whats wars are not dumb?

people think..if USA did this or USA did that, there be less war, but history of man says this is not true

you guys, some how beleive, by letting authoritarian regime (China) and dictatorships ( Russia) have a greater say in the world and for them to enforce there will on other countries, the world will be a better places, this is simply not true

as bad as the USA is, it can and will be much worse

Legitimate question, is adrtho a multi or is he just a fucking retard?

Trump going far left with a policy change?

-PB

yes, i'm a fucking retard, but what part of what i said is wrong?

let me tell you, everyone who work on the future defense of Australia, is shitting them self about Trump right now, because they just don't know,...most of the time, they know what any US presidents candidates says before a election , will; not really change US foreign policy that much (Republican or Democrat) not when it come to defense of sea around Australia , but Trump is so fucking unknown, they can't even began to guess

if Trump come in, and start to withdraw support for NATO even a little bit , this will bring a fire of fear inside of Canberra, the like we never seen since the fall of Singapore.....now, i have to work out, who going make the money on a $70 billion a year Australian defense expenditure

Edited by adrtho: 11/5/2016 08:38:33 AM

The best summation of Trump's nomination victory I've read:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/05/10/trump-won-working-class-voters-gop-forgot/

"Trump will never win"

FLORIDA: Clinton 43 - Trump 42
OHIO: Clinton 39 - Trump 43
PENNSYLVANIA: Clinton 43 - Trump 42

https://www.qu.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2345

If Trump can win Pennsylvania, then most likely he can also win Michigan which will hand him the election (assuming he wins Ohio and Florida, which I think he will).

Interesting results - of most relevance to me is that the huge advantage Hillary has with non-whites and women have (in this poll) been balanced out by the gains made by Trump amongst white men.

I wonder how representative of the electorate at large this is in terms of demographics.

FiveThirtyEight have a cool interactive model you can use to predict results based on demographic:

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-swing-the-election/

The most up-in-the-air aspect about this election to me is that, at this point of the electoral cycle Hillary and Trump are the 2 most unpopular presidential candidates in polling history. Most previous candidates usually have lineball net favourability numbers, whereas Hillary has -20, and Trump -40!!

How will this affect turnout?

White turnout will probably remain fairly constant and go overwhelmingly for Trump.
Black vote will decrease because their isn't a black candidate to vote for.
Latino vote will increase, but it will predominately be in blue states (California, New Mexico) so it won't matter that much.

Tbh it all comes down to the rust belt.

Romney won 60-ish% of the white vote and that wasn't enough.

I don't agree that black voters will be significantly less than last time though.

Latinos - again, I don't agree with that. They live all through the country, especially the south.

Plus Trump is losing the female vote significantly so far.

Still to early to really tell anything.

We are in uncharted territory in terms of how unpopular both candidates are.

trumps average general election polls have a long term downward trend
Hillary's average have a long term flat trend
so both the long term trend and the absolute gap look formidable for trump

Highlights that conservatives live in a fact free world and can't stand their fact free paradigm being exposed

[youtube]WqVCvbtfkho[/youtube]

2016 US Presidential Election - Next President betting odds betfair

Hillary Clinton $1.43
Donald Trump $4.00
Bernie Sanders $34.00
Joe Biden $55.00

1. This argument about Trump having greater appeal in the Rust Belt seems hugely speculative to me - there isn't much factual basis for it beyond the fact he happens to be a protectionist. People say that he's different from the average Republican candidate (and of course he is), but party identification still matters, and he has a huge task flipping some of these states. Romney lost Michigan by 10%, Wisconsin by 7%, Pennsylvania by 5% and Ohio by 3% - those last two may be achievable for Trump but the former are pretty entrenched as Democratic territory. Bear in mind how badly Cruz whipped Trump in the primary in Wisconsin.

2. Polls are pretty irrelevant this far out, but distinct trends over a number of polls and months do matter. Check the RealClearPolitics averages for the Rust Belt states and it looks pretty bad for Trump. He is, on average, 11.5 points behind Clinton in Wisconsin. He's 10.5 points behind in Michigan; 7 points behind in Pennsylvania. Ohio's probably too close for the average to matter, but even then, he's 3 points behind. If the Rust Belt is Trump's strongest swing-state territory, then his campaign is already in dire straits. The almost singular focus on those states from Trump supporters (and within the campaign, by all accounts) also suggests that there's no backup plan.

3. Even if he wins the Rust Belt, the rest of the map is a huge worry for him. Let's say Clinton wins all the states Obama won in 2012, but Trump sweeps the Rust Belt - that's not an unreasonable assumption, considering the dominance of Latinos and well-educated voters in swing states like Florida, Virginia, Colorado and Nevada. Those states are not favourable to Trump. Even under this reasonable scenario, he only squeaks by. If North Carolina falls (the shitstorm over the transgender bathrooms bill has undermined the Republican cause there even further), he loses. If any of those Rust Belt states fall, he loses. If Clinton can drive sufficient turnout of African-Americans in Georgia or Latinos in Arizona, he loses. The Rust Belt strategy is a hugely vulnerable one:



4. In terms of national polling, he's averaging six points behind Clinton, and some polls - extraordinarily - have him up to thirteen points behind. This early on, for a candidate with huge name recognition about whom many voters are likely to have already made up their minds, that is a huge lead to overturn. If he's behind Clinton by even two points come November, this Rust Belt strategy will be totally irrelevant. A popular vote win that big will be reflected in the electoral college.

