Think Trump is losing? Get out of the City…
Salena Zito at the New York Post, a friend of TAH, I believe, has taken it upon herself to do what all political journalists should do and that is to get out from behind her desk and get away from the liberal echo box of New York City and go look at the political landscape in the rest of America. She drives through rural Pennsylvania and what she finds does not surprise me at all, the support for Trump there is overwhelming:
If you drive anywhere in Pennsylvania, from the turnpike to the old US routes to the dirt roads connecting small towns like Hooversville with “bigger” small towns like Somerset, you might conclude that Donald Trump is ahead in this state by double digits.
Large signs, small signs, homemade signs, signs that wrap around barns, signs that go from one end of a fence to another dot the landscape with such frequency that, if you were playing the old-fashioned road-trip game of counting cows, you would hit 100 in just one small town like this one.
Yet if you listen to the liberal media, Trump is several points behind in all their polls in the Keystone State which is one of the key swing states in the coming election. As soon as I read her article I thought of a piece here yesterday that our military is strongly pro-Trump and a comment from an old TAH regular, a person in a position to know, that fellow O-4/O5 officers were more supportive of Hillary. While some of you may see it as a stretch, I see a parallel here between urban elites and these officers when compared to the rural and small town voters Zito visited and our military enlisted. The urban elites and the officer corps tend to be better educated, better paid and more attuned to that favored term of John Kerry, the nuances of politics, while the small town, rural folks are more attuned to the deteriorating conditions within the ranks.
Some of you officers who read here may find this observation too broad and unfair, an over-simplification of a much more complex issue, which is precisely why I have sent it to Jonn, to stimulate some discussion on the topic.
Fire for effect…
Category: Politics
I find that interesting that O-4/O-5’s would be more pro-Hillary. I went from
E-1 to O-4 and I never felt any desire to switch to the other side because of my more senior rank.
Anyway, back to the primary subject. I really, really, really, REALLY hope that you’re right Poetrooper. Trump is not the second coming of the Messiah, but he is heads and shoulders above that corrupt bitch and her family.
This is the final battle between Progressivism and Constitutionalists.
“This is the final battle between Progressivism and Constitutionalists.”
No truer words…
Previous elections have been blood lettings… but this one will be the coup de grace for the Conservative wing if we lose. It’s the battle for the Soul of America.
Hillary is not a progressive and Trump is not a constitutionalist.
We are screwed with either of them.
typo.
You asked for discussion Poetrooper–it begins. I’d like to see any figures that show that military officers are more supportive of Clinton than Trump. It doesn’t match my experience (O-5 retiree with 4 years enlisted). Almost every officer I knew was conservative not liberal in their political views. Sure there were a couple of outliers, but then there are enlisted troops who support Hillary. It’s still a free country. But you are right, your over-generalization is not fair. Because someone is educated does not mean they tend toward liberal thinking. I would put more credence into the degree the person earned. Hard science educations–STEM degrees–are far more prevalent in military officer’s education than SJW degrees. Now I can accept that the percentages of officers that are liberal are more then the enlisted, but I would not be surprised to see numbers are not really very far apart.
My experience as a recently retired O5 – the vast majority of those I know are for Trump, just not vocal about it. Those for Hillary are as arrogantly vocal about it as the rest of her supporters, as if being “Progressive” is the morally superior position.
But given a non-attributable poll, I truly believe Trump would win hands down. But with Hillary’s penchant to act like a 3rd World dictator, no one is going to put Trump on a poll where she may be able to trace the results to conduct a Turkey-style purge….
Hoss, what started this discussion was an observation yesterday, which I referenced above, from an active duty officer that his informal survey among O-4’s and O-5’s of all MOS’s was that they were going to vote Hillary. Follow my link and read his comment.
When you do, please note my multiple responses to his comments. Much of my second enlistment was served as a Staff NCO in airborne infantry battalions and brigades so I served with a lot of officers, most of whom were more conservative than I was at that time. Following GI Bill college, I spent almost thirty years in medical marketing to the military and there almost all my friends were medical officers of all three services, many of them O-6’s as we aged together, and they were almost all conservatives, so the JAG’s comment yesterday really caught me by surprise.
I subsequently saw the NY Post article and thought it might offer a parallel to our new, modern military with which I am completely unfamiliar and admittedly unknowledgeable. I am glad to hear your response, believe me.
