billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,207
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jun 5, 2016 21:49:26 GMT -5
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,207
Member is Online
|
Post by billisonboard on Jun 5, 2016 21:56:39 GMT -5
... Three people I know where there. A more accurate estimate ... really?
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jun 5, 2016 22:15:10 GMT -5
i just heard his interview about this, and he keeps saying "i am building a wall with Mexico. this guy has Mexican heritage". i understand the leap that HE has made, but i don't think it follows that it has anything to do with his ruling. but if Trump things the judge is being "racist" (or, more aptly, anti-US Nationalist), then he should appeal the ruling. The person that can't stop talking about Judge Gonzalo Curiel's Mexican heritage is Judge Curiel. Trump, and look- let's just cut all the political bullshit and have an honest moment here, didn't attack his heritage. He attacked his ideology. Donald Trump is running for President, and his signature policy initiative is a wall along the border with Mexico, paid for by Mexico. Trump has stated he will deport ALL illegal aliens within two (2) years. Judge Curiel is a member of the La Raza (The Race) Lawyers Association of San Diego. He is an Obama appointee and Judge Curiel is in fact a radical activist for illegal alien non-enforcement at every level, an open borders advocate, and a lover of sanctuary cities. This is not even in dispute. So, again- if you've the capacity for it, HONEST discussion only: is it really foolish to point this out when he's the judge presiding over a civil suit against an entity in which you have an interest? Can it even be argued that Judge Curiel hastily un-sealed the un-redacted documents before the court to hurt Trump politically? I mean give me a break, here. We've known each other how long on these boards? Accept when the narrative is bullshit. Just for once lose an argument gracefully instead of under the crushing weight of the water you're carrying for the democratic party. The wall is bullshit. www.dailykos.com/story/2015/8/31/1416884/-So-President-Trump-you-want-a-Great-Great-Wall-let-s-look-at-the-numbers?detail=facebook
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,440
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 5, 2016 22:17:07 GMT -5
Look, I'll just bottom line the Eugene event for you-- the 5,000 figure comes from the Fire Marshall capacity of the venue, The Lane Events Center. 5,000 people at a political rally in a city the size of Eugene is more than impressive, it's unheard of. Well, almost. Barack Obama held a rally in Eugene in 2008 that drew about 8,000 using the same calculation: seats in the venue. However, when Obama came to Eugene, the press was a little more accurate in the count- they happened to notice the equal number of people outside as in. Same here. Three people I know where there. A more accurate estimate of total of those inside and outside the venue: roughly 18,000. That includes the (50) 600 people protesting outside, though. So, there's that. i don't care if he drew 500,000. he still got fewer votes than 2nd-Place-Clinton. but i can understand how you might want to focus on a different subject entirely.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,440
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 5, 2016 22:20:28 GMT -5
... Three people I know where there. A more accurate estimate ... really? moreover, i have seen estimates from "people he knew" for Trump rallies before, and they were off by a factor of 2.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,440
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 5, 2016 22:23:05 GMT -5
i just heard his interview about this, and he keeps saying "i am building a wall with Mexico. this guy has Mexican heritage". i understand the leap that HE has made, but i don't think it follows that it has anything to do with his ruling. but if Trump things the judge is being "racist" (or, more aptly, anti-US Nationalist), then he should appeal the ruling. So, again- : is it really foolish to point this out when he's the judge presiding over a civil suit against an entity in which you have an interest?. yes. it really is. if you want to be taken seriously. the case should proceed or fail on the MERITS OF THE CASE. if there are no merits, then let him appeal. if not, he should really shut the fuck up. he is not doing himself any good with ANYONE here.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,514
|
Post by happyhoix on Jun 6, 2016 7:06:00 GMT -5
To me, if you're still asking: I wonder if that will work for him or against him? You are going to wake up on inauguration day January 2017 confused about what's going on. Trump has rallied more of the base than 5 out of 6 of the last Republican candidates, including Reagan in the month following securing the nomination. The exception is Romney who rallied 87% to Trump's 85%, however as of now- with 9 primaries left to go, Trump's popular vote total of 11,536,494 is a LOT more than Romney's popular vote total at the end of the entire process of 9,809,662. Do the math and you'll discover that numerically, Trump has rallied 1,271,615 more actual voters than Romney which is important since Romney lost the general election by about 5 million votes. There's actually a number of prominent, respected, reliable sources whose combined wisdom in one way or another is predictive of a possible 50-state landslide for Trump. This would concern me more of Trump was actually pivoting to look more presidential.
