Murdoch Rags Ltd
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 0
|
Quote:Psychologists are quite familiar with the fact that die-hard supporters of an idea aren’t swayed by contrary evidence, which can backfire and strengthen preexisting attitudes. Indeed, trying to change the minds of headstrong Trump supporters may be largely futile.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
adrtho
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.9K,
Visits: 0
|
Dr Ben Carson wrote:adrtho wrote:Dr Ben Carson wrote:AzzaMarch wrote:paulbagzFC wrote:What about the people that would vote for hin simply to upset the established order?
-PB This. People like him precisely because of his outrageous commentary. The more the media, politicians come out to oppose him, the more popular he becomes. He is the anti-politician. That is why he is dangerous. All his incentives are to act more over the top and upset people, whether he is using facts or not. He really is an American Berlusconi. The difference being that in parliamentary systems, populist parties win seats, join coalitions and get subsumed into the establishment. In the American presidential system, it is a winner-take-all scenario. No, they like him because he walks the talk, they like him because he's funding his own campaign and they like him because he has genuine regard for the issues he raises such as trade, jobs and illegal immigration. You take the American voters for fools because you dont agree with their preferred candidate. Do you understand why the media are opposing him? Do you believe the media are acting in your interests? Tell me why you think Trump is dangerous as you put it? Trump not funding his own campaign...Trump loaning his campaign money on which he pay himself back as campaign funds come it it ok to be wrong...it not ok to keep saying lies You should stop posting then. why, you didn't know Trump not self funding his own campaign???
|
|
|
|
|
adrtho
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.9K,
Visits: 0
|
|
|
|
|
|
AzzaMarch
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K,
Visits: 0
|
Dr Ben Carson wrote:
No, they like him because he walks the talk, they like him because he's funding his own campaign and they like him because he has genuine regard for the issues he raises such as trade, jobs and illegal immigration.
You take the American voters for fools because you dont agree with their preferred candidate.
Do you understand why the media are opposing him? Do you believe the media are acting in your interests?
Tell me why you think Trump is dangerous as you put it?
He is only "funding his own campaign" because he isn't spending much at all. Fair enough. But to me that is not the only thing that matters. It's important, but not the only thing. I don't take American voters for fools, just Trump voters. They aren't even a majority of Republican voters. The media is opposing him for varied reasons. Fox - because they fear a wipeout in a general election for the right. MSNBC - because Trump is by many people's measures a racist, authoritarian populist, and unpredictable. I think the media is acting in its own interests. I think Trump is dangerous because he is openly advocating the use of torture. Something that authoritarian dictators don't even openly state. His wall building is a joke and a folly. His claim that Mexico will pay for it is ridiculous. The idea of deporting 12 million people is unrealistic, and will never happen. Blocking immigration of people of one particular religion is outrageous and goes against every tradition of the separation of church and state, freedom of religion, the Bill of Rights etc. He has no real political beliefs of his own. He is just a populist that will spout whatever fires up his base. He has contradicted himself on repeated occasions, and blatantly lied on multiple occasions. Are there issues with other candidates? Absolutely. Are all politicians liars to some extent? Yes. But Trump is taking it to a dangerous, and unprecedented, level.
|
|
|
|
Dr Ben Carson
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 40,
Visits: 0
|
AzzaMarch wrote:Dr Ben Carson wrote:
No, they like him because he walks the talk, they like him because he's funding his own campaign and they like him because he has genuine regard for the issues he raises such as trade, jobs and illegal immigration.
You take the American voters for fools because you dont agree with their preferred candidate.
Do you understand why the media are opposing him? Do you believe the media are acting in your interests?
Tell me why you think Trump is dangerous as you put it?