Poetrooper–understand where you are coming from and fully agree. I think our liberal O-5 is talking crap in the article to win favor and is angling for a Pentagon job should the Beast win.
Imagine having to report to an ass-clown like that!
Here’s one O-5 retiree who wouldn’t vote for Hillary if she was the only one running.
Here in battleground NC, I see a lot of Trump signs, shirts, and hats and no Hillary. But, I live nowhere near Raleigh and Charlotte.
Wonder how many are saying undecided/Hillary just because it isn’t cool to support Trump? But Rush pointed out Monday that we thought the same thing last time and it turned out the polls were right.
Look at how many people in this country get government handouts of one sort or another.
Welfare, EBT, Section 8, SCHIP, Pell Grants, Medicaid, Obamaphones, EIC, even an “earned” benefit lIke Social Security (how many times have Dems claimed the GOP hates old people and will steal their SS?), and it’s very easy to see how she could win.
The takers are nearly outnumbering the makers.
I don’t see how anybody with a job, anyone serving in the military, any woman, anyone that owns a house, any man with normal testosterone levels or fuck…overall, anyone with an IQ above 70 that’s not on welfare would vote for Shrillary.
Word.
Word X2 ^^^^^^
^^Best Post Of The Day^^
Living and working in Slammintonio, a city with an approximate 65% Hispanic population, one would think that Trump piñatas would be popular here if the polls and news organizations were to be believed.
Not the case. In fact both at work and in our neighborhood, Hispanics we’ve encountered have not been shy about voicing their support for Trump. Interestingly the wall is popular among many as they feel that since they came over legally so should others. They see Hildebeast as a panderer and the Castro boys (local by-products) as using the race card to get ahead.
Interesting.
I wish this perspective got more attention, on both sides of the aisle, as opposed to the more severe xenophobia / anti-xenophobia perspectives that are focused on in the media. Our legal immigration administration tends to be a miserable blight of idiocy, incompetence and laziness, but it’s legal, and people who have gone through it are often, understandably, against illegal immigration while for immigration reform of this same legal system.
Instead of sensible discussion of how nobody should be for illegal immigration (even if supportive of people who were illegally brought here as children), we get blatant racism on one side and ‘who cares about laws and security?!’ on the other. It annoys me to no end.
If the Republicans could curb the more blatant racist elements in their party, they’d have even stronger inroads with the Hispanic community, in my opinion.
If Democrats would acknowledge that -they- have been the party of Slavery, Secession, Segregation, and supremacy-by-race, and still think of various minorities as “less-able” thus needing “help”, and now support slavery-by-Socialism,
we might finally be able to have an intelligent conversation.
I truly believe that Trump will win by a landslide bigger than Reagan’s! The people have had enough of the corrupt Obammy and all of his cronies! I agree with Trump in calling for a special prosecutor that should put this bitch and her husband in jail for their shady foundation!
Your words to God’s ears!
I think it’s more than that.
In many respects, I think more people are leaning towards Trump because he’s far removed from the sort of “establishment politics” the GOP is known for, even while Republican representatives and senators continue to ignore their constituencies.
In 2008 and 2012, the GOP put McCain and Romney up (and neither one of them could beat Obama), followed with both the House and Senate failing to challenge Obama on anything (Boehner), and ignoring the signals sent during the last mid-term elections.
Then this year, they put their hopes in Jeb Bush and backed whoever else they thought could beat Hillary (while still subscribing to whatever thought process they believed would work to win favor of the American people).
Americans have grown sick and tired of that shit. Conservatives want change, and hope to get it – even if its in the form of Donald Trump because he’s so far removed from the politics that folks are sick of.
Of course, there’s more to it than that, but I think most folks get the jist of it.
Just my .02 cents.
Ditto that, BOTH McCain and Romney were establishment Candidates, Donald Trump isn’t. There is a huge tsunami of anti-establishment sentiment in the US Population right now, and I pray that Trump rides it into office.
I’m pretty confident that something in the arena of a 100 megaton October surprise is going to be detonated and take out Cankles McStrokey Hosebeast and her Viagra swilling Energizer Bunny Boinking surrogate.
Trump by massive numbers AND watch the Damnocraps and the Forrest G(um)OP both implode faster than supernova surrounded by dual black holes
From your keyboard to God’s ears Chip.
My wife said something last night that made me laugh. “This joke has gone on long enough, when are they going to announce the real candidates?”
