Debate Now The 2016 Campaign, Election and Aftermath

[Foxfyre]

At this point Trump. I would take him in a heartbeat over Bernie or Hillary. I can't stand Cruz or Kasich. Rubio was OK at first, then turned into a whiny little beyatch. Initially I loved Ben Carson, but as time went on it was very clear that 1) He was in way over his head 2) He did not have the disposition to be President.

Overall I'm not sure how much it matters. The only reason I will vote Trump is he will throw some chaos into the system, which is corrupt to the core in both parties.

The only hope we have is to burn both parties to the ground and start over, but I'm not sure the will of the American people is strong enough to make that happen.

You won't throw chaos into the system. It will be the same as it has been. Trump even promised as much.

Could you elaborate a bit on what you mean by this?

 

[Trump.Stamped]

At this point Trump. I would take him in a heartbeat over Bernie or Hillary. I can't stand Cruz or Kasich. Rubio was OK at first, then turned into a whiny little beyatch. Initially I loved Ben Carson, but as time went on it was very clear that 1) He was in way over his head 2) He did not have the disposition to be President.

Overall I'm not sure how much it matters. The only reason I will vote Trump is he will throw some chaos into the system, which is corrupt to the core in both parties.

The only hope we have is to burn both parties to the ground and start over, but I'm not sure the will of the American people is strong enough to make that happen.

You won't throw chaos into the system. It will be the same as it has been. Trump even promised as much.

Oh, there will be some.

 

[Foxfyre]

At this point Trump. I would take him in a heartbeat over Bernie or Hillary. I can't stand Cruz or Kasich. Rubio was OK at first, then turned into a whiny little beyatch. Initially I loved Ben Carson, but as time went on it was very clear that 1) He was in way over his head 2) He did not have the disposition to be President.

Overall I'm not sure how much it matters. The only reason I will vote Trump is he will throw some chaos into the system, which is corrupt to the core in both parties.

The only hope we have is to burn both parties to the ground and start over, but I'm not sure the will of the American people is strong enough to make that happen.

You won't throw chaos into the system. It will be the same as it has been. Trump even promised as much.

Oh, there will be some.

There always is. Whoever is elected will be immediately attacked by some factions. There is almost no grace period of favorable political capital that comes with the job now.

And yes. Those who enjoy and benefit from the status quo are going to squeal like stuck pigs and fight like hell if anybody attempts to mess with that.

So if Trump by some miracle makes it past the GOP establishment to get the nomination and then survives the general election to become President, we'll see. I know if that happens I will have a sense of hope and anticipation along with a degree of uncertainty instead of the certain dread I will feel if Hillary or Bernie are elected.

 

[Crixus]

At this point Trump. I would take him in a heartbeat over Bernie or Hillary. I can't stand Cruz or Kasich. Rubio was OK at first, then turned into a whiny little beyatch. Initially I loved Ben Carson, but as time went on it was very clear that 1) He was in way over his head 2) He did not have the disposition to be President.

Overall I'm not sure how much it matters. The only reason I will vote Trump is he will throw some chaos into the system, which is corrupt to the core in both parties.

The only hope we have is to burn both parties to the ground and start over, but I'm not sure the will of the American people is strong enough to make that happen.

You won't throw chaos into the system. It will be the same as it has been. Trump even promised as much.

Could you elaborate a bit on what you mean by this?

Sorry, I was eating lunch and stuff. The reason nothing will change is because Donald Trump is and has been schmoozing the RNC. Take the stuff his new campaign manager was recorded saying. Then there is the stuff he told the times about the wall and all that, not to mention all the money he has given, I have a hard time believing that he being the business man he is just gave it away. Na, favors are owed. His whole past has been going along to get along. If he wins and it's a huge IF, nothing will change and he has said as much, just not out right. As. It is, he will face Hillary and the media will eat him alive, while they kill him with a thousand cuts. At this point, I may skip the presidential election, write someone in and hope that the house and Senate will be of like mind to jam Hillary up for four years.

 

[Crixus]

At this point Trump. I would take him in a heartbeat over Bernie or Hillary. I can't stand Cruz or Kasich. Rubio was OK at first, then turned into a whiny little beyatch. Initially I loved Ben Carson, but as time went on it was very clear that 1) He was in way over his head 2) He did not have the disposition to be President.

