So Trump can’t beat Hillary?
Those of you decreeing disaster for the Republican Party in November, Breitbart has compiled some interesting data from the Indiana primary that you may want to ponder before continuing your tirade against Trump. Various sources have been reporting that overall Democrat turnout is down this year, and of that reduced turnout, a significant portion belongs to Bernie Sanders, as it did in Indiana this past Tuesday. Conversely, the Trump movement has been ginning up voter turnout numbers since the primary season started. Tuesday’s numbers bear that out.
According to Breitbart’s authoritative sources*, Democrat primary turnout in Indiana in 2016 was 628,433, dropping 50.84% from the 2008 turnout, when Hillary last ran there, of 1,278,355. Hillary’s share of that was a 2016 figure of 296,988, down a huge 54.05% from 2008, when she captured 646,282 votes.
Now compare those dramatic declines in the Democrat vote with the Republican primary history from Indiana. In 2016, the overall Republican turnout in Indiana’s primary was up a whopping 73.35% from 2012, with 1,101,777 votes cast this year as opposed to 635,589 in the earlier primary. Back in 2012, frontrunner Mitt Romney garnered 410,635 votes compared to the total of 587,273 for Donald Trump this year, an increase of 43.02%.
Looking back at state primaries from earlier this year, this 2016 Republican surge vs. a Democrat decline appears to be a trend that defies the proclamations from pouting pundits and partisan pollsters that Donald can’t do it in November.
*Breitbart News compiled this data analysis from information purchased from Dave Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections. That data, available at USElectionAtlas.org, is widely used by academics and media organizations including the New York Times, The Economist, Harvard, Columbia, Cornell, and many more reputable organizations.
The 2016 totals were based on the latest numbers put forward by the New York Times at 11 a.m. ET on Wednesday May 4, the day after the primary, so they will change slightly as final totals shift into place.
Crossposted at American Thinker
Category: Politics
Poe, at the end of the day Trump may or may not be just what they need but the reality is the Republicans and the Democrats completely misunderstood the intent behind both sets of midterms….neither was a new mandate for conservatism even though several new tea party style politicians were elected those midterms both meant a simple repudiation of the Obama administration. It didn’t signal a turn towards a more conservative America. That’s never going to happen again. Republicans need to figure out just what the hell their party wants to be moving forward. Neither party can win an election without the dreaded independents…those folks who don’t subscribe firmly to the politics of either party’s extreme platforms but land instead somewhere in the middle…and that middle is increasingly socially more relaxed and financially more responsible. Issues like abortion and cake baking or where to take a piss hardly matter at all to independents but jobs and economic security do. It is now and always has been the economy, and Hillary Clinton isn’t considered by very many people to be the answer to the job issue like Trump is or even Sanders with his whacky left job pronouncements….people terrified to retire or invest or concerned about whether or not they’ll have a job in a couple of years don’t give a flying fuck about diversity and the feelings of illegals or the devastation that gay marriage will wreak upon the nation. Paul Ryan et al don’t understand that their vision for America was soundly rejected by the voters, voters who are turning out en masse to vote for Trump in numbers that are almost unimaginable for a Republican primary. If they a stronger object lesson than that I would submit they are too fucking stupid or idealistic to understand the voters don’t want what they’re selling anymore and have been proving that for 24 years…when was the last time the Republicans had a supermajority? A quick check of Democratic supermajorities should shake the shit of their Republican heads but I’m not counting on it… This has been a truly amazing primary… Read more »
Problem is, VOV, is that the Republicans AREN’T conservative, they’re just Democrat-lite.
Which is one reason I don’t claim to be a Republican anymore, and haven’t for over a decade now.
>>Issues like abortion and cake baking or where to take a piss hardly matter at all to independents but jobs and economic security do.
This is the truest thing I have read all day.
No, they really don’t matter, but they are being FORCED to matter.
When a person is sued because they don’t want to bake a cake and are punished by losing their business, home and life savings, then that is a problem that needs to be corrected.
We may not have wanted these kind of things to matter, because they shouldn’t, but with the “You will think the right thoughts” attitude of the left we have to fight them over it.
Now we shall wait for Lars to come and tell me how much of a hater I am for having wrong thoughts.
Those voting for Trump are voting against Hillary. Those voting for Hillary are voting against Trump.
Nobody to vote for.
The Republican Congress now has to think they can control Hillary more than Trump.
The beast vs the clown. What has America done to deserve such a miserable dilemma? “Don’t blame me, I voted for Kodos”
Great episode!
“Well I believe I’ll vote for a third-party candidate!”
“Go ahead, throw your vote away!”
Being as the Indiana primary is an open primary, I have to wonder how many of the votes cast for Trump were cast by cross-over Democrats… If the number is large, it could also explain the drop in votes cast in the Democrat primary.
IM(not so)HO – what we are seeing is the consequence of folks who make decisions based upon emotions, not reasoning.
Like a high-school boy… little head vs big head.
I suspect the drop from 2008 in the Dems is more because of not having Obama in the mix than a huge drop for her. She got more or less 50% of the vote each time.
Romney got 410K out of 635K, approximately 65%. Trump got 587K out of 1.1 million, about 53%. There’s always a bigger turnout when there is a serious race between party candidates. I’m not all that convinced that the numbers show much other than Breitbart supporting Trump.
Breitbart’s support of Trump bordered on fanboyism.
They once had a viable reputation. They are a clownshow now.
Lars, you should realize that your credibility is such that if you said the sky was blue, we’d look out the window to check for ourselves.
I am not a “journalist” and you are not my peer group.
Your perception of my credibility is irrelevant to me.
Most of you carry little credibility with me either.
You are among the top 5 least people I have the least respect for on this forum or any other.
I really don’t give a fuck, Lars. Because you’re a liar and a self-righteous asshole. I may be an asshole, but I’m neither self-righteous nor a liar. Once again, nobody likes you. Now kindly fuck off.
Then stop engaging with me you. Seriously, you just keep replying to my posts. Like a little basement internet troll.
And your not agreeing with more or not seeing things the way I see them does not make me a liar.
Correct, my disagreeing with you does not make you a liar. You repeatedly lying makes you a liar.
And seriously, “stop engaging with me you?” Who the hell taught you to write?
So you are saying that Breitbart is to Trump what MSNBC is to the entire Democratic Party.
That being said, Hillary is going to see her poll numbers fall, just like they did during her race against Lazio in NY and during the last primary.
