That fairy-tale happens in movies. It wont happen to you.

We're not talking about me we're talking about the US

I knew what you were talking about, but I could tell you were projecting. :d

Definitely older than you :lol:

Oh. Ok.

I wasn't, but you think you can read minds through the internet. You're awesome.

Well, it won't be another candidate. It will be Rubio if it is someone other than Trump.

I accept he likely won latinos in Nevada, but Latino GOP Primary voters are less than 1% of eligible latino voters in the state.

I'll be first to say that Trump has done better than I thought. And I don't like his politics at all.

BUT, what I am interested in is the analysis of the polling. And it is important to note that Trump has high 'unfavourable' ratings. This is what will limit him significantly in a general election.

And it is what people (me included) thought would limit him in the primary race. But, it is still early days. The latest betting odds give Trump about 50% chance of winning, with Rubio about 45%, and Cruz about 5%. I think that is about right.

The other thing to consider is that there haven't actually been many attack ads against Trump. The other contenders have been targeting each other. Now that it is seemingly coming down to 3 candidates, there will no doubt be a lot of ads against Trump.

But on the other hand, the fact Trump has runs on the board means he is increasingly seen as credible, rather than a wasted 'protest' vote.

So in terms of his unfavourability ratings, will his runs on the board make this reduce, or will the expected barrage of negative ads make this increase? That is the real question.

I still favour Rubio to take it out, but with much less certainty than I did before. A lot will depend on how long Cruz stays in the race, and how his voters split.

If the Donald does win the nomination, the only possible way I can see him winning a general election is if it is extremely low turn-out overall, but his voters have a very high turnout.

It is possible, because Hillary doesn't have much enthusiasm in her support, but I still think it unlikely. At a national level the vast vast majority of blacks and Hispanics are democrat voters, so are not voting in the GOP primaries. In a shoot out against Hillary, the black and Hispanic vote will be so overwhelmingly Democrat, that Trump's turnout of his base (white, working class, high school education only) will have to be astronomical.

It's the same problem Romney had vs Obama.

The other open question is what happens to Bernie's youth support? When he loses, will they lose interest? Or will they stay motivated and support Hillary in order to vote against Trump?

We are definitely in a post-spin, damage control era. That is Trump's appeal, he can say what he wants no matter how outrageous. In fact, the more outrageous the better.

I really think this is a replay of the Berlusconi era - a charismatic guy who was already publically known, willing to speak outside of the "on-message" scripted talking of politicians, making big promises he can't possibly keep, promising simple solutions to complex problems.

Add to this an electorate who is angry, disenfranchised, with no 'buy-in' to the system as is, due to perceptions that the system itself is bought and fixed.

This leads to people having an attitude that "politics is a joke, so we will treat it as such!"

In terms of any objective analysis of Trump's policies, I don't know how anyone can act like these are clear. The guy has contradicted himself so many times, I don't think anyone can really be clear on what he will do other than build a wall across the Mexico border!

Its becoming more and more likely that Trump will be the GOP candidate. The media have been completely clueless throughout his whole campaign. Expecting him to fall at any minute because of his political incorrectness and his anti-establishment stance but he keeps gaining. He also keeps gaining with groups who the media say he shouldn't.

After he called Cruz a "pussy" people said he would fall cos that is "not on" but he surged in the polls.

I feel he has risen out of the public's increasing annoyance at political correctness and media dominated leftist authoritarianism and policing of speech and thought.

I think he would beat Hillary in the general election too as he would expose her lies and corporate ties beautifully.

The media havent been clueless. They've been running an agenda. An anti Trump agenda, and its been led by FoxNews/Murdoch (which is why no one in Australia takes him seriously because we're dominated by Murdoch press and Fairfax wants a Democrat anyway)
The Saudi Prince who has a stake in FoxNews is at war with Trump and told him he'd never be president and he'd make sure of it, or words to the effect.

Trump'll get people who don't vote to turn out. Makes a big difference when voting's not compulsory and only 50% bother to.

apparently Nevada turnout was very high, unprecedented

whereas Hillary will be relying on apathy

There is truth to that argument.