Since Trump continues in his arrogant attack mode, I think he is less and less likely to be POTUS.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Jun 6, 2016 7:24:48 GMT -5
Yes, I did forget you average polls . Other times you post a poll and then qualify it by saying "It's an outlier poll" when you like it. Not everyone here use averages of five or ten polls. It does not make us correct or incorrect. When Trump wins the Electoral College with 323 votes, please do not use an average of polls to tell us the vote will be against Trump and he will lose a week before he wins it. 51% is still a great number for the President and I will take it as fact until proven different by future polls. After a few months of Trump and Clinton using hatchets on each other he will be clearing 65% favorable rating.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,429
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jun 6, 2016 8:53:27 GMT -5
moreover, i have seen estimates from "people he knew" for Trump rallies before, and they were off by a factor of 2. Never mind estimates from "people he knew". How about the first person acount posted here last August of attending the Trump rally at Mobile's Ladd-Peebles stadium where it was claimed the 30,000 seat stadium was full ...and just as many people were outside trying to get in.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,440
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 6, 2016 10:54:25 GMT -5
Yes, I did forget you average polls . Other times you post a poll and then qualify it by saying "It's an outlier poll" when you like it. and again.....i draw attention to outliers when they are outliers- like your 52% approval poll. i try very hard to set my biases aside, VB. i know you don't believe it, but it is true.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,440
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 6, 2016 10:58:26 GMT -5
When Trump wins the Electoral College with 323 votes, please do not use an average of polls to tell us the vote will be against Trump and he will lose a week before he wins it. i never said he "will lose". i have said that he had about a 40% chance of winning the nomination since January. i raised that to 60% BEFORE "a month ago". ask Virgil if you don't believe me. the way Trump fails to get the nomination is the way Clinton doesn't get it = getting indicted, caught up in a scandal, having major health issues, etc. there is no other way he fails to get nominated. 51% is still a great number for the President and I will take it as fact until proven different by future polls. After a few months of Trump and Clinton using hatchets on each other he will be clearing 65% favorable rating. you won't find me ever being this reckless in my forecasts.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,440
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 6, 2016 11:02:54 GMT -5
Not everyone here use averages of five or ten polls. It does not make us correct or incorrect. of course. it does, however, make it MORE LIKELY that you will be incorrect if you select a poll which makes your point without any disclaimers that this poll is, in fact, an outlier. i would also add that this does NOT mean that the outlier is WRONG. sometimes the outlier is RIGHT, and ALL OF THE OTHER POLLS are wrong. that really DOES happen. in fact, it is not even that unusual. but what you are doing, when you claim that an outlier is correct, and all the others are wrong, is the equivalent of playing Old Sodbuiscuits at 14:1 at the racetrack. you might win- and if you do, you will win big. but you are playing the long odds.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,514
|
Post by happyhoix on Jun 6, 2016 11:15:40 GMT -5
Judges are sworn to hear cases without prejudice, based on the laws on the books.
If this judge fails to remain unbiased, Trump would have a good case to appeal.
Trump calling out the judge for being unfair even before the trial has started is stupid, both legally and politically.
I can only guess that he thinks he can bully the judge into abstaining from this trial, but he hasn't taken into account the negative backlash he could and has received.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Jun 6, 2016 11:25:58 GMT -5
In the meantime...
More than 1,000 people lined up to get inside the Lane County Events Center in Eugene Friday evening to see Donald Trump speak at his first Oregon rally as a candidate. The apparent Republican nominee for president has attracted long lines of supporters and many protesters.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,440
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 6, 2016 11:26:12 GMT -5
Judges are sworn to hear cases without prejudice, based on the laws on the books.
If this judge fails to remain unbiased, Trump would have a good case to appeal.
Trump calling out the judge for being unfair even before the trial has started is stupid, both legally and politically.