I can’t stand either one of the candidates and think that we should select the winner by putting them both in the Thunderdome and letting them fight it out to the death.
^^THAT^^
Most media sources have been fairly biased this election season.
Astonishingly to me Fox news has been less biased than NPR this season.
Which is insane to me.
But Brietbart has been among the worst.
I do not watch or read MSNBC but I did see a few of their news clips over the last several months. Not enough to have an opinion on them right now.
Well, considering that Lars is a fucking clown, I guess he would know a clown show when he sees one.
Shit I hit report by mistake. I was lol’ing so hard I fucked up the buttons I was looking at. He is the clown shoe in the clown show.
A couple of things to consider with the data sets. In 2008 the Obama effect really drove up voter participation in northwest Indiana, while McCain had already clinched the nomination.
In 2012, while Romney had yet to clinch the nomination, he was essentially so far ahead that voter turnout didn’t spike.
The real issue IS the economy. We are now on the doorstep of a recession. Whether or not the Fed decides to actually raise the prime interest rate will have a great deal to do with what happens in the Fall. And if Yellen continue to waffle until the last minute, and then slaps a 1/2% hike on the prime rate, it will definitely send us further toward a recession.
The question for me is not who is in my bathroom, but who will be the most likely to find valid and sustainable ways to keep the economy from going into the tank.
That is behind this voting season, and everyone knows it.
This is totally confusing. The GOP had primaries and debates with 17 candidates trying to be the party leader. At the end Trump is standing. So now the GOP is saying, no no no, hes not OUR choice. Well…he’s the people “Republicans” choice. If the GOP doesn’t get behind him, pretty soon. The people that voted for him will say, you can’t back who we pick, then I guess we can’t support your ticket. The Senate, House, Supreme Court picks and ObamaCare will be lost too.. I do not understand..why did the GOP have primaries and debates if they aren’t backing the winner?
CORRECTION
meant to say “the repealing of ObamaCare will be lost”
Sarge, they’re pissed because they lost control of the process and were denied their right to handpick a suitable candidate who won’t rock their comfortable ruling-class boat. One outcome of all this is that we’ll be able to grade the GOP elites as to just how elitist they are. The most elite will be those who hold out the longest from supporting the Republican candidate. My money is on Bill Kristol.
I agree Poe. Just sad it has to be this way. I, myself, cannot get into politics cause I’m set in my ways.. I’m guessing there are people there that need to go fishin’ leave Washington and just go. Just sad that if they don’t get behind Trump the GOP will lose the House, Senate and a lot more. Just stupid.
Always thought that we compromise on things. Thought what people believed it was fine as long as we worked together.. This… my way or the highway is just wrong.
I’m sure there were commanders we hated, but we did our job. I’m sure we didn’t like some things and stood up for other things, but we were a team and got it done. Trump is not Cruz nor Rubio nor Bush nor any of the others, he’s Trump. He won fair and square. Just so confusing. Thanks Have a safe weekend..
I think Trump has a good chance of beating Hillary.
1. Hillary on leads Trump by about 4-8 points in national polls. This is not an insurmountable lead.
2. Hillary really has no more supporter to gain. Either people like her or they don’t. She is not going to win more fans beyond the (anti-Trump) vote.
3. Trump’s rhetoric will change moving forward. Especially once he officially secured the nomination. He will try to appeal to moderates and disenfranchised progressives. He really has a lot of voters he could potentially capture.
4. While I expect Trump will have more absurd statements and more cringeworthy positions his popularity and support seems pretty resilient. They are pretty much fine with him being giant blowhard narcissistic idiot bigot. It does not seem to cost him his supporters.
5. Hillary, on the other hand, really cannot afford more controversy. Some of her support is based on people clinging to paper thin lies about how much she is committed to dealing with the progressive issues they care about. Hillary does not carry about progressive causes and only supports them to the extent that it is political advantageous to do so. He lies are wearing thin and more and more progressives are seeing her for the opportunistic sociopath she is.
6. Hillary does not motivate voters. Her supporters pride themselves on being pragmatic voters supporting “more of the same” status quo political power structures. “More of the same” does not motivate people to turn out to vote. Even among supporters.
7. At any time Hillary may find herself dealing with both a campaign and a federal investigation that has moved into a more public awareness with potential criminal charges at stake. This could knock the wind out of her self righteous support base.
Okay, cut the crap you phony. We’re on to you. You can’t possibly be Lars, not being this factual and reasonable.
Where did you hide Lars’ body?
All my irritating typos are intact. It is like a fingerprint.
Hmm, that’s true. So…you’ve over-medicated?
No, it’s Lars. I recognize and can vouch for the typos.
But for once, Lars makes some good points.
Shrillary is no more a progressive than I’m a box of chocolate-covered caramels. She’s only in this for the money and the power she can gain.
Good analysis, but there is more to be uncovered as the actual autumn election draws closer.
The only thing I disagree with is the Trump persona. He’s a loud-mouthed blowhard, yes, but he can switch from that to pound-dealing in a hearbeat. He tends to be a butthead, which may be something that both Houses of Congress need to have thrown at them. They are too complacent, locked into their tenure the way Dan Madigan is locked into his 30 years in the Illinois State legislature.
I do think it is far past time that some fresh air was let into Congress overall. Trump may be able to do that.
Still, I’m waiting to see how long Yellen holds off raising the prime interest rate. I think she’s waiting for that moment when it’s going to land on someone else’s shoulders and slide the US further into a serious recession.
OK, Lars, so as a person of the left, I have to ask: What will the erstwhile Bernie supporters do?
I find it really hard to believe they’ll stay home or vote for Nader or write in Sanders name.
They may hold their noses, but I’d still bet most of them will pull the lever for Hillary.
Democrats learned in 2000 and 2004 what a “protest” vote will do, and I just can’t believe they’d do it again.
I can’t speak for everyone, but I, for one, will write-in someone. Either Bernie or Mickey Mouse, maybe Saddam if I feel particularly cheeky that day. Makes about the same difference.
To me it is the only logical think to do. If both of the major party candidates are “unvotable” on principle, then I will not play games by voting against someone by giving my support to someone I dislike. The way I see it, we all get one vote, but no guarantees that we get what we want. Tampering with the democratic process by voting strategically is dishonest, IMO. I could see this as being a good year for the Libertarian crowd, if they can get their shit together this time. On the other hand, my wife will absolutely vote against Trump by giving Hilary her support, so what do I know?
