ZEB: without getting to personal…how old are you ? I am 48 and got to vote for the first time in '88.
I think that it is cool that your dad and you did the wall map. I wish more schools had had something like that when i was growing up.
For the record. I grew up in Chicago Politics (no hate please) in the 70’s-80’s.
We understood that the first Daley was corrupt, but with the intent of doing chicago well.
The second coming … yeah, didnt work out to well.
Anyway, i digress.
Age again ?
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]on edge wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]on edge wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I really don’t think he wants to be known as the guy who helped elect Hillary Clinton, so I’m betting he wont run as an independent.
[/quote]
Mit Romney will go down as the guy responsible for electing Hilary.[/quote]
How so?
(I’m just curious…or maybe the sarcasm went by me? That happens!)
Mufasa[/quote]
Because his campaign was the last republican campaign for the foreseeable future that had a chance. At one point Romney had Obama on the ropes but he was too much of a gentleman to go in for the kill. When Romney lost '12, that’s when Hilary won '16.
I really think our only chance of avoiding Hilary at this point is if she blows it. The presidency is hers to win she just needs to keep her shit together.[/quote]
Not at all my friend, not at all.
History shows us that it is difficult for one party to keep the White House for 12 years in a row. It has only been done once (in the modern day) by the republicans when Ronald Reagan served two years then his VP George H.W. Bush ran and won keeping the White House republican for 12 straight years, 1980-1992.
It also happened for the democrats after Roosevelt died in office. Harry Truman his VP won on his own, back in 1945.
What you are now saying is Hillary is strong enough to actually keep the White House for the democrats after 8 failed years of an Obama administration. In my opinion she would have had a much better chance had Romney defeated Obama in 2012.
By the way, no one was ever elected to the Presidency with such high negative poll numbers as Hillary. Some of the latest poll numbers that I’ve seen show her negative numbers to be hovering between 47% and 50%. That means that out of those who know who Hillary Clinton is 47% to 50% do not like her. Now, if she was an unknown those numbers would have the potential to improve. But, after about 24 years in the public eye most everyone knows who Hillary Clinton is and about half the country does not like her.
How does she change that? Does she once again try to “reinvent herself”? They tried that in 2008 and fell on their faces.
If someone has a poor impression of a candidate like Marco Rubio they may change their mind once they hear him speak and see him more often. Whereas when they drag Hillary out her numbers tend to go down. That’s why they did such a low key announcement of her entering the campaign this time around. They have tried to run a very low key race because they know that the more people see her the less they like her.
I’ll stop right here only to make a prediction of my own. If there is no third party candidacy of a conservative such as there was when Ross Perot handed the Presidency to Bill Clinton TWICE, Hillary will lose to whomever the republicans nominate.
She would give some of the republicans a close race but still lose. Whereas I believe that certain republicans if nominated (and choose the proper running mate) could very well hand Hillary quite a large electoral defeat.
[/quote]
I like the argument you make however I think you are missing a key factor that will make the difference and that factor is demographics. The demographics now favor the Dems and on top of that, the Dems now come out and vote. Maybe if Hilary can bore them out of voting…
[quote]on edge wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]on edge wrote:
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]on edge wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I really don’t think he wants to be known as the guy who helped elect Hillary Clinton, so I’m betting he wont run as an independent.
[/quote]
Mit Romney will go down as the guy responsible for electing Hilary.[/quote]
How so?
(I’m just curious…or maybe the sarcasm went by me? That happens!)
Mufasa[/quote]
Because his campaign was the last republican campaign for the foreseeable future that had a chance. At one point Romney had Obama on the ropes but he was too much of a gentleman to go in for the kill. When Romney lost '12, that’s when Hilary won '16.
I really think our only chance of avoiding Hilary at this point is if she blows it. The presidency is hers to win she just needs to keep her shit together.[/quote]
Not at all my friend, not at all.
