The Trump/Republican Primary/General Election Megathread

[bwframe]

RUH ROH, the NeverTrumpers may not get the Hillary victory they are hoping for...


Fox News Poll: Trump narrows Clinton's lead | Fox News


Trump is within the margin of error on the latest FNC poll.

Back to looking more favorable to those of us who are Pro Second Amendment.

 

[mcapo]

Trump stayed on message in Mexico - but for how long....

 

[foszoe]

RUH ROH, the NeverTrumpers may not get the Hillary victory they are hoping for...


Fox News Poll: Trump narrows Clinton's lead | Fox News


Trump is within the margin of error on the latest FNC poll.

Back to looking more favorable to those of us who are Pro Second Amendment.

National Polls vs Electoral polls er polls=votes


Al Gore knows the difference..

 

[BugI02]

Rubio won his primary last night, and now challenging his opponent to six debates, including one on Spanish TV.

Gee, we could have had this... but instead we have Amnesty Don.

Rubio challenges Murphy to six debates, including one on Spanish TV

Yeah, well we could have had Jim Webb on the other side instead of Sauron.

But we don't

"You Go To War With The Army You Have---not The Army You Might Want Or Wish To Have At A Later Time."

 

[BugI02]

It just occurred to me what Trump should do about the illegal immigration. I'll totally freak out if his idea is anything like this.

Tie immigration to trade. The illegal aliens are from other countries (obviously). For those countries that agree to beneficial trade deals (beneficial for us, potentially not so much for them), their people can have a path to citizenship. Maybe we even talk about special visas/immigration procedures.

Basically, make it more win-win (with more winning for us). Maybe there are already some countries (like Canada) who have a very small number of illegal aliens that we just don't worry about. (Before you mock me for the Canada thing, there really are some from there.)

Seems to me we could have a country-specific policy. It is a non-traditional approach, but it might be a good compromise.

I thought we already had this. You contribute $100k and up to the Clinton Foundation and your application is considered on an individual basis.

IIRC Khizr Khan's 'law' practice revolved around being a facilitator

 

[jamil]

You're right. Getting Hillary will be sooooo much better.

Arguably the Indiana GOP Primary sealed Hillary 's coronation.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Pena Nieto says he told Trump that Mexico won't pay for border wall, contradicting Trump, who says it was not discussed.

 

[foszoe]

Arguably the Indiana GOP Primary sealed Hillary 's coronation.

I understand where you are coming from ( I think).

Lets take a step back though......

Who should we really say got us to where were are, the voters or the candidates?

 

[jamil]

I understand where you are coming from ( I think).

Lets take a step back though......

Who should we really say got us to where were are, the voters or the candidates?

Well, of the field of 17 I probably would have supported maybe any one of a dozen. Picking a guy who has consistently earned the dislike of ~2/3s of GOP voters seems not to have been a wise choice.

 

[Ericpwp]

Picking a guy who has consistently earned the dislike of ~2/3s of GOP voters seems not to have been a wise choice.

Well, he did win an election.

 

[foszoe]

Well, of the field of 17 I probably would have supported maybe any one of a dozen. Picking a guy who has consistently earned the dislike of ~2/3s of GOP voters seems not to have been a wise choice.

Is that a fault of party rules or the voter base?

 

[jbombelli]

Well, of the field of 17 I probably would have supported maybe any one of a dozen. Picking a guy who has consistently earned the dislike of ~2/3s of GOP voters seems not to have been a wise choice.

Then those 2/3 should have voted in the primaries maybe?


They stayed home instead of supporting someone when it mattered most.

 

[bwframe]

It's looking like a pretty good day for President Trump.

 

[Arm America]

It's looking like a pretty good day for President Trump.

And hopefully a better day for America if he he wins.

 

[nate77]

Well, he did win an election.

Elections are for suckers, the party elites should pick the candidate; stupid voters cant be trusted with such an important task.

 

[Expat]

Interesting coverage of the Trump Immigration speech on the Today Show this morning. Tim Kane was their guest analyst. Between Tim, Savannah and Matt about all they could discuss was the question of whether Trump was lying about about not discussing Mexico paying for the wall in his meeting with the Mexican President. If he wasn't lying about it, then he was a coward for not bringing it up... Seemed like some pretty objective analysis.