I can only guess that he thinks he can bully the judge into abstaining from this trial, but he hasn't taken into account the negative backlash he could and has received. dumb politics keeps working over and over for Trump, so here is a BOLD prediction: i predict that Trump will continue using dumb politics. i predict that his followers (and the few leaners that are left) will continue following him, because they either like his dumb politics, or because they hate smart politics (as Paul has, essentially, stated), and that those that hate him will continue hating him, or will hate him even more. i predict that this election will then become an election about comity, decorum, and tradition -vs- "blowing shit up", and we can see how that goes for old Dumpster Fire. if people are "fed up" enough with 240 years of politics, then shit will get interesting.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,440
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 6, 2016 11:34:39 GMT -5
By the way- where's Elizabeth Warren? Right the fuck back under her rock, lol! there are at least 7 major articles on Warren in the last (24) hours. did FOX not report them? www.google.com/search?q=elizabeth+warrent&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#q=elizabeth+warren&tbm=nwsedit: FOX is not on that list, so the answer is NO. i actually think that Warren is very important to this cycle. if she endorses Clinton, she would form a bridge between MANY Sanders supporters (who LOVE her) and mainstream Democrats. if she fails to do so, it will make Clinton's battle a lot more difficult.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Jun 6, 2016 12:23:58 GMT -5
By the way- where's Elizabeth Warren? Right the fuck back under her rock, lol! there are at least 7 major articles on Warren in the last (24) hours. did FOX not report them? www.google.com/search?q=elizabeth+warrent&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#q=elizabeth+warren&tbm=nwsedit: FOX is not on that list, so the answer is NO. i actually think that Warren is very important to this cycle. if she endorses Clinton, she would form a bridge between MANY Sanders supporters (who LOVE her) and mainstream Democrats. if she fails to do so, it will make Clinton's battle a lot more difficult. Agreed. I don't believe there's a big #NeverTrump movement-- in fact, even Nate Silver has recognized that. Likewise, I'm not counting on a big #NeverHillary. In the end, GOP voters are going to look at Hillary; and Dem voters are going to look at Trump-- and they're all going to be well-motivated to go home to their party's candidate.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,514
|
Post by happyhoix on Jun 6, 2016 13:53:01 GMT -5
there are at least 7 major articles on Warren in the last (24) hours. did FOX not report them? www.google.com/search?q=elizabeth+warrent&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#q=elizabeth+warren&tbm=nwsedit: FOX is not on that list, so the answer is NO. i actually think that Warren is very important to this cycle. if she endorses Clinton, she would form a bridge between MANY Sanders supporters (who LOVE her) and mainstream Democrats. if she fails to do so, it will make Clinton's battle a lot more difficult. Agreed. I don't believe there's a big #NeverTrump movement-- in fact, even Nate Silver has recognized that. Likewise, I'm not counting on a big #NeverHillary. In the end, GOP voters are going to look at Hillary; and Dem voters are going to look at Trump-- and they're all going to be well-motivated to go home to their party's candidate. No - none of us are going to be well motivated. We're going to cry or rant, drink too much alcohol, curse the Gods of Politics and then sadly pull the voting lever for the candidate that we think will fuck up the country the least, and most likely that candidate will be our party's candidate.
Same result that you posted, but my prediction has more dismay and wailing than yours does. Whoever wins, we'll all be depressed.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Jun 6, 2016 14:09:00 GMT -5
When Trump wins the Electoral College with 323 votes, please do not use an average of polls to tell us the vote will be against Trump and he will lose a week before he wins it. i never said he "will lose". i have said that he had about a 40% chance of winning the nomination since January. i raised that to 60% BEFORE "a month ago". ask Virgil if you don't believe me. the way Trump fails to get the nomination is the way Clinton doesn't get it = getting indicted, caught up in a scandal, having major health issues, etc. there is no other way he fails to get nominated. 51% is still a great number for the President and I will take it as fact until proven different by future polls. After a few months of Trump and Clinton using hatchets on each other he will be clearing 65% favorable rating. you won't find me ever being this reckless in my forecasts. I agree, you are not reckless in your forecasts. You were just wrong in your forecast of Trump. Heck, you did not even know when he won the nomination. You insisted on proof of it when we all knew it had happened. Do you consider a 65% favorable rating for Obama this fall as being out of hand? Not with these two running. 65% of America will be clamoring for a constitutional amendment to keep him in place NOTE: I will be in the minority on that one.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Jun 6, 2016 14:19:05 GMT -5
Judges are sworn to hear cases without prejudice, based on the laws on the books.
If this judge fails to remain unbiased, Trump would have a good case to appeal.
Trump calling out the judge for being unfair even before the trial has started is stupid, both legally and politically.
I can only guess that he thinks he can bully the judge into abstaining from this trial, but he hasn't taken into account the negative backlash he could and has received.
And yet we know many white judges in the south do a lot of rough justice when it comes to black minority defendants and acknowledge this freely across the country. We know black judges in the large cities are prone to error on the side of minority defenders also. A Spanish American justice cannot fail the system in the same way? I am not saying this judge does. I do not know his track record. I admit Trump was a 1,000 percent out of line on the claim, but he could still be correct about him.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,514
|
Post by happyhoix on Jun 6, 2016 14:26:01 GMT -5
Judges are sworn to hear cases without prejudice, based on the laws on the books.
