Donald Trump Presidential Campaign Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Bay
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
chero23 said:
Just saw this poll.
It is the latest one from Fox News.
HRC vs Trump head to head, HRC wins by 3%, 42-39

Then they have it with Gary Johnson, HRC wins by 3%, 39-36-12

Rasmussen has HRC ahead by 4 points and Reuters has HRC ahead by 8.

realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/pres_general/
Click to expand...
Is it possible that the polls generally, not just the polls you cited, are underestimating support for Trump because there will be people who don’t want to tell pollsters they support Trump?
 
Sy_Noe said:
Wait a bit, Chero. I’ve heard once Bernie winds down, she could be up by 8 in more than just Reuters.
Click to expand...
Yes, I do expect a Clinton bounce - Trump gained about 11 points after winning the nomination, presumptively that is. I also would not be surprised to see Trump slump for awhile - a hangover/buyer’s remorse if you will. I hope it comes sooner rather than later. 🙂 I think he could come back from it by the fall pretty well.

A lot depends on the conventions, consolidation of support from the NeverTrumpers (at least most) to the GOP and/or Sanders folks to the Democrats - and the VP picks on both sides I think (especially Trump though) will have an impact, more so than usual. I still want Kasich. I think that could do it. Whoever it is, he better be damn “stabilizing.” 😉
 
_Abyssinia said:
Is it possible that the polls are underestimating support for Trump because there will be people who don’t want to tell pollsters they support Trump?
Click to expand...
I think a lot of men will vote for Trump - all of them may not admit it - beyond the ones in the polls: college educated, middle class, younger (under 45), urban, suburbia especially. (mostly white but I put some blacks here too, even a few Hispanics who are assimilated, born in US, well-established, job, house, kids, etc.) Men don’t like Hillary Clinton. It is actually possible that Trump could win enough male votes to neutralize the high numbers of women voting for Clinton, the total number of which is actually quite a bit lower; the women doing this are mainly Hillary’s generation. It is also important to think of the states in play in terms of polling - the demographic makeup of those states.
 
Trump has really been treated unfairly by the established politicos and this last bashing has been as overdone as commercials for lawyers soliciting clients suffering from mesothelioma!
 
If the David French brigade keeps up I don’t know if Trump can get enough support behind him to go after Clinton, Obama, and Sanders all united, with the mainstream media support - oh, and Ryan calling him a racist. I was offended by Trump’s remarks (really I thought they were more stupid than offensive) but Ryan doesn’t always have the best judgment either. He could have handled that better. He widens the wedge in the GOP. Not intentionally. The good news is we have time to figure all of this out, hopefully at the convention or shortly after it. I predict the sight of the Democrats uniting and climbing in the polls will be such a tonic even David French (et al.) will abandon his little princess prima donna routine. But I could be overestimating him, no doubt there. Ditto the Bushes, Romney, Cruz - I think all of those people need to come around for the GOP to have a chance. Or should I say capitalize on their presently existing fairly good chance.
 
chero23 said:
Just saw this poll.
It is the latest one from Fox News.
HRC vs Trump head to head, HRC wins by 3%, 42-39

Then they have it with Gary Johnson, HRC wins by 3%, 39-36-12

Rasmussen has HRC ahead by 4 points and Reuters has HRC ahead by 8.

realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/pres_general/
Click to expand...
Trump is at the same 39% whether Johnson is taken into consideration with Trump and Clinton or not. Is that correct? I think the poll downturn, although Trump is still in the margin of error in the Fox News poll, reflects Trump having for the most part a bad week due to his comment regarding Judge Curial. I also agree with FollowChrist34, the poll also may well be reflecting a bump for Clinton as she’s now nearly officially recognised as the presumptive nominee.

Next week Trump is having a major speech on the Clintons. Let’s see if that moves the needle as he moves forward into a general election campaign.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Be assured if you got an infraction, it wasn’t me turning you in. I didn’t, and don’t believe in doing it. The only time I recall doing it was several years ago, and the reason wasn’t personal.