He is only "funding his own campaign" because he isn't spending much at all. Fair enough. But to me that is not the only thing that matters. It's important, but not the only thing. I don't take American voters for fools, just Trump voters. They aren't even a majority of Republican voters. The media is opposing him for varied reasons. Fox - because they fear a wipeout in a general election for the right. MSNBC - because Trump is by many people's measures a racist, authoritarian populist, and unpredictable. I think the media is acting in its own interests. I think Trump is dangerous because he is openly advocating the use of torture. Something that authoritarian dictators don't even openly state. His wall building is a joke and a folly. His claim that Mexico will pay for it is ridiculous. The idea of deporting 12 million people is unrealistic, and will never happen. Blocking immigration of people of one particular religion is outrageous and goes against every tradition of the separation of church and state, freedom of religion, the Bill of Rights etc. He has no real political beliefs of his own. He is just a populist that will spout whatever fires up his base. He has contradicted himself on repeated occasions, and blatantly lied on multiple occasions. Are there issues with other candidates? Absolutely. Are all politicians liars to some extent? Yes. But Trump is taking it to a dangerous, and unprecedented, level. Quote:His wall building is a joke and a folly. His claim that Mexico will pay for it is ridiculous.
No it isnt. Visit his website and you'll find out how he plans for Mexico to pay for it. It will work and its entirely feasible. Deportations are nothing new. Barack Obama has deported more illegals than any other president. You didnt know that did you. The cost of deportations however will fall once the wall is built. Quote:Blocking immigration of people of one particular religion is outrageous and goes against every tradition of the separation of church and state, freedom of religion, the Bill of Rights etc. Trump has qualified his temporary ban on muslims and its based on intelligence from the FBI that there is no vetting of these people. Its a major risk factor he wants to address. Quote:He has no real political beliefs of his own. He is just a populist that will spout whatever fires up his base.
This is just emotional speculation from you. It has no basis in any fact. Quote:He has contradicted himself on repeated occasions, and blatantly lied on multiple occasions.
Everyone contradicts themselves. If you have enough video footage you can make anyone look bad with editing. Trump has actually been remarkably consistent. If you look, you'll find a video of him from 1988 on Oprah where his basic philosophy on foreign policy has not changed in 28 years. Quote:But Trump is taking it to a dangerous, and unprecedented, level. Tell me what are you afraid of?
|
|
|
|
|
Scotch&Coke
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 0
|
Alabama deported all of their illegal immigrants. Guess what happened next?
The state almost collapsed in on itself and the government had to come crawling back and import, actually import, immigrants back in to the state.
I can't believe people are actually supporting the idea of building a fucking wall across a country. This shit is straight out of science fiction and appeals to the lowest form of dickhead. This isnt 122 AD ffs
|
|
|
|
|
AzzaMarch
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K,
Visits: 0
|
Dr Ben Carson wrote:
Visit his website and you'll find out how he plans for Mexico to pay for it. It will work and its entirely feasible.
Deportations are nothing new. Barack Obama has deported more illegals than any other president. You didnt know that did you. The cost of deportations however will fall once the wall is built.
Yes, I know about Obama's deportations. He increased them in order to try and encourage Republicans to agree to a comprehensive immigration reform program. They almost did, but ended up backing down. That is why Obama has then gone the way of regularising the status of people via Executive Order. Please don't patronise me. What Trump is suggesting is of an utterly different scale - literally everyone of non legal status, some 12 million people. It is completely not feasible. Please explain how he will force another country to pay for his wall. Please do. Dr Ben Carson wrote:
Trump has qualified his temporary ban on muslims and its based on intelligence from the FBI that there is no vetting of these people. Its a major risk factor he wants to address.
No - he floated a crazy idea that made his supporters happy, then decided to back down to some extent. Or he decided from day one that this watered-down version was the final policy, but floated the blanket ban to start with to attract support. Dr Ben Carson wrote:
This is just emotional speculation from you. It has no basis in any fact.
No - its the conclusion I have come to based on mountains of evidence of his numerous policy changes and pronouncements. Dr Ben Carson wrote:
Everyone contradicts themselves. If you have enough video footage you can make anyone look bad with editing.