History shows us that it is difficult for one party to keep the White House for 12 years in a row. It has only been done once (in the modern day) by the republicans when Ronald Reagan served two years then his VP George H.W. Bush ran and won keeping the White House republican for 12 straight years, 1980-1992.
It also happened for the democrats after Roosevelt died in office. Harry Truman his VP won on his own, back in 1945.
What you are now saying is Hillary is strong enough to actually keep the White House for the democrats after 8 failed years of an Obama administration. In my opinion she would have had a much better chance had Romney defeated Obama in 2012.
By the way, no one was ever elected to the Presidency with such high negative poll numbers as Hillary. Some of the latest poll numbers that I’ve seen show her negative numbers to be hovering between 47% and 50%. That means that out of those who know who Hillary Clinton is 47% to 50% do not like her. Now, if she was an unknown those numbers would have the potential to improve. But, after about 24 years in the public eye most everyone knows who Hillary Clinton is and about half the country does not like her.
How does she change that? Does she once again try to “reinvent herself”? They tried that in 2008 and fell on their faces.
If someone has a poor impression of a candidate like Marco Rubio they may change their mind once they hear him speak and see him more often. Whereas when they drag Hillary out her numbers tend to go down. That’s why they did such a low key announcement of her entering the campaign this time around. They have tried to run a very low key race because they know that the more people see her the less they like her.
I’ll stop right here only to make a prediction of my own. If there is no third party candidacy of a conservative such as there was when Ross Perot handed the Presidency to Bill Clinton TWICE, Hillary will lose to whomever the republicans nominate.
She would give some of the republicans a close race but still lose. Whereas I believe that certain republicans if nominated (and choose the proper running mate) could very well hand Hillary quite a large electoral defeat.
[/quote]
I like the argument you make however I think you are missing a key factor that will make the difference and that factor is demographics. The demographics now favor the Dems and on top of that, the Dems now come out and vote. Maybe if Hilary can bore them out of voting…[/quote]
Actually, the enrollment always favored the democrats. Historically the republicans never one time (to my knowledge) ever had an advantage over the democrats. Yet, the republicans have still won major elections.
As for the democrats turning out to vote I don’t see that happening in near the numbers that Obama received in his first run when people swallowed the hope and change nonsense. Nor (I predict) will they even reach the numbers he gained during his second run when black Americans still stood by his side. In fact, I see black voters returning to the numbers that they turned out at back in 2004. Do you honestly think that black Americans are going to warm up to a wealthy, white female senior citizen who has a problem with the truth? That’s not happening! At least in no higher numbers than they voted for John Kerry in 2004.
Actually Hillary does not excite voters of any demographic but perhaps one. The 23% of women who identify themselves as feminists will turnout for Hillary and many of them will be jumping up and down while they vote. But, its not like those folks were going to vote for a republican anyway, they never have, so what has the republican candidate lost? In fact, the last time republicans actually won the female vote was 1988 when they chose George H.W. Bush over a very poor candidate by the name of Michael Dukakis. Since then between the left wing media hype and the democrats claiming that republicans hate women (eye roll) the majority of women have voted for the democratic Presidential candidate in 6 straight Presidential election.
I don’t see the remaining (non feminist) women rushing off to vote for Hillary in large numbers. Certainly no larger than they have for the typical democratic candidate. One more point that I have not heard anyone mention yet. For every women who votes for Hillary there will be two men who will vote for the republican candidate because of Hillary. In fact, I bet that the republican candidate will receive a higher percentage of male votes than any previous republican Presidential candidate in modern history (of course some will stay home which doesn’t help Hillary either). These men see Hillary as that nasty Mother in law, former Principal, or ex wife that they simply despise. She gives off a very nasty vibe to a lot of men and always has.
My point is while she will no doubt win the majority of women voters she will likewise lose in larger proportions the male vote.