I find it ironic that "the left" have been the target of Fox News for years, but now "the right" are eating their own. Fox are terrified that a Trump victory will condemn the republicans to a 3rd consecutive loss in a Presidential election.

Ironically, the way Fox news has dumbed down debate, and played to base prejudices, has actually created the conditions that Trump thrives on.

Trump polls better against Hillary than anyone else.
What they're afraid of is they wont have a neocon in the Whitehouse. They're more likely to back Hillary because she's a neocon in disguise, but they wont do it overtly.

Not sure where you're "hearing" this from, but if Bloomberg runs it will be as an independent. He's basically said he'd only consider running if he had a chance at winning, which would be if Sanders and Trump are the respective nominees.

Absolutely zero chance of Bloomberg running as a Democrat.

A GOP landslide?

Based off what polling?

-PB

Look at voter turnout - Republicans have been trouncing the Democrats. On one side, you've got a nationalist populist with a wide-base of support, whereas on the other side you've got political apathy and "more of the same". Case in point - Trump got more votes in Nevada than the entire Republican turnout of 2012 and both Sanders and Hillary this year.

One could argue that this could entice moderates to come out and vote against Trump, but looking at the republican primaries this hasn't happened for establishment candidates so I don't see how it's gonna happen for Hillary.

Edited by 433: 25/2/2016 04:26:45 PM

It is absolutely pointless to compare the Republican primary constituency to the electorate as a whole. It is a tiny slice of the American voting public and the enthusiasm of a very specific group of voters for Trump out of a very specific constituency is irrelevant to the general election.

About 75,000 people caucused in Nevada for the Republicans, while more than a million voted in the general election in 2012. You're trying to draw conclusions about the entire general election based on the behaviour of just 7% of the electorate in a single state which is home to less than 1% of the US population. That is pretty obviously ridiculous, no matter what side of the political divide you're on.

Why Trump might win


After a crushing victory in Nevada, Trump's momentum may sweep away main challengers as Super Tuesday approaches.

25 Feb 2016 05:15 GMT | Politics, US & Canada, United States, Donald Trump

Alan Fisher
@alanfisher


There was a lot to amuse when Donald Trump launched his presidential bid. He arrived by slow moving escalator. His staff allegedly paid people to attend. He spoke without notes and after what seemed liked a very long time, he summed up with "In short we are going to do a lot of things very quicky".

His campaign stops attracted a lot of people. In California in September, I spoke to many who had come to see the man they only knew from the US reality show 'The Apprentice'. Others thought they would vote for someone else, but they wanted to hear what he had to say.

He was the butt of jokes by late night comedians on US TV. Other candidates, with perhaps the exception of Jeb Bush, refused to attack him; worried about drawing his wrath and hoping to secure his support when he dropped out.

The Republican Party establishment thought his campaign would implode. Especially after he insulted Mexicans, war veterans, the disabled‎, women and Muslims. His grand vision seemed short of detail and that was exposed in the debates. Yet Trump kept getting stronger. His poll numbers haven't dipped through all the controversies.

Visceral anger

Donald Trump has tapped into a visceral anger in America. People were tired of being taken for granted, of being promised change and never seeing it, of politicians ‎who were so wrapped up in a partisan system and decided policy on what was best for the party, not the people.

And in rough, unpolished tough guy way, he spoke to that. And he never apologised, never backed down.

The Republican establishment took some pleasure when Trump came second in Iowa. But Ted Cruz had been organising there for more than a year, had spent heavily on research to turn out the vote, and it worked

In New Hampshire, Trump was back on top. With Ted Cruz regarded as another dangerous outsider, the establishment needed a candidate to challenge Trump. Jeb Bush was not doing well enough, John Kasich did not have the organisation, so Marco Rubio seemed most likely. But he stumbled in the northeast.

He recovered in South Carolina, forcing Bush out of the race. And in the days since has picked up money and endorsements. He is now the chosen one, the anti-Trump candidate.

Yet the electoral maths do not stack up for the others.