I saw a Hillary bumper sticker the other day that made me do a doubletake. In large letters, it said “HILLARY” and in smaller letters, it said “FOR PRISON”. They were superimposed over an image of Hillary behind bars. Now, that’s what I’m talkin’ ’bout!
I think what is MOST important is that people who might normally not vote are more likely to vote in this election, for various reasons. Controversy tends to wake people out of their apathy. It stirs them, spurs them to do something they would normally avoid or ignore, or make excuses for not doing (e.g., no one I want to vote for).
For this reason, I don’t pay a whole lot of attention to polls. Better to bide my time right down to the last minute and then go distract the election judges with bad jokes.
Here’s a link to a story saying that more people watched “Robot Chicken” than Hitlery on Kimmel:
http://www.theamericanmirror.com/ratings-pickle-hillary-kimmel-beat-robot-chicken-ties-mike-tyson-mysteries/
States like Pennsylvania and Ohio are going to go hugely for Trump in rural and small to medium towns while big city precincts will vote for Hildebeast Rotten Cankles. It’s likely that States like IL will vote for IT because of Chicago /Cook County where many many dead always vote demo-rat, and cities like Milwaukee where demo-rats were caught busing homeless from precinct to precinct to vote (D) in return for a pack of smokes and a “40”. lots an plenty of voter fraud was found that went in favor of B. Hussein 0bama and I have no doubt that Hitlery & Company have been setting up all they can to cheat and tilt this election in their favor.
TRUMP 2016!
Illinois? Not necessarily. Illinois has had more Republican governors than democraps, including the current Gov. Yeah, there are 2.7 million votes in Cook County, but not all of them are progressive libretards and Cook County is NOT the entire state. There are approximately 13+million people in the state overall.
Geez, API, Pat Quinn is putting out a request for a referendum vote on term limits for da Mayor of Cheepcago because Rahmbo is so incompetent, he makes Frank Nitti look like a nice guy.
Don’t assume that one tiny spot has all the votes and all the power. It does not.
Tell that to CA.
IMHO CA has at least three huge libtard concentrations, LA, San Foo-foo and Sancrockmento to throw their elections to the libtard side.
This.
A large portion of California, where people work for a living, is pretty conservative. Because of the huge, highly popluated libtard areas we end up with shit.
I wish Washington could say that…Seattle, and the Metro area, a Mecca for the Progressive Hipster, and aged Hippie pretty much rule the roost when it comes to our electoral votes.
I rarely make political contributions, but with Trump I do. Hillary should go home and take care of Bill.
Dame here. I’ve NEVER given money during political campaigns – until now.
And it ain’t to Hildebeast…
Or just hire an Intern to do it again.
I was talking about this piece with my son yesterday when he said, “Yeah Dad, but 80% of Americans live in cities.” I thought, huh? So I quick jumped on the interweb, and sure enough there’s a quik fact saying 80% live in cities, but you know me, I ain’t buying it. Go to the Census, just 10 cities in the USA populations over 1 million, you have to get down to all incorporated towns to get to 62%. So I say’s, “Son, how big would the population have to be, to count as a “city” for you.” Response, “At least 100k people.” Well, only 295 cities do that. Long story short, only 36% of people live in so-called cities. He was shocked.
You see, the deeper you dig, the more you find out that debunks what popular culture tells you.
True enough, but reality states simply that she’s going to get some of the votes in the non-urban areas and a majority of votes in urban areas.
Having locked down large urban centers and then picking up even 25 or 30% of the remaining smaller communities means she wins the White House.
Trump could beat her 75-25 in non-urban areas and still easily lose the election by a landslide of electoral votes. She needs 270 to win and a lot of the larger electoral vote counts are still favoring her. That could of course change the closer we get to election day and I certainly hope it does.
But we need to be relentless in pursuing every single vote for Trump or he will get clobbered.
Trump does stand a good chance to win, but less of a chance once all those dead people start casting their ballots and people start to cast votes for their relatives two or three times.
A lot of this depends on how we define ‘cities’ (or ‘urban areas’) – here’s a link that breaks it down a bit, as per the Census Bureau:
http://www.citylab.com/housing/2012/03/us-urban-population-what-does-urban-really-mean/1589/
In short, using the 2010 data, ‘urbanized areas’ (more than 50K people in an area – and again, defining ‘area’ is tough) account for 71.2 percent of the population. There are 486 of these regions. Then they also define ‘urban clusters’ (2500 – 50K people), of which they map out 3087 of them totaling another 9.5%. By that metric, it is over 80% of the population.