Trump has actually been remarkably consistent. If you look, you'll find a video of him from 1988 on Oprah where his basic philosophy on foreign policy has not changed in 28 years.
You cannot just wave away the scale of outright lies and contradictions he has spouted. No one has done it at the level he has. Just look at the Politifact ratings he gets. Dr Ben Carson wrote:
Tell me what are you afraid of?
Mainly that he openly advocates torture. There is an assumption from people that somehow he will appoint experts and listen to them. I have no such confidence. The guy is not a real businessman - his business is the "Trump" brand. He is a con-artist, a huckster, and I think that makes him dangerous if he gets real power. Edited by AzzaMarch: 24/3/2016 03:43:54 PM
|
|
|
|
|
adrtho
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.9K,
Visits: 0
|
Scotch&Coke wrote:Alabama deported all of their illegal immigrants. Guess what happened next?
The state almost collapsed in on itself and the government had to come crawling back and import, actually import, immigrants back in to the state.
I can't believe people are actually supporting the idea of building a fucking wall across a country. This shit is straight out of science fiction and appeals to the lowest form of dickhead. This isnt 122 AD ffs :lol: is that so Edited by adrtho: 24/3/2016 03:52:21 PM
|
|
|
|
Dr Ben Carson
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 40,
Visits: 0
|
AzzaMarch wrote:Dr Ben Carson wrote:
Visit his website and you'll find out how he plans for Mexico to pay for it. It will work and its entirely feasible.
Deportations are nothing new. Barack Obama has deported more illegals than any other president. You didnt know that did you. The cost of deportations however will fall once the wall is built.
Yes, I know about Obama's deportations. He increased them in order to try and encourage Republicans to agree to a comprehensive immigration reform program. They almost did, but ended up backing down. That is why Obama has then gone the way of regularising the status of people via Executive Order. Please don't patronise me. What Trump is suggesting is of an utterly different scale - literally everyone of non legal status, some 12 million people. It is completely not feasible. Please explain how he will force another country to pay for his wall. Please do. Dr Ben Carson wrote:
Trump has qualified his temporary ban on muslims and its based on intelligence from the FBI that there is no vetting of these people. Its a major risk factor he wants to address.
No - he floated a crazy idea that made his supporters happy, then decided to back down to some extent. Or he decided from day one that this watered-down version was the final policy, but floated the blanket ban to start with to attract support. Dr Ben Carson wrote:
This is just emotional speculation from you. It has no basis in any fact.
No - its the conclusion I have come to based on mountains of evidence of his numerous policy changes and pronouncements. Dr Ben Carson wrote:
Everyone contradicts themselves. If you have enough video footage you can make anyone look bad with editing.
Trump has actually been remarkably consistent. If you look, you'll find a video of him from 1988 on Oprah where his basic philosophy on foreign policy has not changed in 28 years.
You cannot just wave away the scale of outright lies and contradictions he has spouted. No one has done it at the level he has. Just look at the Politifact ratings he gets. Dr Ben Carson wrote:
Tell me what are you afraid of?
Mainly that he openly advocates torture. There is an assumption from people that somehow he will appoint experts and listen to them. I have no such confidence. The guy is not a real businessman - his business is the "Trump" brand. He is a con-artist, a huckster, and I think that makes him dangerous if he gets real power. Edited by AzzaMarch: 24/3/2016 03:43:54 PM You having trouble finding his website? Let me help you... Quote:increase fees on all border crossing cards – of which we issue about 1 million to Mexican nationals each year (a major source of visa overstays); increase fees on all NAFTA worker visas from Mexico (another major source of overstays); and increase fees at ports of entry to the United States from Mexico [Tariffs and foreign aid cuts are also options]. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/immigration-reformYou're citing Politifact? Really? do you realise its an arm of the democrats propaganda machine? You knew that right? But you still quote them - I wonder why. So you're afraid of Trump because he advocates water boarding of ISIS captives, but you're not afraid of ISIS drowning people in cages, chopping off heads, throwing people of buildings and orchestrating terrorist attacks in Europe?
|
|
|
|
|
Scotch&Coke
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 0
|
adrtho wrote:Scotch&Coke wrote:Alabama deported all of their illegal immigrants. Guess what happened next?