Two questions for you to ponder Some Guy:
1. Do you own guns?
2. Do you want to keep them?
Come on, get real. Do you truly believe that even if a law calling for the confiscation of firearms were to pass in congress, that anyone would be suicidal enough to enforce it? A friend of mine, who is a cop, said the day such a law passes is the day he turns in his badge. As a guardsman I don’t have that flexibility, but I do have the duty to refuse illegal orders, so that is what I’d do if it ever came to that.
Regardless, I honestly don’t believe that could happen in the current political climate, even if Hillary won. Sorry to disappoint you. 🙂
Here’s real for you, soldier: Hillary Clinton is elected and appoints two Supreme Court replacements in her first year that the Republican-controlled Senate feels are moderate enough to approve. A year after those two are seated on the Court, a blue state brings a gun-challenge law to the Supreme Court, where in determining the disposition of that case, the Court rules that the 2d Amendment guaranteed right to bear arms pertains only to organized military forces, federal and state.
That ruling then becomes the law of the land and operating under that law, various blue states enact voluntary weapons surrender laws followed by involuntary weapons confiscation for holdouts.
At that point, soldier, if you happen to be in the Guard in one of those states, the order to confiscate is LEGAL and you therefore have no standing under the UCMJ to refuse it.
That’s how it gets real…
There are all kinds of folks in Australia and Great Britain who scoffed at the idea that their guns could be taken away. Ask them if it’s real now.
I’m not trying to start an argument with you, I’m simply pointing out that taking your vote lightly because your side doesn’t have a perfect candidate can have real and lasting consequences. And if you don’t think the Democrats want to confiscate our guns, you’re not listening to what they’re saying.
I’d like to point out, Poetrooper, that in both Australia and Great Britain, people are still allowed to own guns for hunting and target shooting.
True, but did you notice that when they finally dumped that fruitcake liberal prime minister and got a conservative back in charge, there was no move to reinstate ownership of any type of weaponry that could pose a threat to government?
NO central government, liberal or conservative, truly wants to govern a seriously armed populace. If it weren’t for fear of an armed uprising, I think our own federal government would have tried long ago to at least limit gun ownership.
As I point out to Some Guy, the most likely scenario for doing so is incrementally, starting with blue states backed by a liberal Supreme Court.
Martinjmpr thinks there are too many gun owners in America to ever allow that to happen. But when that percentage of ownership is reduced gradually and incrementally, there comes a point when the percentage is low enough to make it entirely possible.
This is true, but if Cameron’s government does not do something about the rise of radical Islamists in the UK, he’s going to have the same episode of London Burning that happened in 2011, and what good will antigun laws do then?
As of the election in London, today, they have a muslim mayor of their city. That’ll work out well.
Boris Johnson is aiming at Cameron’s office next election.
You forget Poetrooper, Trump is as anti 2A as Hillary.
He only changed his position when he was called on it during one of the debates. Before that he was supporting Obama’s gun control push that happened after Sandy Hook.
He is just as much a NY Liberal Democrat as Hillary so don’t think that somehow he is going to be picking conservatives for the SCOTUS.
I am taking my vote seriously. And in doing so, I cannot in good conscience vote for either turd. The feelings you have towards Hillary, are the feelings I have towards Trump… and Hillary. But as you already noticed, I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on this issue.
As for the gun thing, personally I don’t see it. Guns are way more ingrained into our culture than in England or Australia. Interesting scenario you’re describing, but a lot of dominoes need to line up just right in order for it to play out and I foresee plenty of Republicans throwing many wrenches in the gear at all points for it to work out.
Sorry, but the damn republicans won’t do $h!t. Oblowme has had more go his way with a republican congress than he did when his own party was ramrodding the show.
I have no faith in either party. They put on a good show for the public and then go play golf together or go out for dinner. “F” both of them.
As for Trump, he may not be ideal, but there’s a 50/50% chance that he won’t mess up. However, there’s. 100% chance that Hilldabeast will. We know her record.
As a military person, even National Guard, how can you vote for her? I can tell you that the US Military can’t survive another 4 years of the bullshit that we’ve been going through. Deep down you have to know better. Maybe you just don’t care.
Hey Some Guy – you really need to take a trip out to Kalifonya. As a lifelong resident and shooter here, you just would not believe the level of BS we have to deal with. And every time the Libs pass another law against nature and common sense, all is does is encourage them to take more rights away from the law abiders. I’m sure you understand that each of those laws does absolutely NOTHING to make anyone safer, but simple facts like this have no standing with the libitards. As somebody way smarter than me said: “It’s not about guns, it’s about control”. So yes, your vote really does matter. If not for your grandkids, please think of mine.
Except that by the time both the UK and AUS got their gun confiscation laws in place, firearms ownership was at an extremely low level, in the low single-percent area (I believe Australia was at 7% and the UK was a fraction of a percent.)
In the US, it’s in the 25 – 45 % area (depending on the state) which means that any attempt at confiscation wouldn’t work. Before a general confiscation could even be tried, gun ownership would have to be below 10%. Even then there would be significant political backlash.
That percentage in the US can rise at any time, you know. It doesn’t require legislation to make it happen. In fact, if you look hard enough, you’ll see that gun ownership is rising now and has been increasing instead of dropping.
The numbers I’ve seen have shown that while the absolute numbers of guns in private ownership has been rising, the number of gun owners has been declining slowly.
IOW it’s not so much people who didn’t own guns before and are now buying them, it is people who already own guns buying MORE guns.
Well, the NRA membership has been going up with women being the largest segment getting into guns and shooting now.
I don’t think the gun ownership is declining. It might be going down in a certain segment, but overall there are more new people coming in than ever before.
Up front I want to highlight something that is not being discussed much by the media:
Most progressives strongly dislike Trump, but progressives that dislike Hillary tend to absolutely HATE her. Their hate for Hillary is more PERSONAL. She is seen as betraying progressive values.
As for what they will do if forced to make a choice;
I can speak for myself and things I have heard from fellow Bernie supporters.
I will not vote for either Trump or Hillary. I will write in Bernie. Not because I think he has a chance but I want to participate in the effort to send a message to the DNC that they are losing their base.
Most of my Bernie supporter friends intend to write in or not vote. They are pretty fed up with the system and if they vote it will be for other issues.