Change the definitions a bit, to the 100K you mention, and surely it does drop. But the Census Bureau does say 80%, yes, in large part because of those above definitions.
Apples and oranges. Citylab (The Atlantic) has an agenda, and wants the 80 percent number to be true. What further confuses the issue is that if you have a certain agenda, you can use data for a metropolitan statistical area to define an urban core when it’s really not.
Among people who deal in infrastructure and land use, the term “city” is most commonly used to define an incorporated place with a formal charter and election of local officials. Communities of unincorporated “designated census places” more commonly fall under the control of a county government. The planning process itself often has less to do specifically with politics, and more to do with maintenance or improvement of things such as roads, schools, parks, sewers, etc. A lot of this also relates to housing density.
The best estimate I’ve seen of how such demographics break down, including what’s coming from some of the more articulate minds caught up in the bitter feud over smart growth, is that 20 percent of the population can be considered to live in an urban core. Another 60 percent lives in what can be defined as suburban/exurban. The remaining 20 percent are rural. YMMV.
Perry, my belief is that those urban areas that are predominantly and irretrievably Blue are those that have a majority/minority populace that is typically low income/high welfare and housed in areas that can be categorized as ghettos. Such cities also have a a larger concentration of wealthy elites, mostly white but also including most of those minority families that have achieved true wealth, be they black, Hispanic or Asian. Between the two income extremes are many media, entertainment, sports, academic and political types.
Republicans can forget about ever prevailing in such urban centers because the elites look down upon us as unsophisticated provincials and the minorities are convinced that we would make their freeloading ways more difficult.
Smaller cities not fitting that profile but dominated by the presence of a single large, or multiple, smaller, college campuses are also out of reach.
Other than those examples, I believe most American cities could be up for grabs.
It’s a known fact that 100% of the most crime and poverty-ridden locales in the US have been lorded over by demo=rats for decades.
PT, that’s probably as workable a theory as any until something better comes along.
Still, the dynamics of it can get pretty complicated. For example, it’s fairly well known how a process of ghettoization might happen, but less clear how gentrification occurs as the reverse of the coin. Another recent change, apparently due to globalization, is a shift of the wealthiest demographic to Democrat. You see this in Silicon Valley where engineering labor has either been sent offshore or supplanted with H1-B visa holders.
One of the bigger problems created by federal policy, at least it seems to me, is that we’ve had a steady erosion of the middle class by almost any rational measure. And that’s not a good thing.
It comes down to math Poetrooper, sadly here in the PRoM I see exactly what your writer saw in PA. West of Worcester there’s a lot less support for HRC and a lot more for Trump. But the reality is that the only votes that matter in Massachusetts are those in Boston.
Boston has more population than the entire rest of the state. Every single town west of Worcester could be pro-Trump on election day and he still loses the state.
I don’t know the relative population numbers in PA, but even in New York when it comes to presidential elections it’s not the number of towns that go one way, it’s how the few large urban areas vote that decide the entire state of NY.
In those areas I don’t see the same level of support for Trump.
I’m hoping that’s because urban dwellers are not very comfortable letting their neighbors know they support Trump and on election day it will be Trump with a surprise.
However I will not at all be surprised on election day to find that in spite of all the people in all of the small and mid-size towns across the country voting for Trump the election is a landslide win for HRC solely based on the simple reality that by catering to the turds in urban settings who never contribute HRC sealed the deal for the White House. Getting stuff for free by taking it from other people is the motto of the democratic party, HRC and company have taken that motto to an art form.
Another example (albeit more lightly populated) – most of New Mexico is very conservative, but the vast majority of the population is concentrated in the Albuquerque-Santa Fe axis (with a nod to college town Las Cruces). He will probably sweep almost all the state – until maybe 100 square miles of votes in those three cities are counted.
David, my Hispanic friends in Ruidoso and their Hispanic friends are pro-Trump.
Yup, this. Don’t look at “poll numbers” nationwide, look at the key states. In order to win, Trump has to take at least a couple of the states that Obama took in 2012 and 2008.
There’s a fun interactive map here: http://www.270towin.com/
But it’s got bad news for Trump. Even if Trump wins FL, GA, NC, OH and CO he still falls short of 270.