The state almost collapsed in on itself and the government had to come crawling back and import, actually import, immigrants back in to the state.
I can't believe people are actually supporting the idea of building a fucking wall across a country. This shit is straight out of science fiction and appeals to the lowest form of dickhead. This isnt 122 AD ffs :lol: is that so Edited by adrtho: 24/3/2016 03:52:21 PM Yes. It is quite a funny yet pitiful story. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/alabama-tried-a-donald-trump-style-immigration-law-it-failed-in-a-big-way/2015/08/22/2ae239a6-48f2-11e5-846d-02792f854297_story.htmlhttp://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/undocumented-workers-immigration-alabamaAnd a VICE documentary for the illiterate among us http://www.vice.com/video/watch-our-hbo-episode-about-alabamas-harsh-anti-immigration-laws
|
|
|
|
|
AzzaMarch
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K,
Visits: 0
|
Dr Ben Carson wrote:You having trouble finding his website?
Let me help you...
[quote]increase fees on all border crossing cards – of which we issue about 1 million to Mexican nationals each year (a major source of visa overstays); increase fees on all NAFTA worker visas from Mexico (another major source of overstays); and increase fees at ports of entry to the United States from Mexico [Tariffs and foreign aid cuts are also options]. You realise that much of those "solutions" breach NAFTA rules? You realise that increasing fees on border crossing cards will reduce the amount of people crossing? Dr Ben Carson wrote:
You're citing Politifact? Really? do you realise its an arm of the democrats propaganda machine? You knew that right?
But you still quote them - I wonder why.
Sigh... How abut the article from Politico which tracked every public statement from Trump and concluded that he lies or contradicts himself on average every 5 minutes? Dr Ben Carson wrote:
So you're afraid of Trump because he advocates water boarding of ISIS captives, but you're not afraid of ISIS drowning people in cages, chopping off heads, throwing people of buildings and orchestrating terrorist attacks in Europe?
The difference is that ISIS are a terrorist group - of course what they are doing is outrageous. But you don't think that you should expect better from the most important democracy on earth than a terrorist organisation? You realise that if President Trump ordered torture to occur that he would be breaking the law? The army would be forced to refuse his order. And he wasn't just advocating waterboarding either. He said "we'd go much further than that".
|
|
|
|
|
mcjules
|
|
Group: Moderators
Posts: 8.4K,
Visits: 0
|
Oh look a new multi that posts with a very particular cadence and almost exclusively in the US election thread.
Insert Gertjan Verbeek gifs here
|
|
|
|
Drunken_Fish
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 9
|
adrtho wrote:Drunken_Fish wrote:Next up is Wisconsin where the winner will probably take 36. 39 or all of the 43 delagates unless it is extremely close when the winner might not get quite as many congressional districts (CD). This could be won by either Trump or Cruz. Cruz desperately needs to win it but Kasich might hurt him by taking votes from him in Trumps worst areas. Overnight Scott Walker all but endorsed Cruz which might help him.
Then there is New York, which Trump is probably going to win and pick up at least the vast majority of the 95 delegates, although he might lose a CD or two.
After that it does not get any better for Cruz. Trump will probably win New Jersey and California and not many of the remaining states look good for Cruz. Cruz doesn't have to win, Cruz just have to get enough support from the other high ranking republican, and then stop Trump getting 1237 this is now just about Trump getting to 1237 delegates or not..If Trump doesn't get 1237 delegates, then the republicans will changes the rules before the start of convention to make sure anybody but Trump is selected people forget, the voting is done by the delegates on the floor of the republican convention Edited by adrtho: 24/3/2016 07:51:46 AM Exactly, but what I am explaining is there is a path to Trump getting the 1237 he requires because there are winner takes all states that he is likely to win and the remaining states do not favour Cruz. Kasich is the wild card here, he seems to have no hope but maybe he can do enough to hurt in some the states, but I doubt it. If he fails to do it then he will not get the nomination on the first ballot unless there is deals done, possibly with Cruz. I am not sure whether Trump has any hope if he fails to win the first ballot, because of what you are saying, the delegates with then be unbound and most of them will be party hacks who might support Kasich or even Cruz ahead of Trump.