Overall I'm not sure how much it matters. The only reason I will vote Trump is he will throw some chaos into the system, which is corrupt to the core in both parties.

The only hope we have is to burn both parties to the ground and start over, but I'm not sure the will of the American people is strong enough to make that happen.

You won't throw chaos into the system. It will be the same as it has been. Trump even promised as much.

Oh, there will be some.

I do hope so.

 

[Foxfyre]

At this point Trump. I would take him in a heartbeat over Bernie or Hillary. I can't stand Cruz or Kasich. Rubio was OK at first, then turned into a whiny little beyatch. Initially I loved Ben Carson, but as time went on it was very clear that 1) He was in way over his head 2) He did not have the disposition to be President.

Overall I'm not sure how much it matters. The only reason I will vote Trump is he will throw some chaos into the system, which is corrupt to the core in both parties.

The only hope we have is to burn both parties to the ground and start over, but I'm not sure the will of the American people is strong enough to make that happen.

You won't throw chaos into the system. It will be the same as it has been. Trump even promised as much.

Could you elaborate a bit on what you mean by this?

Sorry, I was eating lunch and stuff. The reason nothing will change is because Donald Trump is and has been schmoozing the RNC. Take the stuff his new campaign manager was recorded saying. Then there is the stuff he told the times about the wall and all that, not to mention all the money he has given, I have a hard time believing that he being the business man he is just gave it away. Na, favors are owed. His whole past has been going along to get along. If he wins and it's a huge IF, nothing will change and he has said as much, just not out right. As. It is, he will face Hillary and the media will eat him alive, while they kill him with a thousand cuts. At this point, I may skip the presidential election, write someone in and hope that the house and Senate will be of like mind to jam Hillary up for four years.

That certainly hits all the assigned anti-Trump talking points, but I am not ready to accept those as anything other than the normal uncivil political rhetoric that gets thrown around in every election season. As for the media, they haven't been able to eat him alive so far have they even though they've thrown everything including the kitchen sink at him. But just as Reagan did in 1980, Trump has been able to turn most of that to his advantage. Both men have been brilliant in that sense.

And if you judge a candidate by his campaign rhetoric, you won't elect anybody. They ALL say they'll do this and they'll do that when they and we all know a President cannot do much of anything about that on his own--they all need to get the cooperation of a whole bunch of other people to accomplish those promises. All we have to go on is their voting record and/or other track record as to what skill sets they will bring. And the campaign rhetoric gives us a gist of what kinds of legislation they would likely sign or veto.

 

[Shrimpbox]

I liked what I just saw at Donald trumps victory speech Fox. He takes on all comers and won't back down. You can bet Hilary wouldn't ever answer any impromptu questions at her victory lap. Is this a dream?

 

[Foxfyre]

I liked what I just saw at Donald trumps victory speech Fox. He takes on all comers and won't back down. You can bet Hilary wouldn't ever answer any impromptu questions at her victory lap. Is this a dream?

He has been doing a lot of these Q&A things lately, and he is really really good at it. Hillary did the usual victory speech except that her tone is now changing as she is starting to reach out for those Sanders voters. And so is Trump I noticed. . .as he is now encouraging Sanders to run as third party. And wouldn't that be a hoot. He knows darn good and well Sanders wouldn't draw any Trump supporters. . .but. . .

 

[Foxfyre]

And in the latest "Super Tuesday" today, Trump went 5 for 5 in all five states and apparently won every single county in all five states netting close to 60% or over 60% of the popular vote overall in every state. The only state Hillary got a higher percentage of the popular vote than Trump did was in Maryland and there just barely.

So now of course the media is playing up next Tuesday and Indiana as the make it or break it primary election. Cruz is expected to do better there but he sure did pitifully today. So we'll see how it goes.

 

[Foxfyre]

So checking the straw poll on this thread, we don't have that many votes. Based on the views for the thread, I suspect numerous people are reading in who have neither posted nor voted. And who knows why? They don't like me? They don't like this forum? They aren't interested?

But we are getting down to the end of the primary process, and all of us who will exercise our constitutional right to vote and see that as our duty as citizens are going to have to choose.

