US Election: It's a post-TrumpDay world

[Shryke]

18 minutes ago, Mudguard said:

No, the reasoning is that Clinton is refusing to release the transcripts because she has something to hide.  Whether this is true or not, who knows, but the only way this assertion can be rebutted is by releasing the transcripts.

Clinton has asserted that she'll release her speech transcripts when the other candidates release theirs.  Soon, it's just going to be Trump.  I doubt that Trump's speeches say anything stupider or more inflammatory than what he's already said in public, so I think there's a reasonable chance that Trump releases transcripts of his speeches to put pressure on Clinton.  Will Clinton then finally release the transcripts?  

There is a perception that Clinton is untrustworthy, and it's a narrative that's pushed by the media.  Clinton's refusal to provide the transcripts, to be transparent, reinforces this narrative.  Trump and the GOP are going to hammer her on this, and the media is going to eat it up.  

Maybe Clinton should release the transcripts after she's officially locked up the nomination but before the general.  I think it's likely that she's said positive things about Goldman Sachs during her speeches to Goldman Sachs, so strategically, it may have made sense to not release them when she was/is running against Sanders.  But against Trump, I don't think these types of statements would really hurt her.

Doubtful. She's still gonna be concerned about getting Sanders' supporters on board and Trump has, somehow, been successfully pulling the "anti-big-money" position. Any damage not releasing them would do has been done. I see no reason why she'd let them out of the bag now.

And let's not be silly, Clinton releasing the transcripts would in no way change the "she's untrustworthy" narrative or people's perception of her on that account.

[TrackerNeil]

3 minutes ago, White Walker Texas Ranger said:

This is actually quite alarming to me since Sanders won by some small amount. It's not because the results matter, but because polls seem to have been wrong a lot lately. This is terrifying because it makes me think Donald Trump has a chance of becoming president despite all polls saying he'll lose in a land slide.

Patience, patience...so far, The Donald has been running to a crowd that loves appeals to racial resentment, against candidates who have no choice but to either say nothing or go along less effectively. Hillary Clinton will not be so constrained. She doesn't have to worry about offending the "Mexicans are rapists" crowd because those folks aren't voting Democrat anyway. 

I know there's a belief that Trump will somehow "maul" Clinton, but I think he's going to mobilize Latino voters and women voters in a way no one else could--against him, of course. There's also this notion that Trump will rein himself in during the general election, but you can't expect the guy to stop being himself. And can you imagine the foreign-policy debate between Clinton and Trump? I think Trump is going to lead the party to a pretty substantial defeat, and if that happens, Mitch McConnell will rue the day he announced that blockade against Merrick Garland.

[TrackerNeil]

1 minute ago, Triskan said:

Favorite part of Cruz's concession was praising Carly Fiorina and what a great running mate she was.  WTF? 

I'm surprised Cruz didn't nominate a replacement for Scalia while he was at it.

[Shryke]

8 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

Patience, patience...so far, The Donald has been running to a crowd that loves appeals to racial resentment, against candidates who have no choice but to either say nothing or go along less effectively. Hillary Clinton will not be so constrained. She doesn't have to worry about offending the "Mexicans are rapists" crowd because those folks aren't voting Democrat anyway. 

I know there's a belief that Trump will somehow "maul" Clinton, but I think he's going to mobilize Latino voters and women voters in a way no one else could--against him, of course. There's also this notion that Trump will rein himself in during the general election, but you can't expect the guy to stop being himself. And can you imagine the foreign-policy debate between Clinton and Trump? I think Trump is going to lead the party to a pretty substantial defeat, and if that happens, Mitch McConnell will rue the day he announced that blockade against Merrick Garland.

There's already a few ads out there going after GOP candidates by linking them to Trump. And it's easy to do. There's tons and tons of horrible racist misogynistic vile shit Trump has said on camera. Such is the wages of 30+ years in the spotlight.

And on top of that, you can also take the Warren route and just mock Trump for being a loser and failure and turn him into a joke. Which also riles him up and feeds into the first kind of ad.

He's a soft target imo.

[Jaxom 1974]

10 minutes ago, Shryke said:

There's already a few ads out there going after GOP candidates by linking them to Trump. And it's easy to do. There's tons and tons of horrible racist misogynistic vile shit Trump has said on camera. Such is the wages of 30+ years in the spotlight.

