Party to win a national election is as simple as turning out their base and letting the rank and file do the rest. It's just math.

I believe Bernie Sanders would still have a real shot at beating Donald Trump. He's no further left than Hillary, he's a little grumpy- but as Norman Lear proved, that can be endearing. Young voters love him, and the rest of the party would fall in line.

Democrats: It's decision time.




thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/polls/296189-polls-darken-for-democrats

How many times in the history of this country has a major political party dumped the candidate who won the primary to replace him with the second runner up - sixty some days from the election?

If that were possible, no doubt the Republicans would have ditched Trump long ago, back when he was busy insulting the family of a dead serviceman.

[happyhoix]

Saw his economic plan.

Trickle down economics - or what became known as voo doo economics the first time around.

Didn't work the first time. Won't work again. Sure will help Trump out, though, all those tax breaks for business and the wealthy.

And isn't that what this election is all about, things that will make Trump happy?

At least, Trump seems to think it is.

Screw the rest of us losers.

[Deleted]

Sept 16, 2016 11:01:36 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

Saw his economic plan.

Trickle down economics - or what became known as voo doo economics the first time around.

Didn't work the first time. Won't work again. Sure will help Trump out, though, all those tax breaks for business and the wealthy.

And isn't that what this election is all about, things that will make Trump happy?

At least, Trump seems to think it is.

Screw the rest of us losers.

Please, just speak for yourself.   A lot of members of this forum, from either side of the aisle, don't like to be referred to as losers.   A good % are noteworthy professionals.

[Deleted]

Sept 16, 2016 10:53:26 GMT -5 swamp said:

If Donald Trump can continue his discipline and continue his focus on policy without the traditional insults?

Good chance his previous attention getting style wasn't all that real.  The last few weeks before the election would be the time to expound on the issues now that the attention has been garnered.  Did you notice that even on this forum,  all the talk is Trump, Trump, and Trump.  

[swamp]

Sept 16, 2016 12:21:38 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Sept 16, 2016 10:53:26 GMT -5 swamp said:

If Donald Trump can continue his discipline and continue his focus on policy without the traditional insults?

Good chance his previous attention getting style wasn't all that real.  The last few weeks before the election would be the time to expound on the issues now that the attention has been garnered.  Did you notice that even on this forum,  all the talk is Trump, Trump, and Trump.  

That doesn't mean i'm going to vote for him. I talk about him because i still can't believe he is considered a serious candidate.

[Deleted]

Sept 16, 2016 12:57:03 GMT -5 swamp said:

Sept 16, 2016 12:21:38 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Good chance his previous attention getting style wasn't all that real.  The last few weeks before the election would be the time to expound on the issues now that the attention has been garnered.  Did you notice that even on this forum,  all the talk is Trump, Trump, and Trump.  

That doesn't mean i'm going to vote for him. I talk about him because i still can't believe he is considered a serious candidate.

He's serious alright.  Have you seen him recently ? 

[Opti]

Sept 16, 2016 12:21:38 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Sept 16, 2016 10:53:26 GMT -5 swamp said:

If Donald Trump can continue his discipline and continue his focus on policy without the traditional insults?

Good chance his previous attention getting style wasn't all that real.  The last few weeks before the election would be the time to expound on the issues now that the attention has been garnered.  Did you notice that even on this forum,  all the talk is Trump, Trump, and Trump.  

He's been using his attention getting style for more than a year. (Announced his run in June 2015.) He's had a couple runs as quieter Donald before, but he always has reverted to the more bombastic style.

[Deleted]

Sept 16, 2016 13:09:34 GMT -5 Opti said:

Sept 16, 2016 12:21:38 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Good chance his previous attention getting style wasn't all that real.  The last few weeks before the election would be the time to expound on the issues now that the attention has been garnered.  Did you notice that even on this forum,  all the talk is Trump, Trump, and Trump.  

He's been using his attention getting style for more than a year. (Announced his run in June 2015.) He's had a couple runs as quieter Donald before, but he always has reverted to the more bombastic style.

And here we are talking about him. 

[swamp]

Sept 16, 2016 13:11:33 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Sept 16, 2016 13:09:34 GMT -5 Opti said:

He's been using his attention getting style for more than a year. (Announced his run in June 2015.) He's had a couple runs as quieter Donald before, but he always has reverted to the more bombastic style.

And here we are talking about him. 

And here we are still not voting for him.

[weltschmerz]

The Drive-Bys are trying to say, "It's just a temporary blip and it's all based on the video of Hillary having the seizure." And another thing. You know it could well be that she hasn't seen that and some of the comments that she and Bill have made, maybe they haven't seen that video but everybody else has seen it. Maybe that's why there's such a disconnect with what they're saying versus what people think is wrong with her. So, anyway, then Luntz cites the Monmouth poll: 66% of Trump supporters are appalled by Hillary. They're so appalled by Hillary, they're gonna support Trump until the end. Frank Luntz, what's going on here?

100% of Hillary supporters are appalled by Trump.

[Deleted]

Sept 16, 2016 13:16:05 GMT -5 swamp said:

Sept 16, 2016 13:11:33 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

And here we are talking about him. 

And here we are still not voting for him.

I'll be voting for him again, but only because he's the best man for the job. 

[ken a.k.a OMK]

I'll be voting for the best woman for the job. 

[Deleted]

Sept 16, 2016 13:58:47 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

The Drive-Bys are trying to say, "It's just a temporary blip and it's all based on the video of Hillary having the seizure." And another thing. You know it could well be that she hasn't seen that and some of the comments that she and Bill have made, maybe they haven't seen that video but everybody else has seen it. Maybe that's why there's such a disconnect with what they're saying versus what people think is wrong with her. So, anyway, then Luntz cites the Monmouth poll: 66% of Trump supporters are appalled by Hillary. They're so appalled by Hillary, they're gonna support Trump until the end. Frank Luntz, what's going on here?

100% of Hillary supporters are appalled by Trump.

I've learned to never say 100 percent about anything here. It always comes back to bite me.

[ken a.k.a OMK]

I've learned not to say 100%, all, everyone, anything all exclusive. Go with many most of the time. 

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Sept 16, 2016 10:53:26 GMT -5 swamp said:

If Donald Trump can continue his discipline and continue his focus on policy without the traditional insults?

I laughed to, but probably not for the same reason. I laughed at the notion Trump could do anything which might cause him to lose.

[ken a.k.a OMK]

The question is can he undo enough to win? He lies enough to maybe pull it off, denying all he's said before.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Words of Wisdom from General Colin Powell:

[djAdvocate]

Sept 16, 2016 15:07:45 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Words of Wisdom from General Colin Powell:

given that you sold BS in front of the UN for Bush, i am not sure how much your opinion is worth.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 16, 2016 14:54:37 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Sept 16, 2016 10:53:26 GMT -5 swamp said:

If Donald Trump can continue his discipline and continue his focus on policy without the traditional insults?

I laughed to, but probably not for the same reason. I laughed at the notion Trump could do anything which might cause him to lose.

sure he could.  he could do 1000 things to lose.  so could Clinton.  don't fool yourself.  it is closer than you think.

[Opti]

Sept 16, 2016 15:07:45 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Words of Wisdom from General Colin Powell:

Was that email from 2014 or 2016? Given Hillary is just 68 yrs. old. Colin Powell is now 79.