If this judge fails to remain unbiased, Trump would have a good case to appeal.
Trump calling out the judge for being unfair even before the trial has started is stupid, both legally and politically.
I can only guess that he thinks he can bully the judge into abstaining from this trial, but he hasn't taken into account the negative backlash he could and has received.
And yet we know many white judges in the south do a lot of rough justice when it comes to black minority defendants and acknowledge this freely across the country. We know black judges in the large cities are prone to error on the side of minority defenders also. A Spanish American justice cannot fail the system in the same way? I am not saying this judge does. I do not know his track record. I admit Trump was a 1,000 percent out of line on the claim, but he could still be correct about him. Trump is a millionaire. He can hire the best lawyers there are. He doesn't need to worry about being railroaded by a white judge because he's black, or by a black judge because he's white. Judges only get away with those kinds of things with poor defendants who have public defenders and zero public scrutiny.
He should shut up and let this thing move forward. Let all his highly paid lawyers do their jobs. If there is the faintest hint of bias, his lawyers will be hustling it right in front of an appeals court. Believe me, I have no qualms that Trump might be denied any of his civil rights in the court system.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,440
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 6, 2016 14:43:56 GMT -5
you won't find me ever being this reckless in my forecasts. I agree, you are not reckless in your forecasts. You were just wrong in your forecast of Trump. when you state odds of winning, you are always wrong, because, in hindsight, everything is either 0% or 100% odds. however, i think i correctly stated the odds based on available facts, much like i did in 2012. you remember 2012, right?Heck, you did not even know when he won the nomination. i have a life outside of this board and politics, i am afraid. i do, in fact, miss some events. i didn't know William Burroughs died for MONTHS, for example.You insisted on proof of it when we all knew it had happened. i didn't "insist on proof". i asked for a link, so i could read about it. don't exaggerate.Do you consider a 65% favorable rating for Obama this fall as being out of hand? i consider it to be very unlikely, yes. but if it happens, then the GOP will definitely lose the Senate, and will probably lose the House.Not with these two running. 65% of America will be clamoring for a constitutional amendment to keep him in place NOTE: I will be in the minority on that one. i would rather not have term limits, personally. they are highly undemocratic. but i lost that argument long ago.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,440
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 6, 2016 14:45:34 GMT -5
And yet we know many white judges in the south do a lot of rough justice when it comes to black minority defendants and acknowledge this freely across the country. We know black judges in the large cities are prone to error on the side of minority defenders also. A Spanish American justice cannot fail the system in the same way? I am not saying this judge does. I do not know his track record. I admit Trump was a 1,000 percent out of line on the claim, but he could still be correct about him. Trump is a millionaire. He can hire the best lawyers there are. He doesn't need to worry about being railroaded by a white judge because he's black, or by a black judge because he's white. Judges only get away with those kinds of things with poor defendants who have public defenders and zero public scrutiny.
He should shut up and let this thing move forward. Let all his highly paid lawyers do their jobs. If there is the faintest hint of bias, his lawyers will be hustling it right in front of an appeals court. Believe me, I have no qualms that Trump might be denied any of his civil rights in the court system. fomenting dissent for the judicial system is highly unpresidential, imo.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Jun 6, 2016 14:48:51 GMT -5
Sorry about stating "proof" I meant to say link. just so you know, I have to admit Trump will not win the fall election. Paul jinxed him big time! Truthfully, he has gone over the edge I wish he hadn't. I so hoped he could destroy the Republican leadership, but now it looks like he will leave them in charge as he falls into a footnote in history. Sad, very sad.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,440
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 6, 2016 14:59:06 GMT -5
Sorry about stating "proof" I meant to say link. just so you know, I have to admit Trump will not win the fall election. Paul jinxed him big time! Truthfully, he has gone over the edge I wish he hadn't. I so hoped he could destroy the Republican leadership, but now it looks like he will leave them in charge as he falls into a footnote in history. Sad, very sad. it may surprise you to know that my position on Trump has not really changed that much. last fall, i thought he was a longshot to win the nomination. however, in December i said "i don't know how they are going to beat him". by Feb, i thought i had it figured out: that Cruz and Kasich were going to stick around long enough to make it a contested convention, and that the party elite would take over and push Trump out. and i will admit, with absolute candor, that i was SHOCKED when both men dropped out. i was shocked because BOTH said they were in it until the convention (and for the precise reasons i thought they were). they swore up and down about it. they were absolute fucking liars, and that did indeed shock me, that they could do so so brazenly. ever since they dropped out, Trump has had a clear path to victory. the only thing that stops him is something unforseen. i would say he is about a 20:1 favourite to win the nomination. i would say that Clinton is about 15:1. Trump has a sizeable chance of winning the presidency. his odds are probably about the same as Romney's. but a lot of things have to go his way. he has to perform a lot better in places like PA, OH, and FL. and he has to hope that when the extra attention is showered upon him, that the GENERAL PUBLIC like him as much as Republicans do. i consider those things quite unlikely. as of today, i am lowering his odds from 3:5 of winning to 2:5.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,440
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jun 6, 2016 15:49:04 GMT -5
i think that Florida is especially interesting to watch in this race, and it should be deeply troubling for Trump.