And on top of that, you can also take the Warren route and just mock Trump for being a loser and failure and turn him into a joke. Which also riles him up and feeds into the first kind of ad.

He's a soft target imo.

It needs to be a relentless and from multiple corners. Too little, or not consistent would allow the Donald to shrug it off and regroup.  Don't give him breathing room and he'll lash out in a manner that would will only lead to his downfall.

[TheKitttenGuard]

Donald Trump will be the Republican nominee. 

I am still shocked.  

This is going to be very wierd and strange.

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

3 hours ago, TrackerNeil said:

Patience, patience...so far, The Donald has been running to a crowd that loves appeals to racial resentment, against candidates who have no choice but to either say nothing or go along less effectively. Hillary Clinton will not be so constrained. She doesn't have to worry about offending the "Mexicans are rapists" crowd because those folks aren't voting Democrat anyway. 

I know there's a belief that Trump will somehow "maul" Clinton, but I think he's going to mobilize Latino voters and women voters in a way no one else could--against him, of course. There's also thisI notion that Trump will rein himself in during the general election, but you can't expect the guy to stop being himself. And can you imagine the foreign-policy debate between Clinton and Trump? I think Trump is going to lead the party to a pretty substantial defeat, and if that happens, Mitch McConnell will rue the day he announced that blockade against Merrick Garland.

I mean I'm confident that Hillary will win, but only 80% sure at this point. Lots of improbable things are happening. Leicester City just won the Premier League.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

16 hours ago, TrackerNeil said:

I'm not sure that 47% comment did more than confirm what people were already inclined to believe about Romney. In any case, Obama had clear structural advantages going into the 2012 race (incumbency, improving economy), and I suspect they did more to help him than anything Mitt Romney said. 

You make a fair point, but Clinton does have a lot to lose if something out of context is leaked close to the election. A lot of fringe, working class voters who are on Bernie's side could easily go to Trump. I made my peace and am sticking with Clinton, she is the adult in the room, and though she is not the candidate for me, she will not harm my son's future in this world, I don't believe. But a lot of the working class people seem to be on the fence. It's hard to believe because of what's on the other side of the fence, I just find this whole thing extremely stressful.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

1 hour ago, White Walker Texas Ranger said:

This is actually quite alarming to me since Sanders won by some small amount. It's not because the results matter, but because polls seem to have been wrong a lot lately. This is terrifying because it makes me think Donald Trump has a chance of becoming president despite all polls saying he'll lose in a land slide.

Bill Maher says people need to say he'll win by huge numbers, that's the only way to get democratic voters off their butts. He might have a point.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

1 hour ago, Triskan said:

Favorite part of Cruz's concession was praising Carly Fiorina and what a great running mate she was.  WTF? 

Lol, what a friggin' weirdo. I'm glad he's out. He's far more dangerous than Trump--he actually knew how to make things happen if he got elected, too damned smart. Even though he did so many weird things. 

[Altherion]

48 minutes ago, White Walker Texas Ranger said:

This is actually quite alarming to me since Sanders won by some small amount. It's not because the results matter, but because polls seem to have been wrong a lot lately. This is terrifying because it makes me think Donald Trump has a chance of becoming president despite all polls saying he'll lose in a land slide.

Keep in mind that polls from before a candidate has won the nomination (usually March, but in this case May) are not terribly predictive. First, a lot can happen in half a year. Second, until the primary is over, there are a lot of people saying that they will never vote for a competitor to their preferred candidate even if the former wins the primary (Never Trump! Bernie or bust!), but many of them will in fact ultimately vote along party lines.

The Sanders victory is interesting. The poll aggregators ( FiveThirtyEight,  RealClearPolitics, Huffington Post) had him down by had him down by 7 to 8 and FiveThirtyEight's "polls plus" model (which has been hilariously wrong when it comes to Trump, but not so bad in the Democratic race) had him down by 11. It looks like Sanders will actually win by a little more than 5 which, even in the best case, is about a 12 point swing. It's not quite as bad as Wisconsin, but a pretty substantial mistake nonetheless.

In unrelated news, the Kasich campaign either exists in an alternate reality or believes their audience to have an unlimited reserve of gullibility:

Quote

"Sen. Ted Cruz just dropped out of the presidential race and it's up to us to stop Trump and unify our party in time to defeat Hillary Clinton," Kasich campaign manager Ben Hansen said in the email, which also asked supporters to donate money.

