U.S. Elections: Trumpsterfire Unchained

[Maithanet]

3 minutes ago, OnionAhaiReborn said:

Trump is helpfully keeping the negative coverage going, though, by attacking prominent Republicans like Ryan and McCain. I think his downward spiral is going to coax more and more unhinged behavior out of him from now until election day. If he could just shut up he probably would regain some voters he lost, but I don't think he can. 

No to mention that voting has already started.  If there is a big surprise on Oct 25, there's a good chance that states like CO and NC could already be lost, even if Trump did pull even by election day. 

[Arch-MaesterPhilip]

1 minute ago, OnionAhaiReborn said:

Trump is helpfully keeping the negative coverage going, though, by attacking prominent Republicans like Ryan and McCain. I think his downward spiral is going to coax more and more unhinged behavior out of him from now until election day. If he could just shut up he probably would regain some voters he lost, but I don't think he can. 

He started as a protest candidate who started winning. Now he has to act more psychotic, racist, xenophobic, and misogynistic than he already is in an effort to lose. Then he can claim that the Republican establishment was the reason he lost. I can imagine him ranting about he would have beat Crooked Hillary if not for the disloyalty.  

[Ice Queen]

17 minutes ago, SerPaladin said:

Have we learned nothing from horror movies? As long as the monster is still breathing, it will keep coming. An 11% lead that falls back to 9% (or even 6.5%) means that a number of folks out there in the polling universe have changed their mind back to Trump.

Kill it with fire.

Monday, I thought the Trumpies were setting up their excuses for the loss, but they think there are more October surprises coming for Hillary. I'll say this... the Wikileaks e-mails are not a huge problem, yet. However, it will be easy to plant a very damaging false story in one of them too late for Hillary or Podesta or whoever to put out the fire. With no Apprentice tapes forthcoming, it's possible the D's might have blown their ammo too early.

I find it hard to believe WikiLeaks would wait until after early voting has started. I think they've released whatever surprises they have.

[Ice Queen]

Just now, Arch-MaesterPhilip said:

He started as a protest candidate who started winning. Now he has to act more psychotic, racist, xenophobic, and misogynistic than he already is in an effort to lose. Then he can claim that the Republican establishment was the reason he lost. I can imagine him ranting about he would have beat Crooked Hillary if not for the disloyalty.  

You know, this makes a sick, twisted kind of sense. I've been waiting for a year for him to say, "Just kidding!"

[SerPaladin]

1 minute ago, OnionAhaiReborn said:

Trump is helpfully keeping the negative coverage going, though, by attacking prominent Republicans like Ryan and McCain. I think his downward spiral is going to coax more and more unhinged behavior out of him from now until election day. If he could just shut up he probably would regain some voters he lost, but I don't think he can. 

Someone upthread said that a poll had rolled back from 11% to 9% lead for H. FiverThirtyEight has it at 6.5%, and the LA Times most recent poll has it at 4%.

Trump immolating is necessary at this point. Please finish the job.

[Mlle. Zabzie]

3 minutes ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

You know, this makes a sick, twisted kind of sense. I've been waiting for a year for him to say, "Just kidding!"

If I wore a tin foil hat, I'd think that he was in league with the Clintons to make sure she won.

But more realistically, I agree that he is really his own worst enemy at this point.  And I'm not sure we need to see any more from either candidate (and in fact, I'd rather not, thank you very much).  I'm curious whether either of them will head down to NC and do a "wow, what a disaster this hurricane was, I will do my best to help", together of pictures volunteering on the beach with cleanup or something.

ETA:  And apparently I agree with Glenn Beck?  Put my in the "hell hath frozen over" category.

[SerPaladin]

4 minutes ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

I find it hard to believe WikiLeaks would wait until after early voting has started. I think they've released whatever surprises they have.

Assange has proven not to be particularly fluent with electoral timing. I'd half expect him to try and drop his best headline on the Monday before the election, when the papers try not to run anything that can't be responded to.