in the first TEN surveys of Trump-vs-Clinton in Florida, Trump lead SEVEN of them. in the last TEN surveys of Trump-vs-Clinton in Florida, Clinton lead SEVEN of them (including the last six in a row).
there are a lot of other really unpleasant realities for Trump. he is not at all competitive in WI. he is competitive in NC and OH, but he really has to win both of those. and it is hard to make a path to victory for him without Florida.
i don't share Paul's optimism for Trump at all. but a lot can happen in 5 months.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,514
|
Post by happyhoix on Jun 6, 2016 16:48:14 GMT -5
DJ how do you think the polls will change when Bernie hangs it up?
Will there be a significant jump for Hillary or for Trump or will all those young adult Bernie voters just take their toys and go home without voting at all, leaving the playing field pretty much the same as it is now?
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,514
|
Post by happyhoix on Jun 6, 2016 16:54:58 GMT -5
Sorry about stating "proof" I meant to say link. just so you know, I have to admit Trump will not win the fall election. Paul jinxed him big time! Truthfully, he has gone over the edge I wish he hadn't. I so hoped he could destroy the Republican leadership, but now it looks like he will leave them in charge as he falls into a footnote in history. Sad, very sad. I think if he had stuck to his 'job creator' story he would have had a chance. There are a lot of middle class people who are unemployed or underemployed who would love to believe Trump could do that.
This whole sidetrack into the legal case he is stuck in, IMHO, really makes him look bad. GOP people who just days ago supported him are once again turning on him - even Gingrich, who apparently wanted to be his VP at one point. Can he really focus his attention on running the country when he gets this caught up in one of his law suits (and I think there are >3000 active at this point) and resorts to name calling the judge?
If we have a disagreement with North Korea will Trump call him names in public?
Once again, I have to revert to my original theory - Trump doesn't really want to win this election. He's deliberately sabotaging himself so he won't be elected.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 28, 2024 18:42:30 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2016 17:44:26 GMT -5
Trump also believes Muslim judges probably would not be fair to him. Just a matter of days before Trump says female judges would probably not be fair to him too. ....and disabled judges. And judges who were Prisoners of War. And judges with a higher IQ number than their hat size...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 28, 2024 18:42:30 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2016 17:55:12 GMT -5
Sorry about stating "proof" I meant to say link. just so you know, I have to admit Trump will not win the fall election. Paul jinxed him big time! Truthfully, he has gone over the edge I wish he hadn't. I so hoped he could destroy the Republican leadership, but now it looks like he will leave them in charge as he falls into a footnote in history. Sad, very sad. it may surprise you to know that my position on Trump has not really changed that much. last fall, i thought he was a longshot to win the nomination. however, in December i said "i don't know how they are going to beat him". by Feb, i thought i had it figured out: that Cruz and Kasich were going to stick around long enough to make it a contested convention, and that the party elite would take over and push Trump out. and i will admit, with absolute candor, that i was SHOCKED when both men dropped out. i was shocked because BOTH said they were in it until the convention (and for the precise reasons i thought they were). they swore up and down about it. they were absolute fucking liars, and that did indeed shock me, that they could do so so brazenly.ever since they dropped out, Trump has had a clear path to victory. the only thing that stops him is something unforseen. i would say he is about a 20:1 favourite to win the nomination. i would say that Clinton is about 15:1. Trump has a sizeable chance of winning the presidency. his odds are probably about the same as Romney's. but a lot of things have to go his way. he has to perform a lot better in places like PA, OH, and FL. and he has to hope that when the extra attention is showered upon him, that the GENERAL PUBLIC like him as much as Republicans do. i consider those things quite unlikely. as of today, i am lowering his odds from 3:5 of winning to 2:5. They are both "professional politicians"... not sure why them lying (or "breaking promises" as some might call what they did) comes as a shock to you.
|
|