About 1/2 will vote for Hillary outright because, to them, it is more about keeping Trump out of the white house and making sure a Democrat gets to pick the next few nominees.
It really depends on the next few months. If Trump continues with the nonsense rhetoric over the last few months then it will motivate the left to turn out against him. If he tones it down a lot of Bernie supporters are likely to feel pretty indifferent between Trump and Hillary.
As one of the other left-leaning sorts here, I’m considering voting for Mr. Trump. Whether he can get that vote depends entirely on how the next few months play out.
For me, it’s a balance of ideological grounds vs. practical ones – I abhor the notion of political dynasties. Even if I thought Mrs. Clinton was the best thing since sliced bread, I’d be strongly opposed to her. I also strongly dislike her, but I try not to let that dictate my choices.
So, on ideological grounds, I’m predisposed to vote for Mr. Trump. On practical grounds, it’s a much murkier calculus, with the Democratic platform being somewhat closer to me in terms of what I want from the government. There are things I agree with and things I disagree with, but probably slightly more of the former than the latter. Mr. Trump’s platform, however, is a ‘mystery box’ — nobody quite knows what his actual position on anything is. So do I look at what the Democrats say they’ll deliver, and take, say 60% of what I want with 40% of what I don’t, or do I roll the dice on an unknown and maybe do better and maybe do worse?
All things being equal, I think I’d roll that dice. But add in my ideological opposition to a dynastic politician… and, well, shit. I hope Lady Liberty blows on the dice for luck, because I’m ready to roll.
Not a bad analysis.
I recall back in 2008 there was a whispering campaign against Hillary. Basically the message was “she’s a real bitch.” My reaction was “I don’t care about that, as long as she’s a competent bitch.”
Alas, it turns out she’s not that competent after all. Evidently she didn’t learn jack from Willie. In any case that’s where I stand with Trump. He may be a loudmouthed blowhard, but as long as he runs an acceptable administration, I don’t care.
I think there is a base which will vote for Hillary; they think “it’s time” for a female president the same way 2008 was “time” for a black president.
There’s also those on the left who honestly think that everything negative said about the woman comes from the “vast right wing conspiracy” she’s been whinging about for the past 24 years. Esquire actually posted an article not too long ago claiming the “new Right” was created for the express purpose of slandering Hillary. I kid you not.
Hmmm. A drop in D voters. A rise in R voters, who vote for a total moron, and probably the only person in the country that the Hildabeast can beat.
Am I the only one who sees that the trumpists will mostly go back to the D side and give us Clinton 2 the Vajayjay chronicles?
Nope. I keep wondering who the strangers invading my familiar conservative websites are, why they travel in packs, and why they are so blooming obnoxious. I am sure there is some gaming of both the websites and the votes.
Both candidate are a sorry indication of the American people. I am ashamed of both.
I hate saying this as I absolutely despise Hillary, but in a way, I hope she wins.
Why, you ask, mouths agape? Simple–Obama and the Democrats has been shitting on this country for the past 8 years. And they’ve been kicking the can down the road on the warm runny shit pile until 2017, when the REAL costs of Obamacare, foreign policy decisions, etc., will be revealed.
And all this time, they’ve been hoping to hand it off to a GOP president and then blaming him for the mess.
/rant off
SEA, keep saying to yourself, Supreme Court appointments, Supreme Court appointments, Supreme Court appointments…
or
I wanna keep my guns, I wanna keep my guns, I wanna keep my guns…
Like I said, don’t expect Trump to be supportive of the Second Amendment. He’s all for gun control and every other Liberal talking point.
He’s Hillary with an Oompa-Loompa tan.
The SCOTUS is already liberal, based on a number of votes Chief Justice Roberts has made.
Second, Obama can still make a recess appointment. It’s been done before, with all but one eventually being confirmed, IIRC. Even if he doesn’t, and holds off making a nomination, there’s no way Trump is going to nominate anyone nearly as conservative as Scalia.
Finally, I live in a state that flips between D and R regularly. Even so, our gun laws are such that if the liberals tried to roll back gun rights, they’d be out on their asses, and they know it. Case in point, Bernie Sanders. The ONLY reason he isn’t on the NRA shitlist is because he’d never get elected to any office that requires statewide support if he actually voted the way he felt. Were he still in NY or another “safe” liberal enclave, he’d be as anti-gun as Cuomo, O’Malley, etc.
But don’t think for a second beltway Republicans give a shit about our gun rights, either.
Hah – they’ll still blame it on Bush!! It’s like the “curse” in Boston… even after winning the World Series TWICE every time I visit that end of the country, someone mentions it.
3 times. But yeah, point taken. Just like the little SJW who blamed all her woes on Reagan, who was long out of office before that little snowflake was even spawned.
Cruz in my opinion was a nut job that in the end would have towed the line.. Like Paul Ryan he would have had no issues screwing vets and active duty out of what we have work hard for, like the screw job on our COLA a few years back
Trump on the flip side a why-not candidate there is no way in hell I’ll ever vote for hildabeast and comrade sanders and go F himself
Can and not and
Why would Cruz have towed the party line when he hasn’t done it before?
And why do you think Trump, who never gave a shit about veterans before, will suddenly come to their aid now?
Not to play the grammar Nazi, Instinct, but you and Skippy might be advised that the term is “toed” and not “towed.” Towing is what tug boats do…
I agree with you on why should we trust trump.
nobody running for POTUS as of now could care less about us as a group
I’m not sure the electoral college map supports any kind of Trump victory.
Ultimately, “voter turnout” matters not a bit in the big states that almost always vote democrat. Whether Hillary gets 70% of the votes in NY or only 51%, either way she takes all of NY’s electoral votes. Ditto for California, IL, PA, and MA.
In fact, the only “big” EC state that Republican presidential candidates have a chance of winning is TX and with Trump’s trouncing of their favorite son, that may not be a guarantee. Trump also belittled and denigrated FL’s TWO R candidates which means it’s unlikely he’ll take that state either.
Those of you who think Trump has a prayer of winning, show me the EC math. Tell me which “blue” state you think Trump will win.
I just don’t see it happening. When it comes down to it, Dem voters will vote for Hillary. Whether they do so with a smile on their face and a bounce in their step, or whether they do so with a tear in their eye makes no difference. Either way she gets the vote.