I used to be Drunken_Fish
|
|
|
|
Drunken_Fish
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 9
|
And the latest California poll show Trump up by 11 over Cruz, although there is still a long way to go and there are lots of undecided in the poll. It could change and the poll might be wrong but good signs for Trump.
I used to be Drunken_Fish
|
|
|
|
|
adrtho
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.9K,
Visits: 0
|
Drunken_Fish wrote:adrtho wrote:Drunken_Fish wrote:Next up is Wisconsin where the winner will probably take 36. 39 or all of the 43 delagates unless it is extremely close when the winner might not get quite as many congressional districts (CD). This could be won by either Trump or Cruz. Cruz desperately needs to win it but Kasich might hurt him by taking votes from him in Trumps worst areas. Overnight Scott Walker all but endorsed Cruz which might help him.
Then there is New York, which Trump is probably going to win and pick up at least the vast majority of the 95 delegates, although he might lose a CD or two.
After that it does not get any better for Cruz. Trump will probably win New Jersey and California and not many of the remaining states look good for Cruz. Cruz doesn't have to win, Cruz just have to get enough support from the other high ranking republican, and then stop Trump getting 1237 this is now just about Trump getting to 1237 delegates or not..If Trump doesn't get 1237 delegates, then the republicans will changes the rules before the start of convention to make sure anybody but Trump is selected people forget, the voting is done by the delegates on the floor of the republican convention Edited by adrtho: 24/3/2016 07:51:46 AM Exactly, but what I am explaining is there is a path to Trump getting the 1237 he requires because there are winner takes all states that he is likely to win and the remaining states do not favour Cruz. Kasich is the wild card here, he seems to have no hope but maybe he can do enough to hurt in some the states, but I doubt it. If he fails to do it then he will not get the nomination on the first ballot unless there is deals done, possibly with Cruz. I am not sure whether Trump has any hope if he fails to win the first ballot, because of what you are saying, the delegates with then be unbound and most of them will be party hacks who might support Kasich or even Cruz ahead of Trump. winner take all Delaware 16 Nebraska 36 Montana 27 New Jersey 51 South Dakota 29 that not that many winner take all states....now the other states might become winner take all if some one get over 50% now polls come out for Wisconsin that now has Cruz winning Wisconsin, with fivethirtyeight give Cruz 81% chance to win Wisconsin it's going to be hard for Trump
|
|
|
|
|
adrtho
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.9K,
Visits: 0
|
11.mvfc.11 wrote:States can still decide to be winner take all, expect a few more on top of that list. yes, it hard to work out which states are, which are not
|
|
|
|
Dr Ben Carson
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 40,
Visits: 0
|
AzzaMarch wrote:
You realise that much of those "solutions" breach NAFTA rules? You realise that increasing fees on border crossing cards will reduce the amount of people crossing?
Sigh... How abut the article from Politico which tracked every public statement from Trump and concluded that he lies or contradicts himself on average every 5 minutes?
The difference is that ISIS are a terrorist group - of course what they are doing is outrageous.
But you don't think that you should expect better from the most important democracy on earth than a terrorist organisation?
You realise that if President Trump ordered torture to occur that he would be breaking the law? The army would be forced to refuse his order.
And he wasn't just advocating waterboarding either. He said "we'd go much further than that".