[Arch-MaesterPhilip]

5 minutes ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

You know, this makes a sick, twisted kind of sense. I've been waiting for a year for him to say, "Just kidding!"

More like this, but without the helmet. 

 

 

[Slick Mongoose]

38 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

This was my biggest criticism of Hillary's debate performance. I understand though that the amount of bullshit coming from Trump could seem overwhelming.

The Gish Gallop has no real counter. It's a weakness of the spoken debate format.

[Ice Queen]

Just now, Mlle. Zabzie said:

If I wore a tin foil hat, I'd think that he was in league with the Clintons to make sure she won.

But more realistically, I agree that he is really his own worst enemy at this point.  And I'm not sure we need to see any more from either candidate (and in fact, I'd rather not, thank you very much).  I'm curious whether either of them will head down to NC and do a "wow, what a disaster this hurricane was, I will do my best to help", together of pictures volunteering on the beach with cleanup or something.

I have wondered the same thing, and I know we're not alone. The man was a Democrat for years and even now you can't call him a Republican. What started out as a joke got to big to handle and he had to see it through...and now he's looking for a way out. He can't just drop out, so he has to make it like he was set up to lose or that the election was rigged.

/tinfoil hat

We'll see what happens in NC. Officials might tell them not to come. 

 

[OnionAhaiReborn]

2 minutes ago, SerPaladin said:

Someone upthread said that a poll had rolled back from 11% to 9% lead for H. FiverThirtyEight has it at 6.5%, and the LA Times most recent poll has it at 4%.

Trump immolating is necessary at this point. Please finish the job.

So far only one pollster (NBC/WSJ) has released two post-tape polls (unless I'm missing something), and it's true that it moved a bit back in Trumps direction, but it's also the one showing the largest Clinton lead. 538's odds of winning have definitely swung in Clinton's direction and not moved back yet. We'll have to wait and see for more post-tape/debate polls, which will also include the GOP civil war fallout, and then we'll know more, but I expect it to remain very grim for Trump. 

[Maithanet]

8 minutes ago, SerPaladin said:

Someone upthread said that a poll had rolled back from 11% to 9% lead for H. FiverThirtyEight has it at 6.5%, and the LA Times most recent poll has it at 4%.

Trump immolating is necessary at this point. Please finish the job.

Clintons lead has been increasing steadily for three weeks now.  Don't take a single poll to mean the world.  Here's Clinton's lead on 538:

9/26 - Clinton +1.4

10/1 - Clinton +3

10/7 - Clinton +5.1

Today - Clinton +6.1

Trump's campaign is disintegrating, there is no need to panic about "not finishing the job."

[MerenthaClone]

Compared to the general trend, the LAT is also +7 Trump at baseline, so...

[Ice Queen]

3 minutes ago, MerenthaClone said:

Compared to the general trend, the LAT is also +7 Trump at baseline, so...

Yeah, they've been the outlier for the whole election.

[Ariadne23]

My worry is that until we either (1) pass a constitutional amendment dealing with Citizens United and big donor money in politics (which people - rightly - feel has disenfranchised the common voter), (2) the Republicans manage to find a responsible, capable candidate with populist appeal, or (3) the Republicans make their primary less democratic like the DNC we're just gonna keep seeing more of Trump himself or candidates like Trump.

[Maithanet]

5 minutes ago, Ariadne23 said:

My worry is that until we either (1) pass a constitutional amendment dealing with Citizens United and big donor money in politics (which people - rightly - feel has disenfranchised the common voter), (2) the Republicans manage to find a responsible, capable candidate with populist appeal, or (3) the Republicans make their primary less democratic like the DNC we're just gonna keep seeing more of Trump himself or candidates like Trump.