 

[T.Lex]

Well, Trump is all over the place.

He looked terribly uncomfortable while trying to look presidential when he met with Pena Nieto. His speeches have been scattershot on what should be his core issue (immigration). His position can be nuanced/complicated/evolving, but it can't be muddy. It is muddy. Either that or his efforts to communicate it have been.

Either way it doesn't look good.

For those of you relying on national polls for good news about Trump's campaign, go to 270towin.com and check out the electoral map. They have various ones you can start with, then click on states that you think will go for Trump. Post what the final numbers look like to you.

 

[jamil]

Is that a fault of party rules or the voter base?

Oh, I think there are many fault's causing this mess. We have a choice between the two least liked candidates in history. They're both turds. And the blame can be spread around. On the D side, it's more obvious that their nominee is largely the Party's doing. Emails showing the Party actively working for the candidate they want, as well as actively collaborating with the press to get it. Still, yes, on their side, voters are also to blame even if to a lesser extent than Republicans.

On the Republican side, there are also many things to blame. The GOPe created the climate in which a turd could actually gain the fierce loyalty of enough minions to take the nomination despite the availability of better, more competent candidates on the ballot. So they're partly to blame. Party rules? On the Dem side, sure. On the GOPe side, maybe to some extent. And certainly, to jbomb's point, the people who didn't show up also shared some blame. But more on that later. So no, I think Trumpers are responsible for a significant share of the blame--as much blame for foisting that particular turd on the American electorate as those guilty white folks share for foisting upon us one of the worst Presidents in US history. I don't care the race of the POTUS, but voting "Black" as a virtue signal is a pretty ****ty reason to choose.

So basically, yes. I get to blame Trumpers if Hillary wins. And I get to blame Trumpers if Trump wins and proves himself to be the turd he smells like. And that notwithstanding, the biggest culprit is something that is a given, we will always have an electoral system that has the potential to exploit the human psyche and allow used car salesmen like Hillary and Trump to con people out of their fierce loyalty. If I were to give something the lyon's share of the blame it would be our voting system.

Then those 2/3 should have voted in the primaries maybe?


They stayed home instead of supporting someone when it mattered most.

This is a big part of it. Even though primary voting was much heavier this time, it typically isn't. The most partisan voters are the ones that are the most likely to show up to vote. So yeah. The Republicans who wanted someone else, stayed home. But staggered primaries really ****s things up. By the time Hoosiers got to vote, there was only a choice between Trump and the 2nd least liked candidate in the GOP race, Cruz. The primary system worked perfectly to allow the most radical choices to come out on top. Better candidates had already been eliminated through a system that allows things that shouldn't matter, to matter.

 

[jamil]

Well, Trump is all over the place.

He looked terribly uncomfortable while trying to look presidential when he met with Pena Nieto. His speeches have been scattershot on what should be his core issue (immigration). His position can be nuanced/complicated/evolving, but it can't be muddy. It is muddy. Either that or his efforts to communicate it have been.

Either way it doesn't look good.

For those of you relying on national polls for good news about Trump's campaign, go to 270towin.com and check out the electoral map. They have various ones you can start with, then click on states that you think will go for Trump. Post what the final numbers look like to you.

that's what happens when you don't have enough political experience to pander to all the largest factions without pissing off your base. Trump went all in on "the wall" strategy. And now when he needs to court the other side, he basically has to abandon the thing that hooked his support in the first place. But it may work out for him. Fierce loyalty, once gained, is a powerful agent of prolonged deceit.

 

[T.Lex]

that's what happens when you don't have enough political experience to pander to all the largest factions without pissing off your base. Trump went all in on "the wall" strategy. And now when he needs to court the other side, he basically has to abandon the thing that hooked his support in the first place. But it may work out for him. Fierce loyalty, once gained, is a powerful agent of prolonged deceit.

Yeah, but the numbers of fierce loyalists in the right places don't appear to be there. One problem with populism is that the EC isn't linked to popularity. (Yeah, I know, ranked voting blah blah blah.)