Quote:You realise that much of those "solutions" breach NAFTA rules? You realise that increasing fees on border crossing cards will reduce the amount of people crossing? Thats the general idea. Who cares about NAFTA? Its not binding. Why do you place so much importance on upholding bad trade agreements? NAFTA is wholly unpopular and you're worried about breaching it. Check your perspective. Quote:Sigh... How abut the article from Politico which tracked every public statement from Trump and concluded that he lies or contradicts himself on average every 5 minutes? Politico? That's even worse. You may as well quote Huffington Post or the Guardian. Quote:But you don't think that you should expect better from the most important democracy on earth than a terrorist organisation? Yes we should. This can start by not forming alliances with the likes of Al Nusra who are an affiliate of Al Qaeda. Trump is not advocating terrorism. Quote:You realise that if President Trump ordered torture to occur that he would be breaking the law? The army would be forced to refuse his order. Trump said he wouldnt breach the law, he's bound by law. He's been quite clear about that. His opinion is he'd like to nove to change the law, but there are 3 levels of government he has to go through to do that. He knows that, I know that, most people know this but you. So what are you so afraid of?
|
|
|
|
|
TheDecider
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 402,
Visits: 0
|
Can we just IP ban ricey please?
|
|
|
|
Dr Ben Carson
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 40,
Visits: 0
|
mcjules wrote:Can we just IP ban ricey please? The left trying to shut down free speech again.
|
|
|
|
Dr Ben Carson
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 40,
Visits: 0
|
This is quite a nice little documentary covering the anti Trump protests.
No narration is provided so it lets the viewer draw their own conclusions from interviews with the protesters.
Is very good and insightful.
[youtube]LIjljucvBI4[/youtube]
|
|
|
|
|
adrtho
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.9K,
Visits: 0
|
Dr Ben Carson wrote:This is quite a nice little documentary covering the anti Trump protests.
No narration is provided so it lets the viewer draw their own conclusions from interviews with the protesters.
Is very good and insightful.
[youtube]LIjljucvBI4[/youtube] :lol: and you think Trump going to win i think in 2012 ,Romney won 60% of white votes , and he still got killed ...there just no way Trump can win, with out some how getting black and Hispanics to vote for him
|
|
|
|
Dr Ben Carson
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 40,
Visits: 0
|
adrtho wrote:Dr Ben Carson wrote:This is quite a nice little documentary covering the anti Trump protests.
No narration is provided so it lets the viewer draw their own conclusions from interviews with the protesters.
Is very good and insightful.
[youtube]LIjljucvBI4[/youtube] :lol: and you think Trump going to win i think in 2012 ,Romney won 60% of white votes , and he still got killed ...there just no way Trump can win, with out some how getting black and Hispanics to vote for him I didnt say I think Trump is going to win. The video attached shows the kind of people that go to anti-Trump protests. Your kind of people. These are your people. Just like you.
|
|
|
|
|
adrtho
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.9K,
Visits: 0
|
Dr Ben Carson wrote:adrtho wrote:Dr Ben Carson wrote:This is quite a nice little documentary covering the anti Trump protests.
No narration is provided so it lets the viewer draw their own conclusions from interviews with the protesters.
Is very good and insightful.