I think trump has a good chance in Florida his name is all over the real estate map there
Rubio before becoming a republican was a dem and trump has a strong following with conservative dems. Obummers policy’s the last 8 years have cost the dems the blue collar vote for good…
Martin, don’t overlook the reality that Republican voters aren’t the only ones fed up with political correctness, white privilege, black lives matter, snowflake college students, pushy gay activism, the anti-police movement, Mexican flag wavers and on and on, ad infinitum, with endless liberal sacred causes.
Add to that a crappy jobs situation, a piss-poor economy, manufacturing flight, stagnant wages, out of control federal regulation and federal spending, and you can see there are many voter issues that cross party lines, especially among blue collar Democrats, many of whom are just as fed up as their Republican counterparts. Ditto with working class Independents.
Those folks constitute a large segment of the electorate in those industrial states that you are simply yielding to the Democrats without a fight.
Add to that the fact that Hillary is outspoken in her opposition to gun ownership, a huge issue with blue collar Americans, including in all those same industrial states, and I think you’re being premature in so readily ceding them all to the Democrat party.
Remember, Trump only has to win 51% as well.
So again I ask, which blue state(s) do you think Trump can take? NY? No way, no day. IL? Again, not gonna happen. CA? In your dreams. Florida is a “maybe” but it will be a tough race. VA? Doubt it, very much. With all the NorVA population voting hard Democrat, I don’t see that state going to them.
Trump can probably take some Midwestern states – OH is a possibility, Indiana a near certainty. Of course Trump will take the deep South and the sparsely populated states of the West but that’s not enough to push him over the top.
Trump needs to bag at least one “trophy state” like NY, IL, CA, PA or MA and I just don’t see it happening.
BTW here’s another interesting site showing the EC breakdown of every presidential election.
http://www.270towin.com/historical-presidential-elections/
Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and I wouldn’t be so quick to write off New York. I’d agree with you completely if Cruz were the candidate but New York City delivers the vote in New York and Trump is that city’s native son, not that carpetbagging Hillary. He may be a billionaire but he’s one of ’em, thinks, walks and talks like a New York working class stiff. That’s an entirely new factor in the Republican equation that’s never been tested.
I think Trump has a fairly good chance to take Florida. Again, because of his unique, bifurcated relationship with that state and New York, he might even have a chance to cut into the sizable New York ex-pat community there.
I’m in agreement with you on the rest of them although an unanswered FBI recommendation to bring charges against Hillary could give Trump a huge weapon that might alter the vote in even some of those now solid blue states.
I’m not saying you’re wrong MJ, just that it’s a little early to be calling this thing based on the past election results that underlie that electoral map you reference. The primary has already demonstrated that the impossible can happen in spite of very formidable opposition.
Just sayin’…
Poe,
With regard to NY; Trump got approximately 500k votes in the primary, with Cruz picking up about 200k and Kasich about 100k. In contrast Hildabeast got 1.2 Million with Bernie picking up 800k in the Democrat primary. Explain to me the math where Trump wins New York against the carpet bagger when the votes just aren’t, in my opinion, there. If even ALL registered Republicans vote Trump he still gets less than a million votes, vice Hillary, having already shown that she can garner over one million fools in that state to vote for her, picking up, let’s say just a third of the Bernie voters. It’s just not there.
Gunner, New York has a closed primary so there was no chance of any Reagan Democrats or Independents voting for Trump. It’s a whole different ballgame in the general election. Whether there’s enough of them is the million dollar question.
Not a snowball’s chance in hell that he wins Illinois. That is a State that voted for Jesse Jackson Jr while he was in a mental hospital and up on corruption charges and they also voted for a politician that had to be sworn in while he is in jail up on murder charges for a drug deal gone bad simply because they both have a “D” after their name.
Illinois didn’t vote for JJJr. Chicago did. Chicago’s vote overwhelmed the rest of the state, like it always does. Chicago needs to be given state boundaries that encompass only Cook County and let the rest of the state have autonomy.
Yeah, NY just doesn’t seem likely, any more than IL or CA.
OH and PA – Yeah, I could see that (though PA is going to be a real reach.)
As for MI, isn’t that still pretty much a union-owned state? I can’t see union members voting for a billionaire. Maybe, but not likely.
MJ, a commenter over at American Thinker noted that a lot of union workers like Trump because he has a reputation of being a stand-up guy in dealing with them in his many construction projects.
As for the email problem, it doesn’t make any difference what a flunky tells the boss, the boss, like the ship’s captain, is ultimately responsible for ensuring the law is followed. And a delay ploy can be used by Trump to indict the Democrat party and the Obama administration for shielding a potential felon and allowing her to run for president without having her name cleared.
And don’t forget, the investigation reportedly includes possible charges of official corruption involving the Clinton Foundation. Those might be much harder for the Obama administration to turn a blind eye to.
And last, it only takes one pissed off FBI investigator to pull a Deep Throat if Obama tries to simply sweep this under the rug. Trump would have that agent doing a national tour, a talking shadow obscured behind a screen.
Also, being the whistle blower of all whistle blowers and the accompanying book deals and wealth could be a helluva temptation to an already righteously ticked off agent. Trump might even float a quiet offer through his Washington contacts that such a whistle blower might be on a post-election fast track to heading up Trump’s worldwide security apparatus. Bet the salary and perks are pretty sweet for that job, private jet travel, finest hotels and restaurants.
That could turn an agent’s head.
Heh…
I see two ways this obstacle can be removed for Hillary:
1. If it looks like an indictment is imminent, some low-level State Dept flunky steps forward and says “I’m the one who gave her the OK to put the server in her home”, cops to a minor charge, gets a slap on the pee pee and that closes the matter.
2. Or, more likely, we get delay after delay until finally the lead FBI investigator makes an announcement that due to the volume of documents that have to be gone through, we can’t expect a decision on indictment until some future date (that is safely past election day.)
Trump can win in PA, OH, CO, and possibly even MI as well. These, along with the aforementioned states, we’re all states Romney lost in 2012.
This makes the math a lot easier.
For my part, I wish the country as a whole would recognize that we don’t have a parliamentary system in the United States. You’re supposed to vote for candidates, not for parties. Voting for a candidate who sucks just because he/she is on your party’s ticket is stupid, and over the decades has created the mess we see now.
Trump sucks, but many of us will vote for him because he sucks less than the evil hellbitch or the freeze-dried commie. Better candidates are sidelined because they didn’t get the party nomination, so We The People are left with this crap. As for me, I’ll probably vote for Mattis as a write-in.