Somebody ought to remind him that Kasich has won a grand total of one state (and that one was a place where the state party apparatus was an extension of his campaign) and that he is only fourth in the number of delegates (trailing not only Trump and Cruz, but also Rubio who dropped out in March).

[Shryke]

18 minutes ago, Simon Steele said:

You make a fair point, but Clinton does have a lot to lose if something out of context is leaked close to the election. A lot of fringe, working class voters who are on Bernie's side could easily go to Trump. I made my peace and am sticking with Clinton, she is the adult in the room, and though she is not the candidate for me, she will not harm my son's future in this world, I don't believe. But a lot of the working class people seem to be on the fence. It's hard to believe because of what's on the other side of the fence, I just find this whole thing extremely stressful.

Trump's appeal to the working class is overstated imo.

538 had this today on that idea:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-mythology-of-trumps-working-class-support/

Which basically says that primary voters skew wealthier then the average and Trump's supporters wealthier then the average or either Democrat's supporters (though less so then Rubio's or Kasich's).

[Stan the Man Baratheon]

So happy Cruz dropped out.

GOD EMPEROR TRUMP!

Trump vs Hillary. Its absolutely lit

[peterbound]

1 hour ago, Shryke said:

Trump's appeal to the working class is overstated imo.

538 had this today on that idea:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-mythology-of-trumps-working-class-support/

Which basically says that primary voters skew wealthier then the average and Trump's supporters wealthier then the average or either Democrat's supporters (though less so then Rubio's or Kasich's).

I'm not so sure.  Everyone I work with, /everyone/ is a union card carrying blue collar 'working class' dude/lady, and all of them are now voting for trump.  Everyone of them distrusts, dislikes, and can't back Clinton.  

 

Should be interesting from here on out.  I'm actually just shocked that Sanders didn't run away with the democratic nom.  I can't see how anyone would back clinton at this point in history.  She's pretty much always been on the wrong side of what the democrats stand for, can't seen to get her shit together long enough to actually stand up for something, and is in the back pockets of the government elite.  You guys had a chance to make a real fucking difference, and you played it safe with a mediocre, wishy washy, weak candidate.  For shame. 

 

I just hope the God Emperor likes fire fighters. 

[Free Northman Reborn]

I still think the fears related to a Trump presidency are totally overblown. I mean, even the radical Obama was kept pretty much in check thanks to the checks and balances provided by the Senate and the House. Why would Trump have any more leeway?

He is not going to unleash WW3 on his own, or impose a radical new economic system without the support of the majority of the House and Senate, and that is highly unlikely to materialize. So people should relax a bit at the prospect, however remote, of Trump making it to the White House.

[Stan the Man Baratheon]

25 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

I still think the fears related to a Trump presidency are totally overblown. I mean, even the radical Obama was kept pretty much in check thanks to the checks and balances provided by the Senate and the House. Why would Trump have any more leeway?

He is not going to unleash WW3 on his own, or impose a radical new economic system without the support of the majority of the House and Senate, and that is highly unlikely to materialize. So people should relax a bit at the prospect, however remote, of Trump making it to the White House.

Fear-mongering is textbook liberal policy. 

2 hours ago, peterbound said:

I just hope the God Emperor likes fire fighters. 

God Emperor likes everything

 

[ThinkerX]

So...how is the GOP leadership going to go about denying Trump the nomination without Cruz?

[Bennis of the Brown Shield]

1 hour ago, ThinkerX said:

So...how is the GOP leadership going to go about denying Trump the nomination without Cruz?

They aren't. Indiana appears to have been their last line of defense. The chairman of the RNC has tweeted this:

 

So considering that Sanders is basically just treading water by now, Trump versus Hillary is all but confirmed. 

[Crazydog7]

Holy suffering Christ on a pogo stick.  I have been sitting here for 10 minutes trying to come up with something but serious Trump?  Oh my God. 

[TrackerNeil]

5 hours ago, peterbound said:

I can't see how anyone would back clinton at this point in history.  She's pretty much always been on the wrong side of what the democrats stand for, can't seen to get her shit together long enough to actually stand up for something, and is in the back pockets of the government elite.  You guys had a chance to make a real fucking difference, and you played it safe with a mediocre, wishy washy, weak candidate.  For shame. 

Then why don't you ask a Clinton supporter? But then, if the belief is that all Clinton supporters are on the take, I suppose nothing they said would interest you.