Election cycles seem to be infraction magnets, and not only for you.

It’s hard to make a direct comparison without inventing a scenario that doesn’t exist and would seem improbable. Well, there is one that’s mildly comparable. I recall the crack made by, I believe, Hillary Clinton, to the effect that Ghandi was a convenience store operator in St. Louis. I think I did compare that to the Trump utterance. My point was that both were stupid gaffes that probably didn’t mean anything more in the one case than it did in the other, but the Clinton one was quickly buried while the Trump one has been made a big deal.

But do I think Hillary Clinton is a racist because of that remark? No. That’s one of those dumb things people say in a lapse of “in the moment” judgment. I dislike her intensely, but not for that.

Personally, I think racism is both overblown and underestimated. People call things racist that aren’t and ignore things that are, particularly if they come out of their own mouths. I believe everybody is a racist in some sense, mostly quite mildly. But to me, the most important thing isn’t any of that.

I’m from a part of the “upper south” where there are almost no black people at all. When I went to college in a city, I was pretty unlettered in urban political correctness when it came to race. My fellow students were city kids, Catholic almost without exception, and they acted like a person was a howling racist if he didn’t go out of his way to befriend every black person there. Well, there were some of the black students I just didn’t like and, I think, for good reason. Being “up from the country” ignorant, I confessed to a priest that, try as I might, I just couldn’t like some black people.

“You don’t have to like them, you have to love them” he said. He explained that loving someone is desiring what’s good for them and, if occasion presents, to act on it. Real racism, he said, is desiring harm or worse, acting to harm.

I have not changed my view of racism since then. Nor have I changed my mind about some of the puffery and pretension that often accompanies disavowals of one’s own racism and extreme oversensitivity to it.

It’s possible, though not entirely impossible, that, in graduate school, I was the only white man in St. Louis given permission, at least in the otherwise all-black neighborhood in which I lived, to use the “N” word and live to tell about it. My “right” was affirmed by a black motorcycle gang I somehow befriended, because they came to realize I “meant it the same way” they mean it when they say it, not the way they think most white people mean by it. I know that sounds incredible, but it’s true.

And so, I have what probably most would now consider a “warped” view of racism. No, I don’t use the “N” word, but if some hillbilly or other says it, I almost never think anything of it because a lot of them never even got to the long ago politically acceptable word “negro”, let alone “black”, “Afro-American” and now “African American”. But if I was a black man with a flat tire on the road with no spare, the likelihood is that one of those hillbillies would be the one to stop and help me out.

I will admit I have had friendly arguments with local Hispanics who insist on distinguishing themselves from “white” people. Some of them are “whiter” than I am in appearance. I really don’t like hearing them say that, not because I think it denigrates me, but because I don’t really care for the self-separation it implies. And that’s why I don’t favor La Raza or anything that’s race-based, and I’m suspicious of any organization that announces itself as race-based, like that lawyers’ organization Judge Curiel belongs to.

Now we’ll see if I get an infraction for this post. 🙂
Click to expand...
I remember that Hillary story, good memory there. I taught that comment on her part was unnecessary and if Trump brought it up I would have no problem.

From my part I respect your post, tip of the hat.
 
Mulligan2 said:
usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/06/09/donald-trump-unpaid-bills-republican-president-laswuits/85297274/

This article is not good news for Mr. Trump.

He will be under the microscope like never before. I am half expecting him to bow out of the race before the GOP convention due to all of the continued scrutiny he will be facing. And of course, he’ll say he’s being treated very unfairly. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
You’re right, it’s not good news, and he has been under every microscope the New York Times and the Clinton Foundation can bring to bear.

But in reading the actual article, one has to be very suspicious of it. Many of the claims and lawsuits it’s talking about are claims made by subcontractors who were not under Trump’s direct control, but were under the control of a general contractor or even another subcontractor. Anybody familiar with construction knows those things are extremely common.