From today's Rasmussen Report, Fran Coombs, managing editor writes:

It’s moment of truth time for the #Never Trump crowd: Do you want four years of Hillary Clinton in the White House or a Republican president you strongly disagree with? . . .

. . . Last week, 83% of Republicans nationwide projected that Trump is likely to be their nominee. That number also can be expected to climb after Trump’s sweep yesterday, including wins in every single county in all five states.

In early March,18% of Republicans said they will definitely vote against Trump if he is the nominee. Rasmussen Reports is testing that question again this week and will release new numbers tomorrow morning. . .

. . . If Trump clears the 1,237-delegate hurdle, then it’s on to the general election. But if he’s a few delegates short, the Cruz, Kasich and other anti-Trump forces hope to turn some of the delegates committed to the front-runner and produce a nominee that 1,237 of those in attendance at the convention can agree on. Really?

So delegates committed to the candidate who is generating record turnouts in primary after primary are going to transfer their support to someone else all in the name of party loyalty? Let’s not forget either that that loyalty is a one-way street since it isn’t being shown to their candidate even though he played by the rules, went through the entire debate/primary/caucus process and far outdistanced his opponents in votes and delegates.

In fact, in previous election cycles, Cruz and Kasich would have dropped out by now since they have no chance of winning. Instead of staying in the game in hopes that a chaotic convention will turn to them, they would have endorsed the front-runner and called for party unity with eyes on winning the White House in November. . . .
OK, Republicans – Trump or Clinton? - Rasmussen Reports™​

 

[Foxfyre]

Another interesting poll from Rasmussen today:

. . .Trump is more toxic within his own party than Clinton is in hers. If Trump is the Republican nominee, 16% of GOP voters say they would choose a third-party candidate, while five percent (5%) would stay home. Sixty-six percent (66%) would vote for Trump, but 10% would vote for Clinton instead.

If Clinton is the Democratic nominee, 11% of Democrats would vote third-party, while three percent (3%) would stay home. Seventy-five percent (75%) would support the nominee, but 11% say they would vote for Trump.

Among voters not affiliated with either major party, nearly one-third say they would opt out: 21% would choose a candidate other than Trump or Clinton, and 10% would stay home. Trump leads Clinton 38% to 27% among unaffiliated voters. . .

24% Opt Out of a Clinton-Trump Race - Rasmussen Reports™​

 

[Toro]

Trump has a 67% negative rating, which means he's working hard to piss off the other third of Americans.

 

[Foxfyre]

Trump has a 67% negative rating, which means he's working hard to piss off the other third of Americans.

But he keeps winning state after state after state. And his negatives are improving though certainly worse than anybody else's. Today's Rasmussen's poll I posted just ahead of your post shows scenarios much improved over just a few weeks ago. And I think we will see a much more presidential and less 'insulting' Donald Trump as the nominee if that is the way it goes. He has a ton of ammunition to use against Hillary. We'll see.

 

[Toro]

Trump has a 67% negative rating, which means he's working hard to piss off the other third of Americans.

But he keeps winning state after state after state. And his negatives are improving though certainly worse than anybody else's. Today's Rasmussen's poll I posted just ahead of your post shows scenarios much improved over just a few weeks ago. And I think we will see a much more presidential and less 'insulting' Donald Trump as the nominee if that is the way it goes. He has a ton of ammunition to use against Hillary. We'll see.

So what if he's winning state after state in the primaries? Every losing Presidential candidate over the last 100 years won state after state in the primaries.

Trump supporters remind me of Cleveland Brown fans at the beginning of the season telling New England Patriots or Denver Broncos that the Browns are going to win the Super Bowl.

 

[Foxfyre]

Trump has a 67% negative rating, which means he's working hard to piss off the other third of Americans.

But he keeps winning state after state after state. And his negatives are improving though certainly worse than anybody else's. Today's Rasmussen's poll I posted just ahead of your post shows scenarios much improved over just a few weeks ago. And I think we will see a much more presidential and less 'insulting' Donald Trump as the nominee if that is the way it goes. He has a ton of ammunition to use against Hillary. We'll see.

So what if he's winning state after state in the primaries? Every losing Presidential candidate over the last 100 years won state after state in the primaries.