Pennsylvania? Sorry but the last time PA voted Republican for president was in 1988. Since that time the population of the big urban centers has gone up, not down, and they tend to vote democrat.
Florida is a possibility but Trump’s going to have to fight hard to get it.
To those who think Trump has a chance, what traditionally blue states do you think he’ll win? The “big ticket” states like CA, IL, NY, NJ or MA? I just don’t see it, no matter how much support he has in the rural areas, those are all states where the big city tails wag the dog.
Even a reliably conservative state like Nevada will go the way of the big city voters in Las Vegas and Reno, not the ranchers in Ely or Winnemucca. Ditto for Washington, Oregon and Colorado.
The Electoral College is what Trump has to win. Remember the 2001 Cluster goat screw that happened. Algorithm the sky is falling Gore won the popular vote by 500,000 votes. In Orygun where I live the liberal enclaves of Portland/Salem/Eugene have mostly liberal snowflakes that control everything in the Beaver state. No way is the left coast going Trump. Unfortunately.
Question: What happens if what seems to be the theme (more Trump supporters than it appears) vote in a majority that numbers would show a defeat of Hillary, but Hillary still wins (via a corrupt mechanism)? Is there anything to prevent/prove that? I’ve only been here 34 years but I’ve never been more afraid.
Great point ^^^^
I don’t think there’s any real chance of the election being ‘stolen’ – I went through this with liberal friends when President George W. Bush won after the Diebold voting machine president ‘promised’ he’d win, and they were counting the ballots in some places. The reality is, Clinton is ahead in the electoral college by quite a lot – it’s considerably more unlikely that Trump wins the EC, and thus the Presidency.
I think the worst of all outcomes for the country, though, is that Clinton wins the EC, and Trump wins the popular vote. That’ll be a cluster-fuck of epic proportions.
Please excuse my ignorance, but walk me thru what happens if your last sentence happens. What is the fall out?
It happened in 2000 when Gore won the popular vote by about 500,000.
The Country is split even worse now along political lines, it could get nasty, hopefully if it does it will just stay in the courts.
-Not seeing a lot of Hillary support amongst the O4-O6 crowd. At least in the Army. We don’t talk a lot of politics at work, what with not a lot of time available and the whole requirement to watch our mouths….
-Regarding nuance: yes. Here’s an actual conversation with my gunner back a long time ago. Gunner: “I’m voting for Hillary; she’s from New York.” Me: (Knowing how my gunner is)”Are you serious? Do you know her opinions on anything?” Gunner: “She’s from New York.” Me: “Do you consider yourself a democrat or a Republican?” Gunner: “I’m a democrat; I’m voting for Hillary.” Me: “How are you on gun control?” (Against); How are you on abortion? (against); How are you on death penalty? (For); How are you on illegal immigration? (Against); How are you on military / defense? (Pro military); How are you on this war? (Pro).” Finally, I tell him that he is a Republican and explain Hillary’s position on all of these areas and the light comes on. (It was one of those long patrols.)
-It’s been said already but when the population density is 1 person per mile in the country, you can be as pro-Trump as you want, but it isn’t pulling the state into the win column. For example, Washington State is completely controlled by Pierce and King counties. The way they vote, so votes the state. And those cities vote in only one way. Look at any electoral map from any election, broken down to the county level.
The assumption that there’s a correlation between ‘better educated’ and ‘more attuned to the nuances of politics’ just because they’re elites, is not necessasily true. If they’re so ‘educated and attuned’ they would realize there’s a vast world outside their fishbowl that is very attuned to what’s going on in the world at large. The effete tend to have a high opinion of themselves, hence the pejorative terms like ‘uneducated hillbilly’, when addressing those who live and work in rural settings. You have to wonder about the mind of an 04/05 who sees nothing wrong with supporting a corruptocrat, along with her husband, with a long history of bad ethics and criminal malfeasance.