The extant two-party system has never served us well and was not what the Founders intended. It shouldn’t matter who gets a party nomination. Nowhere in any of our founding documents does it say that political parties will choose who we get to vote for.
Would a Mattis selection as a Trump VP sweeten the deal a bit?
Mattis has already said that he has no intentions of running for political office.
But we NEED him, damn it!
There’s a huge dif between running for office and being asked to be #2 on the top ticket. Not at all like running for a Congressional office or any other.
One can hope that he would see it that way as well.
We would be better off with a parliamentary system.
But you are right, we don’t have one and we should not vote like we do.
No, we wouldn’t. There’s a reason why it wasn’t written into the Constitution.
Yeah, the reason was unique to 13 colonies trying to negotiate a new agreement after the articles of confederation failed to achieve what it needed to to preserve the nation.
The constitution was specifically written to deal with the particularly concerns of various states at the time of the constitution.
Parliamentary systems objectively function better with respect to managing challenges nation’s face because they allow for more cooperation and coalitions.
They are also more representative because they are not based on winner take all systems.
The constitution has its strengths but congress is not one of them.
If you want a parliamentary government, there’s plenty to choose from. Go take your pick.
They are not more representative. They simply give X number of seats to a given party. There is no direct representation. Our system allows the people of each state and congressional district to elect their own representative. Each of these representatives is accountable to the people who elected them. Perfect? No. But it is more representative.
If you don’t like it, face the setting sun and turn right. Canada’s that way.
They are more representative because they are closer to proportional representation and it allows for more parties to gain seats which allow for more viable party choices for voters.
In America you essentially have to vote democrat or republican. No other party affiliation has any viability politically. In a parliamentary system people have more viable party option and thus the party they identify with is more likely to be closer to their views across more issues.
Often in America voters are forced to choose a party based on one or two key priority issues for them because much of the platform does not reflect their views.
Having said the above, it may not be all bad news for the R’s. Low Dem voter turnout will help the R’s on down-ticket elections. I haven’t seen the analysis (probably because it’s too early to call) but I doubt that the House will change hands and probably not the Senate either.
Here’s a fun link that looks at the Electoral College vote:
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-swing-the-election/
It lets you manipulate ethnic groups by % of voter turnout and by which way that group leans and then applies it to the EC.
Alexander Hamilton speaks for me:
“If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures.”
I don’t believe that Trump understands the limits that our sacred Constitution (the greatest gift ever bestowed on any people) places on government-and I think that his words and actions support my conclusion. I can fight against Clinton with a clean conscience, but I would at least nominally be obliged to support a President Trump due to who his enemies would be.
“Will Trump beat Hillary?”
The REAL question on everyone’s mind is:
Would IDC SARC hit Hildebeast?
Yeah, he would. He already said so.
I tell ya, that boy ain’t right…
I would hit her, but only with a cruise missile or a MOAB.
I would hit her…..with a sock full of nickels.
I think that someone already hit her in the ass with a sock full of Nickles. That has to be where al of the dents came from.
Dude said he’d tap that booty… live by the motto “In war, any hole is a trench”.
Bet he’d make her bark like a fox when it was over…
Gary Johnson 2016.
Because I still have to look at myself in a mirror every day, and there just ain’t enough whiskey to vote for any other candidate.
I can’t believe that another blogging site I love to read has gone full on for Der Dump. The GOPe that has gone Quisling for a man who has flipped and flopped so many times he makes Kerry look like a truth sayer. All the conservative blogs that I have been reading since Indiana primary, have tossed away thier objections to Der Dump and said he is the savior of the nation. If it’s all about team jersey wins, then you are no better than that NCO who enforces a stupid rule because the CO came up with it. You don’t have principles, you are a spineless chump who would prefer to lick the boots and lock the rooster of your “leaders” in a hope of being protected. All while watching the ideas and concepts , hell the nation or service you believe in become a neutered entity that you hardly recognize. How many posts here have ripped into GOFOS or SNCOS that support the party line at the detriment of the principles they claim to support? Now you are saying it doesn’t matter about ethics or princples, because we need to have a big win? What will you a say when Der Dump has you bent over a table and whispers in your ear that this will hurt you more than it him as he pulls your pants down? He doesn’t care a wit about veterans remember his fundraiser? Yea how many dollars went to veterans? The same amount as some of the scammer organizations that have been featured with thier Stolen Valor owners. Guns? Der Dump has been against guns before he was for them and before he was against them again. Freedom of speech or privacy? Yea he has said a big old fuck you about those amendments. The list goes on and on about how much he actually cares about this nation and it’s government. Oh and citing Brietbart? Really a news site that threw it’s own reporters under the bus after they were assualted by Der Dumps Brownshirts? Sorry, but Der Dump is not my… Read more »
I agree with you, if that helps. Poetrooper apologizes to me every time he writes one of these pieces that seem to back Trump. You’ll notice that I’ve said very little about this election.
Jonn,
Sorry but I have become more and more angry after seeing some of the folks who support Der Dump in recent weeks. There isn’t enough tinfoil to cover all their heads from the conspiracy theories they speak off. Half of them that I have meet in person speak in tones or words that I haven’t heard, except in newsreel footage of the civil rights movement in the 50s or in other films showing racial hatred from around the world. The economic, foreign policy (anyone else see the news that Obama had a failed novelist as the head of the NSC????), social and other policy theories are so half baked and full of holes they make a Bernie Sanders doper fan look like a card carrying member of Mensa.
I get the electorate is angry. But fuck, this is cutting ones own entrails out to spite the village.
Okay, Charles, we have only a few choices in this voting pool, so answer this:
Whom would you prefer in the White House this time around?
Clinton
Sanders
Trump
Before you answer that, just tell me which one of those three is going to do the most harm to this country in general.