Trump supporters remind me of Cleveland Brown fans at the beginning of the season telling New England Patriots or Denver Broncos that the Browns are going to win the Super Bowl.

He may not win, that is true. But he is the most likely guy left standing who will be nominated to run on the GOP ticket. When it comes down to the championship fight, would you put your money on the so-so prize fighter who had only won a few minor league fights? Or on the guy who had won only one fight and barely at that? Or the one who won most of his fights and beat the odds in a lot of those?

Somebody who is nominated will win. So will it be the one with the highest negatives at this time but also more positives in more categories than the one with a possible indictment hanging over her head and very little in the way of successes or achievements along with a lot of negatives to put on her resume? Tough call.

 

[Toro]

Trump doesn't just have the highest negatives "at this times." He has the highest negatives "of all time."

Trumps net negatives - negatives minus positives - are around -40%, double that of Hillary.

He is a walking, talking Democrat strategists' dream.

But the Republican base is so riven by anger and seething with rage, they've nominated the worst candidate possible. They would rather lose to Hillary than win with a Republican "establishment" candidate.

And they will.

 

[Foxfyre]

We'll see. But while there are certainly those who vote straight GOP ticket no matter what, I think most Republicans have typically required higher standards for their standard bearers than do Democrats who are more ideologically and political party loyalist driven. But there is some anger in this election process and the Republicans are no longer so willing to just accept the status quo which is what the Democrats will have with Hillary.

So they have rejected the ideologically driven Cruz and the status quo establishment candidate Kasich and across all demographics, rich/poor/men/women etc. they are voting mostly for Trump. And independents are breaking for Trump more than they are for Hillary too when the rules allow them to vote.

So we'll see.

 

[320 Years of History]

Trump doesn't just have the highest negatives "at this times." He has the highest negatives "of all time."

Trumps net negatives - negatives minus positives - are around -40%, double that of Hillary.

He is a walking, talking Democrat strategists' dream.

But the Republican base is so riven by anger and seething with rage, they've nominated the worst candidate possible. They would rather lose to Hillary than win with a Republican "establishment" candidate.

And they will.

I don't think Republicans would sooner lose the election under any circumstance. They will, however and IMO, accede to four more years of controlling things via Congress rather than the White House.

Not considering whether I like Trump as a President or not and his own ability to lead and effect policy, I am concerned that he, like Jimmy Carter, will have a an ineffectual Presidency due to his having won the White House via populist fervor. Like Mr. Carter, Trump will not have the committed backing of establishment party members (both in Congress and in the corridors of unelected power) and he's a micromanager. I really don't want to see four more years of a Carter-esque Presidency.

 

[Foxfyre]

Me either. But I can't see Donald Trump being ineffective or incompetent at anything he sets his mind to do. He will come in as a novice at governing for sure and will almost certainly make some mistakes. But everybody makes mistakes anyway, even if they have experience. There is no job on earth that prepares somebody to be a super knowledgeable, effective, efficient President of the United States from the first day on the job.

But if he picks the right people to advise him, and selects a running mate with governing experience, I think he might surprise us all at how effective he would be as POTUS.

But even if he was terrible, he would still be better than Hillary.

 

[Shrimpbox]

As Rush said today it is negatives in a vacuum. Every pr diction of trumps demise has been wrong. Democrats are trying to force the PERCEPTION to be the fact and it will not happen with Donald trump, because he will fight back. That has been the problem in the last two presidential elections. The spotlight will not be only how bad trump is but also how much worse Hilary is, if she even makes it past the fbi primary.

And the strategy is really easy. How can anyone be worse than Obama. Failure after failure after failure. 10 trillion in debt, who could do worse? A healthcare system stood on its head in order to be in worse shape than we were 8 years ago. Worse race relations, worse outcomes for blacks, no increase in wages, less net worth for middle class, my fingers get tired typing in all of obamas failures. Hilary's the third term of Obama, more failure. And you can best believe trumps gonna ask all the African Americans how much longer they want to live and suffer on the democratic plantation. Latinos might just find trumps job agenda more believable than Hilary's. For trump anything is possible, the sky is the limit. For Hilary, she can only hope that the media will focus strictly on trump, because she cannot stand the light of day.