Just taking a very brief look, it appears Walmart has been a defendant in my state alone in about 5,000 cases. Remember Walmart? Remember that Hillary Clinton was on the board of Directors?

Clay County, Missouri has a history of about as many lawsuits, and it’s not the biggest county in the state, just a pretty big one.

Lowe’s has about 250. Tyson Foods has about 500, and that doesn’t count the thousands of workers’ compensation claims both have had. Remember the “doffing and donning” lawsuits against Tyson’s and others over overtime? Sometimes overtime is more technical than real. In the “donning and doffing” suits, the issue was whether workers were entitled to overtime for putting on their work clothes. Ultimately, the courts decided they were. But, of course, I put on my “work clothes” every day and never get a dime for it.

The article is a “hit piece”. They mix together subcontractor claims with direct claims, and never explain what the overtime claims were about.

But it’s true the liberal media and the Clinton Foundation are going to dig up every aspect of Trump’s history, and they’ll misrepresent 90% of it. But they’ll leave Hillary Clinton’s history alone. Of course, the FBI has dedicated the full time of a hundred and more agents, and hundreds of man-days to investigation of Hillary Clinton, all without any political motive at all. But nothing for them to even look at, right? They must all be sitting around picking their noses. No other crimes to investigate.

And, of course, Judge Curiel saw fit to release the unproved, unlitigated claims of the Plaintiffs in the Trump University case, despite the fact that judges usually don’t because it ruins jury selection when there’s a highly publicized case, and despite the fact that the initial Plaintiff in the case tried to dismiss it.

Anybody still wonder why?
 
Sy_Noe said:
Wait a bit, Chero. I’ve heard once Bernie winds down, she could be up by 8 in more than just Reuters.
Click to expand...
Could be. I saw the 4 polls ( the 2 from Fox, the 1 from Reuters and Rasmussen).

I’m just speculating, but I wonder if obamas endorsement will help her with the base.
 
chero23 said:
Could be. I saw the 4 polls ( the 2 from Fox, the 1 from Reuters and Rasmussen).

I’m just speculating, but I wonder if obamas endorsement will help her with the base.
Click to expand...
I would think any real Obama supporter who has stuck with him would already be a Hillary Clinton supporter.
 
Jeanne_S said:
Dream on,ain’t gonna happen:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I think it would be suicide for the republicans. A huge revolt would occur.

I think the republicans, especially those in elections will distance themselves from Trump, as those in 08 from Bush.
 
_Abyssinia said:
Trump is at the same 39% whether Johnson is taken into consideration with Trump and Clinton or not. Is that correct? I think the poll downturn, although Trump is still in the margin of error in the Fox News poll, reflects Trump having for the most part a bad week due to his comment regarding Judge Curial. I also agree with FollowChrist34, the poll also may well be reflecting a bump for Clinton as she’s now nearly officially recognised as the presumptive nominee.

Next week Trump is having a major speech on the Clintons. Let’s see if that moves the needle as he moves forward into a general election campaign.
Click to expand...
To me the biggie is Johnson. On this poll he’s around 11-12%. I think people are going to be turned off by trump and clintons playground battle.

Johnson needs to get to 15% to get to the debates. I think he will and if he does, watch out.
 
chero23 said:
To me the biggie is Johnson. On this poll he’s around 11-12%. I think people are going to be turned off by trump and clintons playground battle.

Johnson needs to get to 15% to get to the debates. I think he will and if he does, watch out.
Click to expand...
Gary Johnson has said he sides with Bernie Sanders, “73 percent” - m.townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2016/06/03/gary-johnson-i-agree-with-73-percent-of-what-sanders-says-you-know-n2172078

Johnson will probably get some Republican votes, but with statements like that he will also probably take from the Democrats as well some Independents.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top