I would have wanted Walker, but he is out. Then it would have fallen to Cruz, but he rubbed the established aristocracy the wrong way. Out of the three. I vote for SIOP! Full on Global Thermonuclear War! Let the living envy the dead. Those three choices aren’t anything good for this country as I have been raise to love it. Der Dump has already begun his flip flopping about the debt, with even Chicago and Austrian styled economic philosophy types suggesting that he would not only cause a depression in the US, but probably a global one that would make the Great Depression look like a minor hiccup. I won’t even go into how he really isn’t much different than Clinton or Obama with his ideas. For christ sakes look at the news articles that have talked of his flips and flops about the typical platforms that he has invigorated the voters with, let alone with the traditional GOP platforms. I mentioned it above, with where he has flipped and flopped. Clinton? She is running strictly on her vagina and the left overs from her Husband’s admin that got into the Obama admin and did what exactly besides lie, cheat and steal and do damage to the nation right now. Fast and Furious? Investigation of political opponents? Tax dodging? Health care fiascos? the list goes on and on. Berine? As if. He is being allowed to air his grievances for the democrats but short of a giant meteor crashing into the democratic convention. The hope of him winning enough delegates, let alone electors is worst than playing powerball. If we ignore his economic failures of his favored economic philosophy and the economic ideas he is pushing, well he is where the angry of the democrats voters are ending up at because they feel betrayed by the 1% of the democratic establishment. But if you want to go full Quisling, by all means. As for me I will go down fighting. I will do the write in on Cruz, I will push for my friends and family that lean right… Read more »
Gee, thanks. I’ve never considered my views to be remotely close to those of the Vichy. I asked you a direct question and you avoided answering – which one of those three is the most harmful. Instead, you complained. Fine.
Here’s the correct answer.
Sanders is an incompetent idiot who has skated by his entire life and never held a paying job until he got into politics. He thinks money falls out of the sky or grows on gooseberry bushes. There is a video of him being interviewed in which he says he thinks bread lines are good because then poor people can have bread instead of just rich people. He wants to tax you at 90%.
Clinton is only in this for herself. She’s about as leftist as a bowl of mashed potatoes. She wants money and power. Greed oozes out of every pore in her body. She’s clever, sometimes downright wily, but she makes massive mistakes like she did with Benghazi, when she could have brought that slacker in the Oval Office to his knees over that business. She is as poisonous as they come. But I don’t doubt for one second that she’d do everything possible to avoid a recession or nationalize health care so that we have few choices, if any. I think she’s just enough of a jackwagon to approve of a negative interest rate, where you buy Treasury bonds and when they mature, they are worthless, or your savings account drops on a monthly basis until you have nothing left. And for your information, she changes her tune with the way the wind blows. She also flipflops on any subject, just as much as Trump does.
Trump is a butthead and a blowhard with an ego the size of the Sears Tower. He’s also a bully. He likes the spotlight and the attention, but he knows how to negotiate, and he is certainly not incompetent. Yeah, he flipflops on things, but name anyone in the rare air of finance that does not.
But thanks for the insult. You suck, too. 😛
No I gave you an answer. Let’s nuke the fucking earth. Reduce everyone to the lowest levels of Maslow and his needs of hierarchy. Most civilizations die off because the population gets to quit worrying about the needs of its people and thier children. Instead it’s all about circus and entertainment and only carrying about their selfness. This nation had a great run but maybe after 200 some odd years it’s time to say fuck it to the principles that both the DNC and GOP claim is thier brithright.
My anger is because the people that are following Trump aren’t “normal” and civilized. I have heard some at rallies in my town blame the economy failures on all the colored folks and the secret zionists in the government. Almost like a bad mix of LaRouche and Birchers with sone Skokie Illinois mixed in for spice. Then there is nothing defined by him short of well its going to be yuuge! Sorry, but most political types by this time in the cycle have a decision and a few strong planks to sell for folks. You know like lowering the tax rates for the population and reduce the overall size of the government to cover for the lost of revenue. The 100 day plan to help jump start the economy. The fight for health care for all. The war on poverty. Missile/bomber gaps, etc. Der Dump big policy is isolationism and even that is bringing on scorn from conservative and left foreign policy wonks.
Yea I am angry and Yea I don’t like any of the choices but guess what, I will make do with what I am given and there is still the pencil for my options.
No need for nuking anything, Charles.
It’s not as dismal as you think.
Tbh, Ex, I think any of those three would be equally disastrous for this country.
Trump Cult Logic: “You should vote for a person who opposes everything that you stand for, in order to prevent a person who opposes everything you stand for from winning.”
Nope, not gonna happen!
Charles, Jonn is right about my not being fully enthusiastic about our Republican candidate. I was originally for Kasich or Perry, who dropped out early, and then Cruz when it became clear that Kasich didn’t have a prayer. Then Cruz became the fair-haired boy of the establishment and his chances, as well as my opinion of him, went down the tubes as well. So, we’re left with Donald Trump, and as the Republican candidate, he has my support if for no other reason, as I’ve stated repeatedly above in other comments, the alternative is simply intolerable. I understand fully that Trump’s conservative credentials are suspect but no more so than those of Mitt Romney, a Massachusetts RINO who pioneered the concept of Obamacare. What those of you who are so angry at Trump should be considering is that for the first time in a long time, the presumptive Republican nominee is making the party leadership sit up and pay attention to issues the rank and file have been concerned about for years, issues that same leadership ignored. When was the last time ANY politician stood up and said political correctness is a bunch of silly crap? When was the last time you saw a politician calmly tell the media darlings to print or say whatever about him because he doesn’t give a crap about their opinions? When was the last time you heard any Republican with any real power talk about cutting off the flow of illegal immigration? Trump may very well not be as conservative on every issue as we’d like him to be but then, neither was John McCain nor Mitt Romney. Lots of PURE conservatives stayed home on those two election days and look at the disaster and damage that has brought to this nation. Do you think either McCain or Romney would have allowed our military to become the social testing ground for every perverted liberal cause that Obama has? Would either of them have us in the mess in the Middle East that two terms of Obama have wrought? Perhaps, but at least we’d have… Read more »
I could give a rats ass about ideological purity. Guess what ideological purity got us? Dole, McCain, Bush, Romney. Want to know who has helped to push that purity? The so called silent majority of the Religious Right. Want to know the alters we have died on constantly? Try abortion, LGBTQ, and other social issues. The Religious Right are just as much big government types but for the issues they care about like social programs via NGOS instead of the government offices (still sucks when your tax dollars are being given to the Church of Holier than Thou vs the State Welfare office). Give me an Ike or even a Coolidge any day over what we have had since the fall of Nixon. Where the idea is that the government that governs the least is the one that governs best. Yea Ike had some big government programs, but he also had ideas and concepts to temper the growing budget issues from the previous three wars that the nation was still paying for. I don’t trust Trump. The people that have clamped on to him are scary because some of them are like Pat Buchanann and believe the Jews are the evil of the world. If not that then they believe in a police state that would make Beriea jerk off in lust. My purity is towards someone that understands that we need to roll the bureaucracy back, to be accountable to Congress and play by the rules as outlined in that quaint little document written in Philadelphia in the 18th century. As to voting team jersey. Yea I gave that up after the failures of McCain and Romney. I said never again. Instead I decided whom ever the establishment hated I would vote for. So to me that was Walker or Cruz. Trump wasn’t there and reviews of the established media and wonks attempts to shut Trump down tell me that really he was a false flag to begin with. That one they pretended to hate simply because he leaned left, but they had hoped to get him in. For… Read more »
Angry? Yeah, I’d say that describes you pretty well, Charles and most assuredly not in a constructive way.