Trump is getting stronger with each passing contest. A Republican needs 1237 delegates to secure the nomination. Trump currently has 79. Cruz has 15, Rubio 14. Each primary and caucus allocates delegates.

Until now it's been done by proportional representation. There are winner-takes-all states coming up and Trump leads in most of them.

Republican establishment

Cruz could drop out. Many in the Republican establishment would like that. It would essentially make it a two horse race. He won't. At least not ‎until his home state of Texas votes. The first term senator had a big lead there. But Trump is closing fast.

Even if Rubio emerged as the sole candidate to challenge, there's no place at the moment where he can obviously win. Not even the senator's home state of Florida is a given. He is behind Trump in the polls‎. And he can not keep claiming second places as significant victories.

Twenty-four states hold their nominating contests between now and the middle of March. Trump can not win the nomination by then - but he could build up such a lead it would be an almost impossible task to catch him.

And the longer the field remain divided, Trump's chances just look better and better.

http://www.aljazeera.com/blogs/americas/2016/02/election-2016-donald-trump-win-rupublican-nomination-160225033341907.html

Not really, look at all the turnouts for every single primary/caucus so far - Republicans are having record numbers whereas Democrats are down.

This isn't just for Trump - candidates like Rubio and Cruz are also getting numbers. Hell, Cruz got the highest votes any candidate in Iowan history got in his win over Trump.

I'm not saying it "proves" anything per se, all I'm saying is that it's indicative of the feeling of apathy on the left and the desire for the republicans to take back the White House after 8 years of Obama.

Edited by 433: 25/2/2016 07:44:21 PM

Coming from a former CND member and campaigner he can hardly talk about integrity.

As for Trump he is just Ronald Reagan 2.0

Indicative :lol: ?

Do you not understand the meaning of that word?

This is an interesting point of debate.

Another perspective to consider is that conventional thinking is that turnout is higher when there is a real contest. Obviously this is the case with the republicans.

One of the arguments is that Hillary is seen as the inevitable Dem candidate, so the only motivated voters are the Sanders youth brigade. Overall, turnout is low for Dems because everyone assumes Hillary has it.

I buy this logic to some extent. A good example was the relatively low turnout in the Dem primaries last time, but a big increase when it came to the general. Obviously Obama, as the sitting President, was more inevitable than Hillary is. But the essential argument is that turnout levels in Primaries vs General Elections are not really linked.

But it is obviously an open question still. I think if Trump wins the Primary, his biggest risk in the General is a huge turnout to vote against him.

I know I have gone on like a broken record, but he is by far the most polarising candidate across all polling. Whilst he is currently the most popular republican, he is also the most hated candidate in the republican primaries. Let alone how hated he is by the Dems.

Bernie Sanders rallies very much like Hitler rallies. Dictator shouting idealistic slogans for over an hour with no substance.
Hyped up crazy crowds, some of them in tears. Its scary. Really scary.

Trump rallies on the other hand is a guy ad-libbing for 90 minutes interspersed with jokes and shaggy dog stories explaining his policies.

Funny how the compromised media try to paint Trump as the extremist.

What are these other factors?

-PB

One wants universal health care and to reduce the out of control expense of education.
The other wants to build walls and fight wars.

See I can paint candidates in my own colors too.

Rubio's killing Trump in the debate on right now imo

Sanders wants to fight wars. He supports the war against Syria.

Trump doesnt.

Where do you get your information from?

You may also want to familiarise yourself with Trump's education and healthcare policies before commenting again on this topic.

in your opinion or are you just listening to the audience stacked with donors like the last debate?

The audience is absolutely stacked but not what I'm talking about. He just did to Trump what Christie did to him 3 weeks ago except arguably harder when it came to Trumps plan on healthcare.

After the debates all thats really left are a few 2 minute clips and thats going to be the biggest one imo.

Fwiw, I actually agree with Trump the most on healthcare on that stage, but I'm trying to judge it from the perspective of how this will affect the polls and the votes.

Edited by tbitm: 26/2/2016 02:48:54 PM