On the republican side I feel that there will be a large turnout. Obama has been so bad that those who stayed home because they thought (wrongly) that Romney was not going to be conservative enough, or they didn’t want a Mormon President, are now chomping at the bit to turnout in large numbers for whomever the republican candidate will be. Sure they will be voting “for” the republican candidate. But, primarily against the democrat. In short, the republicans DO NOT want Hillary! Most feel that they’ve had to put up with Obama for 8 years and now it’s their turn. Republican turnout will reach record levels.
So, while there may be more democrats than republicans that has never prevented a republican victory as the typical voter does not vote for a party. They always, always, always vote for the person they think is best regardless of party affiliation. Which means they vote for the person they LIKE. The one who lures them in with their Charisma, charm and good looks. All of the things that Hillary lacks. And I’ve already talked about Hillary’s unfavorable numbers being higher than anyone who has ever won the Presidency. She is charisma-less, among many other negative things.
The democrats challenge (and it is an impossible task) is to get those who have seen Hillary for 23 or so years and don’t like her, to now like her. Tell me how is that accomplished? More Benghazi hearings? More talk about her multi-million dollar Clinton foundation empire? How about putting her in front of a large crowd and hearing her screech out a speech? Yikes! Maybe a one on one personal interview so she can look cold and calculating while answering questions. The last time they tried that, a few weeks back, she lied about never receiving a Subpoena. Her unfavorable numbers took a tick up after that whopper. In short, how do you make Hillary more palatable to those who dislike her and have for two or so decades? You don’t! They’ve seen her they heard her and they don’t like her. And the funny part is, the more they try to serve her to the public the more ground they lose.
The only way Hillary even has a chance to win the White House is if there is a strong challenge from an independent conservative candidate. And even then it will still be close.
She is just a horrible candidate in almost every way and horrible candidates do not win Presidential elections. Even if that horrible candidate happens to be a woman.
I highly doubt that Trump will win the nomination. I think that the real question is whether or not the GOP nominee has the balls to make Trump their VP candidate. I doubt any of them would do it and I doubt that he would agree to do it, but it may be the only way the GOP wins the election.
[quote]OldOgre wrote:
I highly doubt that Trump will win the nomination. I think that the real question is whether or not the GOP nominee has the balls to make Trump their VP candidate. I doubt any of them would do it and I doubt that he would agree to do it, but it may be the only way the GOP wins the election.[/quote]
It could be the only way the GOP loses the election.
Trump is toxic.
But just like alcohol you have to take in enough of it before you start to feel its negative effects.
Trump won’t be around in November of 2016 as the more the voters get to hear him the more they will start to dislike him.
In fact, in one recent poll his negatives are already up to 60%. That even passes Hillary Clinton’s negatives. Trump is a sideshow and that show has a closing date in the not to distant future.
[quote]OldOgre wrote:
I highly doubt that Trump will win the nomination. I think that the real question is whether or not the GOP nominee has the balls to make Trump their VP candidate. I doubt any of them would do it and I doubt that he would agree to do it, but it may be the only way the GOP wins the election.[/quote]
The GOP is going to lose and it’s going to be because of Trump, who’s an asshole. Maybe next time Kim Kardashian will run to officially making voting pointless.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]OldOgre wrote:
I highly doubt that Trump will win the nomination. I think that the real question is whether or not the GOP nominee has the balls to make Trump their VP candidate. I doubt any of them would do it and I doubt that he would agree to do it, but it may be the only way the GOP wins the election.[/quote]
The GOP is going to lose and it’s going to be because of Trump, who’s an asshole. Maybe next time Kim Kardashian will run to officially making voting pointless. [/quote]
The GOP is going to win!
And they will win because just about everyone of the GOP contenders can beat Hillary. And early polls are demonstrating that when asked “if the election were held today who would you vote for?” They used Bush, Rubio and Walker and each of them beats Hillary. Many of the others would do just as well.
I don’t think Trump will even jump in as a third party spoiler because he will be so unpopular by that time even he will know he has no chance of changing the outcome. Also, people forget that in order to run a third party you have to get on the ballot in each state independently. That is no small task it takes a great deal of time and money. And he would have to start working on it fairly early. I don’t think Trump wants to drop 400 million to run as an independent.