Nuclear oblivion is your solution?
It also doesn’t help your case when you label a wise and well informed lady like Ex-PH2 a traitor just because she disagrees with some of your angry diatribes, many of which are full of Nazi allusions. What’s with that? You a big Wagner guy? Gotterdamerung and all that?
You pound on the bar much down at the VFW?
We’re just going to have to agree to disagree, although being so disagreeable, you’ll probably disagree with that.
Poe, No I am not a fan of Wagner, couldn’t ever stay awake for his operas. Rather it’s from seeing what I am learning in my political philosophy classes. Which right now talk of the death of the aristocracy in Europe and the rise of Totalitarianism. Beginning with the horrors of Robespierre and ending now on Putin. Of which there is half of a textbook on totalitarian governments dedicated to how easily both the Leninist and the mad Austrian corporal came to power. Where they all eventually fooled everyone. Even the moderates with the lies the leaders told to the moderates. All because, they had the devil they thought they could contain or the devil they feared. In the end we all know what happened to the folks trying to hold the leash. So now I see history rhyming again with current trends and I am shocked that sensible folks who have seen the horrors of Totalitarianism are willingly marching towards it. Oh as to pound much at the bar? Nope I quit going there as I heard more and more pro-Trump and nativist speech from the patrons there. You know the type, I am sure you have been practicing for your own local Trump rallies. As to being angry in a constructive manner. That got squashed for me at the local GOP caucus and dinged at the annual state GOP platform development convention. Where I watched as rational debate with regards to things like immigration support, taxes. Government bureaucracy and even purging some of our more damaged political aristocracy in the state party (but what’s a few tax dodges, a person with an undocumented workers, or even a state legislature senator who thinks coffee cups are for throwing at interns heads and not coffee.) That is when from 2012 to now that I lost my sharpened directed anger at the other side. It was then that I realized we have an entrenched political aristocracy that believes putting up any candidate that is willing to wear the jersey I’d more important that getting someone that can capture 80% of the… Read more »
Charles, stick around. If you don’t, you’ll miss the real fun.
And I supported Cruz. Hence my revulsion at the Hobson’s Choice we have come November.
Either way, we’re sending a NY liberal to the White House.
I’m sorry I couldn’t have been a year older before this election cycle, you’ll all have to wait for my name to show up on the ballot for 2020, I’ll get this shit show turned back round.
According to a couple of people who make financial forecasts, the world will be vastly different by 2020. They wouldn’t tell me what they meant by that. I can only hope that it was positive.
Sounds pretty mystical. Or shroom induced.
Not mystical at all. Timing.
Nope, sorry. Virtual currency is what they’re referring to, like Bitcoin. The short version is this: money starts disappearing into the ether, for various reasons. Governments panick. At that point, several things can happen, none of them pleasant for the average citizen. There are several good articles that discuss the different scenarios.
I know, was just playing dumb. This whole ordeal has brought a whole new level of fear, stupid, but also some new opportunities for success as long as people don’t screw it up.
Nope, all guesses way off. Bitcoins? No, debit cards are virtual currency.
No, I finally got an idea tonight of just how long we have before things start to move back toward what we used know. And it will happen in my lifetime and yours.
This is from a financial forecaster with a high rate of accuracy. “When you are going through the experience, it is difficult to be objective about it. It is as if you need some time and distance away from the experience to realize just how profound it is. Did anyone imagine the emergence of ISIS before this period? Or that there would be a USA election between someone like Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, who both possess the highest disapproval ratings of any two candidates running for the office of presidency ever? The core psychological issue to navigate is “trust versus mistrust.” Who can you trust? This was supposed to be an election about character and trust. Instead, it has become a contest between two characters that are both mistrusted by the majority of Americans. On top of that, we now learn what has been suspected all along: financial markets may be manipulated – taken advantage of – by those who pay for access to government data just before those announcements are made public, and which sharply affect market prices right afterwards.’ Friedrich Hegel may be right too, when he wrote, “What experience and history teach us is this: that people and governments have never learned anything from history.” ‘People think that both political parties are on the verge of self-destruction, never to return to what they once were. I don’t think so. I think in 2020, both parties will return to the higher standards of what they once were.’ When the author speaks of vast social change, he’s not referring to the destruction of this country and its traditions. He does say that things will definitely be completely different by 2024, and he believes that a great president will be elected then, along the lines of FDR and Reagan. That’s a pretty strong statement. But on the other hand, he is not predicting a victory for shrillary. I really do not think she stands a chance. He does say this 2016 election is a catalyst for this shift, and that the pendulum of social change will make it through.… Read more »
Trump is all about “winning”. Put aside the us/them, red/blue, Donkey/Elephant stuff for a moment.
What moves put Trump in the “win” circle?
If Hillary locks up the Democat nomination, expect Trump to publicly sympathize with a “got robbed” Bernie. That, right there, screws with a whole bunch of “base” on the Dem side.
“Big Gambit” move? He asks Bernie to be a significant part of his “unification” team, possibly even Veep. (Assuming he cannot get Cruz to join up. )
Skip the whole philosophy aspects of that. Trump -owns- the “disgruntled” vote if he has Bernie and Cruz anywhere on the team. (Even as figurehead advisors)
A balanced “unity” cabinet. He gains about 1/3 to 1/2 of the whizzed-off of -both- parties.
If he cant get Cruz or an equivalent, he could still bag enough annoyed Bernie supporters to tip the scale his way, again as a “unify the country” move.
Expect several major money players, in and out of the current campaigns, to back heavily the “write in X” buzz.
I suspect Trump has at least one other YGBSM move in his game plan. Why? Because he does -not- think like a politician, and he thus doesn’t know “you can’t do that”.