I’m a lifelong conservative Independent who has voted Republican my entire adult life- I have simply agreed with the Republican Party more on the issues that matter to me than the others (I am old enough to have had the chance to vote Perot). Risking the danger of lumping myself in with the ‘better educatedI and ‘more attuned’, I am/was an O4/O5 (although I don’t consider myself effete. Is that a requirement?). I’ve never used or heard anyone use the term ‘uneducated hillbilly’. On a daily basis I talk to mostly O4/O5s and a COL/BG thrown in for good measure, and my unofficial and totally unscientific poll would say that most of them are Trump supporters. I haven’t heard many of them support Hillary. What I have heard is what both candidates have to say about issues. I have never liked Hillary Clinton, but if we are going to emphasize history let’s not forget that Trump has bad ethics and criminal malfeasance in his as well. Without presuming to speak for all of the elite, I would say that my issue with Trump is that he is absolutely full of crap. He has no interest in being President other than for the fame it will garner, and he has only started taking the campaign seriously in the last few weeks. His positions are ludicrous- beginning with the wall and down to the ‘pause’ on immigration based on a religious test. One is simply not feasible, the other is unconstitutional. Oh yeah, he’s also an unabashed bigot and serial con man. When Barack Obama was running the first time, I found him to be an intelligent, charismatic speaker. I wanted to like him. Then he started talking about his platform. Most of it was a pipe dream- I remember laughing out loud when he said he would close Guantanamo. Simply can’t be done. And it hasn’t. He was just telling a lot of people what they wanted to hear. That’s what Trump is doing to his supporters. He is literally making it up as he goes along. The wall was the… Read more »
Red, thanks for chipping in–I was hoping you would because even though we frequently disagree, you make unique contributions based on your perspective, that of an airborne infantry O-5.
Gotta tell you I’m relieved to hear your colleagues are pretty much in the same quandary as the rest of us, faced with this no-win scenario but most recognizing Trump as the lesser evil. When I read JAGC’s comment yesterday, I was floored.
My major concern is that the Democrat party will use a Hillary presidency to stack the Supreme Court with a new regime of liberal justices. They’ll induce the older liberal justices to retire early and replace them with young true believers who will hide their liberal fervor through the Senate hearing process but once on the bench go full Alinsky on us so we’ll be stuck with them for decades. In that case, either our guns will be gone or we will have nationwide insurrection.
I can’t think of anything Trump would do that might lead to civil war. Some think he’ll get us into a major ground war in the Mideast, but I don’t buy into that so easily. Trump is a pragmatic businessman and a deal maker who prides himself on making deals that work for both sides, preferably better for his side of course, but nonetheless a workable, deal that satisfies all parties.
And lastly, if he turns out to be a disaster as POTUS, we impeach his ass and remove him from office. The Democrats would gladly make that easy enough to do. Then we have a very capable, level-headed, Midwestern governor who is very much to my liking, to step in and run our government.
It’s my impeachable candidate plan.
By the way, if the dog catches the mail truck, he’s pretty much helpless rather than dangerous don’t you think?
Poetrooper, please see my post below.
Fuck Clinton. Fuck Trump. Neither is qualified to be President, or even a school crossing-guard.
Fuck the Democrap Party. Fuck the Rethuglican Party. These two bands of fucktards are the people who got us into this fucking mess.
Let. It. Burn.
He’s losing. He’s losing everywhere it matters. PA, VA, FL, you name it, he’s losing. He’s so bad people are going to hold their noses and vote for Killary.
I wanted Bernie, voting for Clinton. She may be a liar and worse, but Trump is so fucking inept and frankly dangerous to have in charge. You guys clinging to any reason to believe he’s not losing, and hard, are in for a rude awakening.
Look at how she handled Classified Information as SoS, and you’re still voting for her? She’ll likely put our Nuclear Launch Codes on Yahoo!
They are both authoritarians. The best thing about Trump is how much damage he is doing to the public perception of conservative ideologies. He has done more from progressives in the last 8 months than Hillary ever has merely by Trump being Trump.
The Clintons are among the worst things that have ever happened to the public perception of progressives ideologies. They use their political influence in order to entrench and enrich themselves and a global elite without ever doing a damn thing for the public good.
So ultimately I think the nation would be better off with Trump then Hillary because the public backlash to Trump will be a sharp anti-authoritarian left turn in American politics.
My fear is Hillary will win and the reaction to her centrist authoritarian kleptocratic finance feudalist neoliberal neocon presidency will be a massive right wing swing of the pendulum in America politics.
Given how enamored the right is with dictatorships and nationalist fascism a strong right wing swing from will be the nail in the coffin of our democracy.
Which candidate is accepting “donations” from various dictatorships? Hmm? Which one has a “foundation” that is primarily funded by foreign “donations”? Hmmm?
It is most democrats that assume everything is within the perview of the governement, not most republicans.