While I'm sure you don't like Citizens United, I don't see how it can really be tied to the rise of Trump.  His opponents in the GOP primary were much better funded, but his "free media" tactic overwhelmed their spending.  Now maybe Trumps "politicians are bought and sold" message has a little more punch with Citizens United, but the message that the little guy is getting shut out of politics is pretty universal.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

1 minute ago, Ariadne23 said:

My worry is that until we either (1) pass a constitutional amendment dealing with Citizens United and big donor money in politics (which people - rightly - feel has disenfranchised the common voter), (2) the Republicans manage to find a responsible, capable candidate with populist appeal, or (3) the Republicans make their primary less democratic like the DNC we're just gonna keep seeing more of Trump himself or candidates like Trump.

The Republican primary system is much less democratic than the Democratic system*, and it's what allowed Trump to secure a delegate majority and avoid a contested convention. Many Republican delegates were awarded winner-take-all either statewide or by Congressional district to the plurality winner. This allowed Trump to build an enormous delegate lead while taking ~35% of the vote in a crowded field for a few months (then everyone gave up and he started winning outright majorities). In the Democratic system delegates are awarded almost entirely proportionally, so under those rules Trump would have taken his plurality- but non-majority- of delegates into a contested convention and probably lost to an establishment choice. 

*the exception is the use of superdelegates, but they've never overturned the will of voters and I don't think they realistically could without provoking electorally-catastrophic backlash. Still, they should be eliminated. 

[Arch-MaesterPhilip]

The size of the Republican field didn't help either. That made it so much easier for him in the beginning.

I think proportional is more undemocratic,  can you imagine the outcry if he went into the convention without the required number and lost there? At least winner take all is no different than the general election.  

I didn't like the idea of legally binding  primaries to begin with and this cycle has turned me against them completely. 

[SerPaladin]

1 minute ago, OnionAhaiReborn said:

The Republican primary system is much less democratic than the Democratic system*, and it's what allowed Trump to secure a delegate majority and avoid a contested convention. Many Republican delegates were awarded winner-take-all either statewide or by Congressional district to the plurality winner. This allowed Trump to build an enormous delegate lead while taking ~35% of the vote in a crowded field for a few months (then everyone gave up and he started winning outright majorities). In the Democratic system delegates are awarded almost entirely proportionally, so under those rules Trump would have taken his plurality- but non-majority- of delegates into a contested convention and probably lost to an establishment choice.

Some of the Dirty Dozen and a Half were never serious candidates, but the Republicans would be well served to set up rules that start with a smaller field to prevent a Trump style disaster in the future. Cruz had to deal with at least three other "Evangelical" style Republicans, Kasich had Christie, Perry, Walker, Gilmore, Pataki and Jindal in the "Governor" lane. Rubio and Bush fought over the establishment bloc before they realized there was a bigger dog in the kennel. And Ben Carson was there.

The leadership is too weak to have winnowed down the field ahead of time. And that lack of leadership contributes to keeping it weak. Right now there are four splinters of the party, and the divisions are deep enough to make me feel that they can't be healed. Trump's lower income/ no college bloc cannot co-exist with the laissez faire economics types, because of Free Trade, among other things. The evangelicals have long been at odds with the libertarians. And there are just not enough of the ivory tower purists to keep the tent alive.

Expect to see the Trumpsters and Evangelicals coalesce (though the "god uses flawed men" argument of the evangelicals makes my head hurt). I wonder if they will take on a new party name, or drive the Bushes and National Review out and claim the Republican moniker That means an eternity of Trump and Cruz battling each other for that throne.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

3 minutes ago, Arch-MaesterPhilip said:

The size of the Republican field didn't help either. That made it so much easier for him in the beginning.

I think proportional is more undemocratic,  can you imagine the outcry if he went into the convention without the required number and lost there? At least winner take all is no different than the general election.  

I didn't like the idea of legally binding  primaries to begin with and this cycle has turned me against them completely. 

There may have been outcry, but that doesn't make it 'more undemocratic' than having a minority of voters command a majority of delegates. He would not have had a majority of delegates under proportional rules, and an actual majority would have been free to coalesce around someone else.

The general election rules are also undemocratic, so it's true that Republican rules are more similar to the general- they're similarly undemocratic.