Ross Perot had a good size organization behind him in order to accomplish what he did in 92’ and 96’.
My prediction: Trump will be no where near the Presidential race come November of 2016.
(Hey…let’s hope I’m right 
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]OldOgre wrote:
I highly doubt that Trump will win the nomination. I think that the real question is whether or not the GOP nominee has the balls to make Trump their VP candidate. I doubt any of them would do it and I doubt that he would agree to do it, but it may be the only way the GOP wins the election.[/quote]
The GOP is going to lose and it’s going to be because of Trump, who’s an asshole. Maybe next time Kim Kardashian will run to officially making voting pointless. [/quote]
The GOP is going to win!
And they will win because just about everyone of the GOP contenders can beat Hillary. And early polls are demonstrating that when asked “if the election were held today who would you vote for?” They used Bush, Rubio and Walker and each of them beats Hillary. Many of the others would do just as well.
I don’t think Trump will even jump in as a third party spoiler because he will be so unpopular by that time even he will know he has no chance of changing the outcome. Also, people forget that in order to run a third party you have to get on the ballot in each state independently. That is no small task it takes a great deal of time and money. And he would have to start working on it fairly early. I don’t think Trump wants to drop 400 million to run as an independent.
Ross Perot had a good size organization behind him in order to accomplish what he did in 92’ and 96’.
My prediction: Trump will be no where near the Presidential race come November of 2016.
(Hey…let’s hope I’m right
[/quote]
I hope so because right now I see Trump playing spoiler. We do have a long way to go though.
As someone has already pointed out, the GOP hasn’t done too good a job selecting candidates lately. Nobody to get behind. John McCain…Mitt Romney…really? I agree that Trump is an asshole and, on his own, is not electable. However, he is an asshole who has been pounding on things that people in the real world find important and he has gotten them fired up.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]OldOgre wrote:
I highly doubt that Trump will win the nomination. I think that the real question is whether or not the GOP nominee has the balls to make Trump their VP candidate. I doubt any of them would do it and I doubt that he would agree to do it, but it may be the only way the GOP wins the election.[/quote]
It could be the only way the GOP loses the election.
Trump is toxic.
But just like alcohol you have to take in enough of it before you start to feel its negative effects.
Trump won’t be around in November of 2016 as the more the voters get to hear him the more they will start to dislike him.
In fact, in one recent poll his negatives are already up to 60%. That even passes Hillary Clinton’s negatives. Trump is a sideshow and that show has a closing date in the not to distant future.[/quote]
True enough, Zeb.
BUT Trump’s ego could push him to run as a 3rd Party Candidate.
I think that the best thing the GOP could do at this point is to NOT make him an enemy.
Mufasa
[quote]OldOgre wrote:
As someone has already pointed out, the GOP hasn’t done too good a job selecting candidates lately. Nobody to get behind. John McCain…Mitt Romney…really? I agree that Trump is an asshole and, on his own, is not electable. However, he is an asshole who has been pounding on things that people in the real world find important and he has gotten them fired up. [/quote]
True, but has he offered any real solutions? I don’t think he’s going to force Mexico to build a wall so what’s his actual plan? How does he plan to attack the deficit? I hope it isn’t to declare bankruptcy and try again.
I think he’s a celebrity that loves the spot light and he’s smart enough to know how to manipulate certain voters to get the attention he wants.
And I think he’s narcissistic enough to run as a third party.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]OldOgre wrote:
I highly doubt that Trump will win the nomination. I think that the real question is whether or not the GOP nominee has the balls to make Trump their VP candidate. I doubt any of them would do it and I doubt that he would agree to do it, but it may be the only way the GOP wins the election.[/quote]
The GOP is going to lose and it’s going to be because of Trump, who’s an asshole. Maybe next time Kim Kardashian will run to officially making voting pointless. [/quote]
The GOP is going to win!