I recently drove from the South East to Upper New England using the secondary roads when possible. I saw no Hillary signs but did see some Trump signs. As a truck driver rolling about NC I have seen 0 Hillary signs and just a few Trump. This is one of the most apathetic elections I have ever seen but it appears Trump has more support than Hillary does.
No possible electoral map gets Trump to 270. He may pull 40+% of the voters, but he’s toast. Basically, voting for Trump is a wasted vote.
Okay, okay, okay. Taking everything into consideration, in the previous two elections, if you will recall, bodaprez won his first term in office because the proletariat, mostly women, voted with their stomachs and their crotches. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, find a video of the inauguration day and look at the mass of people who jammed the Mall up to the Capitol building. It was like watching the Beatles arrive at New York City in February 1964. The second election, the same thing but much more subdued and his opponents just did not have the charisma that he had, and he and da missus didn’t perambulate up Pennsylvania Avenue this time. I guess they knew their popularity had dropped like a stone. Now we have two candidates who make promise after promise after promise and the argument from the balcony seats is that neither of them can keep those promises. There’s no ‘rock star’ charisma here, just who is better at name-calling and bitch slapping. Trump is reactive and shrillary is as spontaneous as pool algae. (That’s an opportunistic organism, in case anyone is wondering.) Trump knows which buttons to push and sometimes pushes too many times. Shrillary waits until he’s done yapping. I’ve seen arguments over who is going to win and for what reasons, including whose transits favor which birth signs, and everyone has opposing opinions, so here’s mine. I think this is going to be one of the tightest elections EVER. In fact, since there are 538 electoral votes available, it would be more likely that you could get an exact 269 EV split. And don’t tell me that isn’t possible, Hondo, because it is. All you need is one state to make that even split vote. Then what are you going to do? It’s the states with the larger EV numbers that tend to swing the balance one way or the other. Like I said, I think this is going to be the tightest election ever, despite the EV map based on current polls. Link below: http://www.electoral-vote.com/ Maybe it’s time we did away… Read more »
Here’s another electoral map, one which includes the toss-ups (undecided).
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_elections_electoral_college_map.html
This clearly shows that if all the undecided votes went to Trump, he’d win.
This is why I pay no attention to polls any more.
I think there is something not being counted here: the People.
Look at those empty basketball courts for Hillary and Kaine then look at the packed meeting halls and coliseums for Trump and Pence.
I think the Democrat press and the pollsters are selling us a very dead fish wrapped in a thin sheet of pseudo-science. Call it the Global Warmist method of measuring America’s political temperature.
Screw ’em…
Rush had a very persuasive observation on this a few days ago: Same thing happened with Romney. Huge crowds etc. And he got dunked.
See it happening again because R’s are saying they won’t vote for T which means they are effectively voting for C. They stay at home…a vote for H. Trump, hate him or love him is the only option to the 3rd Obama term, on steroids since many of the Supremes are likely to croak.
I reject the “a non-vote for Trump is a vote for hillary” mantra being used by the right. This mistakenly assumes that everyone will vote for hillary that is a dem and it clearly is not the case. just as many if not more dems will not show up and vote for her.
A vote for someone else is just that. People exercising their Constitutional right to make a decision and vote for the person they see as best to lead this nation not just vote for who someone tells them to vote for
I’m as concerned about SCOTUS as the rest of you, but it is not just a president that gets elected in the fall. It’s also state representatives and senators and if both houses of Congress are heavily biased against a Democrat’s choices, then what?
We can argue this back and forth but the choices in appointments are no guarantee of a seat and never were.
Exactly, and this is why I said I don’t put a lot of consideration into what they say.
I tend to dismiss the media reports because they are consistently angled in favor of whatever candidates the media outlet favors/supports/drools over. That entrenched attitude can make people who would vote decide to stay home because there’s no use in going, the other candidate hasn’t got a chance.
It’s unfortunate that we, the people, can’t put a chokehold on them or hold their feet to the fire over their asinine frothing over one candidate, instead of taking a nonpartisan approach and accurately reporting the stories.
Apparently Hil thinks she can just run out the clock on being held responsible for her transgressions.
I think I’d laugh myself into a coma if the Hildabeast got elected and then impeached.
Couple of observations. Hillary certainly will not get the numbers Obama did. Even though the polls ( including liberal geek Nate Silver) are saying Hillary will win big. A large group of Americans vote on emotion. Plenty could happen between now and Nov 11 to play on those emotions. I’m not counting Trump out.