Maybe Trump will win - this far our it's difficult to predict with any certainty. But the delusion in this thread (and in general) from Trump supporters is incredible. There are so many reasons to doubt his ability to win, and all you seem to have is a hunch that he'll be able to "expose" Clinton over the course of the campaign. However much you like him, if you're paying any attention at all it should be clear to you that his chances are very slim.

Edited by JP: 15/5/2016 11:35:26 AM

I'll bet the left and the right one that an avalanche more dirt can be dug up on Trump.
The question is whether Clinton wants to stoop to Trump's level

She can stoop to Trump's level alright but she is allowed because she is a woman.

@JP

I think it's important to stipulate that Trump's problem is not just his own - it's a Republican problem. Republican's always start off on an electoral disadvantage given the shape of the map and the "safe" seats are overwhelmingly in the Dems favour.

With regards to your map, I agree. It is a steep uphill task.

The latest national polls have Hillary's lead tightening quickly and her unfavourables rising. If Trump can drive the white turnout in Pennsylvania, he will win the election (assuming he wins Florida + Ohio which I believe he will).

And with regards to Georgia, if the first black president can't turn it blue then no one will be able to.

Another thing - I think Hillary's anti-gun message will galvanize lots of gun-owning whites in the the rural areas to get out and vote against her (including areas such as western Pennsylvania).

Edited by 433: 15/5/2016 02:00:26 PM

It's definitely a Republican problem, but the reason the map slants Democratic is because of demographic shifts (e.g. the growth of educated suburbia in Virginia, or rising Hispanic populations generally, and especially in Florida/Colorado/Nevada). Those are trends which arguably mean an even bigger setback for Trump than an ordinary Republican nominee.



1. Clinton's lead is tightening because moderate Republicans are just now coming to terms with Trump as their nominee and are choosing him over her. I expect Clinton will get a similar boost once Sanders drops out.

2. Your assumption that Florida will fall for Trump is a huge one considering his unprecedented unpopularity within the Hispanic community (and in Florida that community is notably becoming less Cuban - and therefore less Republican - than it once was).

3. The fact that Trump's campaign is so focused on a Rust Belt strategy should be an indication that Florida (and other swing states) is a long shot for him. Clinton's taking a much broader approach because her ceiling involves her winning every swing state there is. It appears that Trump is already giving up on states like Nevada, Colorado and Virginia as unwinnable. They will still presumably contest Florida, but the Rust Belt focus clearly indicates that he has a very narrow path to victory.



That's probably true, but I wouldn't rule it out in such an extraordinary election.



Hillary (even 2016 Hillary) is far more gun friendly than Obama ever was. Regardless, anyone who votes on the basis of their gun rights probably already votes reliably Republican and won't make any difference in this election.

Honestly, Trump's best chance is probably if ISIS fly a Boeing into the Statue of Liberty the week before the election. That or a recession. Otherwise I think he's a massive underdog.

i'd like to point out that poll aggregates don't show a tightening race.
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-trump-vs-clinton
Media will take a single poll and say "tightening race" or "landslide" but things have been stable for about 3 months
we'll see what happens the next month or two

-PB

Trump making more Friends around the world :lol:

Trump 35% of women, lowest ever ...more women vote them man

to be fair hillary's standing amongst white men is astonishingly low
You know Hillary is one of those candidates where I don't understand why she evokes strong feelings either way. I would expect her presidency to be meh from a left right or centrist point of view. The fact that she isn't greeted with a meh by those who oppose her appears to be partly due to partisanship - its in the interests of the other party to paint a candidate as the destroyer of all things good and virtuous - and partly due to misogyny

This is the only variable I think could change the polling over the next 6 months. We have never had 2 presidential candidate anywhere near as unpopular as Clinton and Trump.

So I think previous assumptions regarding how "locked in" people's opinions about candidates are, have to be taken a little more ambiguously as you normally would.

I don't think Trump has a realistic chance of winning, but everything has been different than normal in the primaries so far. So I think historical precedents are of less value.

Trump supporters make less money then other GOP supporters

only 35% of Trump supporters went to collage


It's Pauline Hanson, just a bigger size....put your hand up 442 Trump supporters, did you also vote for Pauline Hanson? :p

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

-PB

His secretary would know more about stimulating things tbh

great, along as he listen to the right people

you don't have to know anything, you have know the right people to listen to, at the right time and weight it all up

The President actually has remarkably little ability to influence economic growth. It is one of the great myths.

They can only really influence things at a structural level (eg deregulation of banks under Bill Clinton & GW Bush lead to the GFC occurring).

It is actually Congress that has the most power. But with the paralysis in Washington, the govt has basically done very little one way or the other to alter economic growth.