And they will win because just about everyone of the GOP contenders can beat Hillary. And early polls are demonstrating that when asked “if the election were held today who would you vote for?” They used Bush, Rubio and Walker and each of them beats Hillary. Many of the others would do just as well.
I don’t think Trump will even jump in as a third party spoiler because he will be so unpopular by that time even he will know he has no chance of changing the outcome. Also, people forget that in order to run a third party you have to get on the ballot in each state independently. That is no small task it takes a great deal of time and money. And he would have to start working on it fairly early. I don’t think Trump wants to drop 400 million to run as an independent.
Ross Perot had a good size organization behind him in order to accomplish what he did in 92’ and 96’.
My prediction: Trump will be no where near the Presidential race come November of 2016.
(Hey…let’s hope I’m right
[/quote]
Don’t know what polls you are looking at, but realclearpolitics has HRC beating them all…
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_presidential_race.html
You really should provide links to these polls so that smart people can look them over.
jnd
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
And I think he’s narcissistic enough to run as a third party. [/quote]
He is and it would put Hillary in the White House if he does.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]OldOgre wrote:
I highly doubt that Trump will win the nomination. I think that the real question is whether or not the GOP nominee has the balls to make Trump their VP candidate. I doubt any of them would do it and I doubt that he would agree to do it, but it may be the only way the GOP wins the election.[/quote]
It could be the only way the GOP loses the election.
Trump is toxic.
But just like alcohol you have to take in enough of it before you start to feel its negative effects.
Trump won’t be around in November of 2016 as the more the voters get to hear him the more they will start to dislike him.
In fact, in one recent poll his negatives are already up to 60%. That even passes Hillary Clinton’s negatives. Trump is a sideshow and that show has a closing date in the not to distant future.[/quote]
True enough, Zeb.
BUT Trump’s ego could push him to run as a 3rd Party Candidate.
I think that the best thing the GOP could do at this point is to NOT make him an enemy.
Mufasa[/quote]
Well I certainly agree with that. I think there is a rule that says “never tick off a billionaire.” And if there isn’t one there ought to be.
Either way however I don’t see Trump mattering all that much by the time we get to November of 2016. I think the press will give him the Herman Cain treatment. When has a front runner this early ever made it to the White House. I’m not completely sure but I don’t think it’s ever happened.
[quote]jnd wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]OldOgre wrote:
I highly doubt that Trump will win the nomination. I think that the real question is whether or not the GOP nominee has the balls to make Trump their VP candidate. I doubt any of them would do it and I doubt that he would agree to do it, but it may be the only way the GOP wins the election.[/quote]
The GOP is going to lose and it’s going to be because of Trump, who’s an asshole. Maybe next time Kim Kardashian will run to officially making voting pointless. [/quote]
The GOP is going to win!
And they will win because just about everyone of the GOP contenders can beat Hillary. And early polls are demonstrating that when asked “if the election were held today who would you vote for?” They used Bush, Rubio and Walker and each of them beats Hillary. Many of the others would do just as well.
I don’t think Trump will even jump in as a third party spoiler because he will be so unpopular by that time even he will know he has no chance of changing the outcome. Also, people forget that in order to run a third party you have to get on the ballot in each state independently. That is no small task it takes a great deal of time and money. And he would have to start working on it fairly early. I don’t think Trump wants to drop 400 million to run as an independent.
Ross Perot had a good size organization behind him in order to accomplish what he did in 92’ and 96’.
My prediction: Trump will be no where near the Presidential race come November of 2016.
(Hey…let’s hope I’m right
[/quote]
Don’t know what polls you are looking at, but realclearpolitics has HRC beating them all…
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_presidential_race.html
You really should provide links to these polls so that smart people can look them over.
jnd[/quote]
You are correct, I assume that everyone follows this stuff as closely as I do but that’s no excuse.