[youtube]LIjljucvBI4[/youtube] :lol: and you think Trump going to win i think in 2012 ,Romney won 60% of white votes , and he still got killed ...there just no way Trump can win, with out some how getting black and Hispanics to vote for him I didnt say I think Trump is going to win. The video attached shows the kind of people that go to anti-Trump protests. Your kind of people. These are your people. Just like you. :lol: my kind of people don't do protests for free (or for low money)
|
|
|
|
Drunken_Fish
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 9
|
This has all the details on the states. http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/events.phtml?s=cWisconsin 18 state wide delegates, winner takes all 24 delegates, 3 delegates each for the 8 CDs, winner of each CD takes all This is probably a lean Cruz rather than a toss up like I wrong suggested New York 14 delegates Proportional for state wide unless one candidate gets 50% 81 delegates, 3 each for the CDs, 2-1 split unless one candidate gets 50% Connecticut 28 delegates winner takes all if 50% is reached state-wide Otherwise 15 delegates, 3 per CD, delegates winner takes all in each of the 5 CDs 13 delegates, proportional among candidates receiving more than 20% state wide. Deleware 16 delegates, winner takes all. Maryland 14 delegates, winner takes all state wide vote 24 delegates, 3 delegates for each CD, winner of CD takes all Pennsylvania 17 delegates, state wide winner takes all 54 delegates elected directly, 3 for each CD, not tied to a candidate. Rhode Island 13 delegates proportional between candidates with more than 10% 6 delegates, 3 per CD, kinda proportional Indiana 30 delegates, winner takes all 27 delegates, 3 per CD, winner takes all Nebraska 36 delegates, winner takes all West Virginia Directly elects 31 delegates, although with presidential preference also listed on ballot paper, some by CD, most state wide 3 delegates, winner takes all, Oregon 28 delegates proportional with a 3.57% minimum eligibility. A mail primary, the voting papers are mailed out to registered voters. Washington 14 delegates, proportional statewide, 20% minimum, 30 delegates, 3 per CD, proportional California 13 delegates, winner takes all 158 delegates, 3 per CD, winner of CD takes all 3 Montana 27 delegates, winner takes all New Jersey 51 delegates, winner takes all New Mexico 24 delegates, proportional, 15% minimum South Dakota 29 delegates, winner takes all. So in addition to the list above, California, Maryland and Indiana are also state where the winner could take all the delegates. A narrow win, like Trump's win in Missouri, will probably take the vast majority of delegates. So which of the winner takes all (including the three above) is Cruz or Kasich likely to win? If Trump wins California and most of the other winner takes all, even narrowly, and is competitive in most of the rest he will get to 1237. However it is highly likely to not decided until June 7th whether Trump gets there.
I used to be Drunken_Fish
|
|
|
|
|
adrtho
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.9K,
Visits: 0
|
Drunken_Fish wrote:This has all the details on the states. http://www.thegreenpapers.com/P16/events.phtml?s=cSo in addition to the list above, California, Maryland and Indiana are also state where the winner could take all the delegates. A narrow win, like Trump's win in Missouri, will probably take the vast majority of delegates. So which of the winner takes all (including the three above) is Cruz or Kasich likely to win? If Trump wins California and most of the other winner takes all, even narrowly, and is competitive in most of the rest he will get to 1237. However it is highly likely to not decided until June 7th whether Trump gets there. great find Cruz will win Nebraska South Dakota Montana Trump not going to win every CD in California...plus California is 2.5 months away, so a lot can happen Edited by adrtho: 25/3/2016 01:19:29 AM
|
|
|
|
Dr Ben Carson
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 40,
Visits: 0
|
Trump wins in the more cosmopolitan states to come
Cruz has no appeal there
|
|
|
|
|
adrtho
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.9K,
Visits: 0
|
11.mvfc.11 wrote:A lot of people forgetting how well Trump has done in the primaries compared to Cruz. No more caucuses leaves Trump in a stronger than appears position also. yes, but they was open primaries....most of the primaries are now closed also, what happen in past , doesn't mean as much as time goes on ..new polls will tells us more then voting in past the voting has now become , a vote for Trump or a Vote against Trump
|
|
|
|
Drunken_Fish
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 9
|
Dr Ben Carson wrote:Trump wins in the more cosmopolitan states to come
Cruz has no appeal there Kasich might do well in those states which do not look good for Cruz. A poll in Pennsylvania shows Kasich only just behind.
I used to be Drunken_Fish
|
|
|
|
Dr Ben Carson
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 40,
Visits: 0
|
Cruz has some new problems.
#CruzSexScandal
:D
|
|
|
|
Drunken_Fish
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 1.5K,
Visits: 9
|
The source is of dubious quality but they have been right on this kind of thing before. It would be rather unfair if this hurts Cruz too much even if it is true to a certain extent given Trump's own history.
I used to be Drunken_Fish
|
|
|
|