I already posted the national poll which shows Hillary’s high negatives. Here is the poll which shows her losing to republican candidates in three key states:
I don’t know if it would be the same as Cain, Zeb, because Trump has pretty much been an open book for as long as I can remember.
Unless he has a secret, Gay, Mexican lover…I don’t think that there is a “smoking gun” that can derail him.
In fact…I have a suspicion that he’ll eventually derail himself.
Mufasa
I have to hand it to Donald Trump. I always knew it was his main skill but he’s been truly masterful at garnering himself attention. He’s successfully managed to get people who hate his guts to help push him to the top of the GOP polls.
No matter what he says or does, the media and political establishment eats it up and lets the public know about it. It was ridiculous how many editorials the WaPo dedicated to him. For about a week, he had 2 or 3 OpEds a day dedicated to him. That was probably common among other major papers. He’s been a hot topic at all the cable news stations and political radio. I’m not impressed with his ideas or business accomplishments but I am impressed at how he plays politicians and the US media to his own benefit. I don’t think anyone predicted he would poll better after his John McCain episode, but he did.
I don’t see why he would quit. He is winning and although he’s had to take some lumps (NBC, Univision, etc) I think he’s going to end up richer for the effort. He makes money through his name and his name will continue to get bigger if he continues this spectacle.
It’s doubtful he’d have any personal problem playing spoiler as an independent. Why would he? I doubt he gives a shit if its Hillary or Walker who ends up as POTUS. He already feels disrespected by the GOP. Sure there’s some hassle re: running as an independent but there’s not a compelling reason why he couldn’t successfully do it.
I’d be worried if I was dead set on having the GOP win in 2016. Trump cares about himself and his net worth. He could give a fuck about the GOP and its future. It could be myopic to assume he’s just going to go away. I thought he was too much of a clown from the start, yet here he is, king of the polls and media presence.
jnd and all,
This very clearly points out that voters in Colorado Iowa and Virginia (three key democratic states) don’t much care for Hillary:
http://thehillarydaily.com/voters_dont_like_or_trust-_hillary/
Keep in mind that Obama won all three states in 2012 and they will need to win all three again if Hillary is going to take the White House. Those three states comprise a total of 29 electoral votes. Colorado-9, Iowa-7 and Virginia 13.
Here is a map of the 2012 race:
Finally, it is very early in the Presidential race and anything can happen. But, while other candidates are attempting to win support and get peoples attention most already know who Hillary is and many don’t like her. And every time they dust her off and put her out there her numbers either don’t change, or her negatives take a bump up.
They have a towering task trying to sell that woman as trustworthy and Presidential. It can be done because almost anything can be done. But, they have an incredible up hill battle.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
I don’t know if it would be the same as Cain, Zeb, because Trump has pretty much been an open book for as long as I can remember.
Unless he has a secret, Gay, Mexican lover…I don’t think that there is a “smoking gun” that can derail him.
In fact…I have a suspicion that he’ll eventually derail himself.
Mufasa[/quote]
Well, the news today about Trump raping his first wife hit. And his lawyer stating “you can’t rape your wife” didn’t help much with female republicans. So, the press is definitely NOT on Trump’s side.
But overall I totally agree with you. Trump will derail himself. In fact, it has already begun with comments about war hero McCain. Sure McCain is a stooge as a politician but a politically smart person separates that from his war record. Trump I feel is tone deaf when it comes to politics and I think that particular problem is just about the worst thing that any would-be Presidential candidate can have. You can always raise more money if you’re rising in the polls. But, you can never clear up that politically tone deaf problem. Other candidates have had it in the past and they fall like a heavy stone hitting the deep blue sea.
No one knows when it will happen, but it WILL happen. Possibly during the upcoming debate? He is shallow on the issues, a one answer guy who has no substance. Will he be shown up by the many republicans in the race that actually know what is going on in the world? Will it take more than one debate?
It’s near impossible to predict how or when Trump falls. But he will fall it’s just a matter of time.