U.S. Presidential Election 2016 (Sponsored by Betty Croker's Hamburger Helper)

@ItalAussie Trump sucks but that clearly wasn't a suggestion of assassination, he was just telling "Second Amendment People" that voting for him could avoid the tragic abolition of rights etc etc. I actually think it's insane that anybody has construed his words to mean that he suggested assassination. Don't want to play down to the level of his mindless devotees, but that's really grasping at straws.
@Spoonsky I totally agree. I'm in favor of right to choice only because it's the safer option in the long run, but there are serious issues with it. I personally find abortion reprehensible and for good reason, imo

The context of that line in his speech is that they need to make sure Trump wins, because once Clinton is elected, there's nothing they can do to stop her. Except the second amendment types.

That's clearly not just a reference to their devoted character.

I don't think is campaigning for Clinton's assassination, though. I just think he says whatever idiot thing pops into his head. I mean, he's not wrong. That would indeed be a (reprehensible) way to stop Clinton once she was elected. It's just not an idea that should be encouraged.

Oh yeah it doesn't put him in a good light, but it shouldn't be cause for consternation other than "he can't give a real speech".

It is exactly what disqualifies him. He is applying for a job where your words matter. How about an offhand joke during a financial crisis? Any possible consequence? Or next time we have a police involved shooting? Or .... Every word he says has the potential to matter if elected.

Trump vocalises whatever half-assed idea flits into his mind. He's giving us an unfiltered view into his scatty and ill-considered thought processes.

But then he says it out loud it and it has to become policy, because it's that or back down. I mean, that's clearly how we wound up with the whole "we're gonna build a wall" thing. In no planet is that anything other than a silly idea suggested by someone who thought about situation for all of seven seconds. But then he said it, and because he's never backed down from something in his life, it had to stick.

I think Mert has gone into hiding. Come on mate, you said Trump was needed to stop the rot in Western society and that he is the Truth. You must have an easy answer for Trump's video.

In fairness, mert does have a job which I imagine can be quite demanding at times.

Losing weight?

http://www.cracked.com/blog/trump-wr...ow-which-ones/

I know it's weird to be citing cracked.com as a source of political journalism, but they struck upon an interesting trend in Trump's tweets. It's speculation, of course, and they don't present it as anything otherwise.

The theory is that if it came from an Android, it's Trump, while if it came from an iPhone, it's a campaign stooge. It's very interesting what they dug out of that. Tweets in the two different classes seem to be markedly different in character and lucidity.

Cracked just stole this guys work and made it less comprehensive

https://www.r-bloggers.com/text-anal...-android-half/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phonics

Cracked just stole this guys work and made it less comprehensive

https://www.r-bloggers.com/text-anal...-android-half/

---

That article quotes one printed two days before it with exactly the same theory, so that guy's work is also 'stolen' if that's the line.

The "polls are skewed" narrative being wheeled out by desperate Trump fans is pretty hilarious, although it's making 538 super annoyed.

Can I get a bet on Trump to carry no states at all?

Sounds impossible but Walter Mondale almost managed it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimmy Floyd

Can I get a bet on Trump to carry no states at all?

Sounds impossible but Walter Mondale almost managed it.

---

It would require a third candidate to siphon votes from him in places like Wyoming, Oklahoma, and Idaho. The Republicans could run Clint Eastwoods chair in those states and Hillary still wouldn't win head to head.

Sturdy, dependable, unbending.

I'd vote for the chair.

Clinton is not Reagan and it is not really a national race. Trump will win at least 15 - 20 states. Better long odds bet would be Trump dropping out.

I'd favour that as well. He's got his pride but, at some point he'll say something impossible to come back from.

My bet is that he'll call her a cunt during one of the debates.

Oh, and she's 52/37 among likely voters in Wisconsin. I don't understand how Donald hopes to turn this around.

A few swing-districts with the last election to compare with:

CA-10: Clinton+6 (Obama+3)
CA-25: Clinton+25 (Romney+2)
CO-6: Clinton+14 (Obama+3)
FL-7: Clinton+14 (tied)
FL-26: Clinton+24 (Obama+11)
IL-10: Clinton+31 (Obama+16)
MN-3: Clinton+24 (Obama+1)

Again, this was always going to happen. There's nowhere for him to hide, and the media are going after him relentlessly. There's no way to avoid it in the heat of a presidential campaign when you're the party nominee - everything comes out.

He needs to avoid the debates, because he doesn't have the message discipline not to say something inflammatory and / or be outright misogynistic.

View Tweet

2%, lads.

Isn't that basically the margin of error?

It's a shit sample size, but 2% for fuck sake.

He's also starting to lose white republican women - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/10/us...gop-women.html

He's basically going to be reliant on the angry white man vote. He's not going to do a Mondale, but the electoral college / popular vote could look quite unpleasant.

It'll be great if one of his kid's defects.

Ivanka's speech could've just as easily been held at the DNC. She's well-spoken and looks good, so if she stays in the background during all of this I could see her being politically successful in the future if she wants to.

Trump saying Obama literally founded ISIS. :D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSE-XoVKaXg

Alright, mate.

He has such an unnervingly small, bitey mouth.

Reports are that the Republicans are seriously considering giving him up as a bad job, and focusing on downticket races instead. They won't (they're cowards), but with things like this, you can see why they'd consider it.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/...t-out-the-vote

The Democrats have a particularly effective operation in place to get voters to the polls on voting day. Apparently this isn't something that Trump considers to be of value. I assume that will be out of Trump's hands in the end, but still. Bit crazy.

Yesterday he "bragged" that he only has 80 staffers compared to Hillarys 1000.

He really doesn't understand how elections and turnout works.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoXDe8HxHBA

That's enough internet for today...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bernanke

Yesterday he "bragged" that he only has 80 staffers compared to Hillarys 1000.

He really doesn't understand how elections and turnout works.

---

Underdog Billionaire,

View Tweet

Trump is going to absolutely whomp Clinton in votes per dollar spent so really he's the moral victor.

So, Manafort is being paid by the Russians, and Ivanka is vacationing in Europe with Putin's girlfriend.

Is this real life?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by randomlegend

Trump saying Obama literally founded ISIS. :D

---

The worst part is in theory this is a good shout.. considering power vacuum blah blah blah... but the idiot kept repeating "no literally. i literally mean he is the founder." and the guy says "No, you mean figuratively, surely?" and THE DON is all "No no, LITERALLY he founded ISIS."

He doesn't want to win, the cunt.

I almost feel sorry for erstwhile Trump spokesperson Katrina Pierson. Her job description seems to be "say something so stupid we forget what Trump just said." Upon reflection, while that takes some doing, she seems up for the task.

Now she is being attacked for her incorrect use of literally. A mistake that virtually every American makes. Hopefully, a huge amount of the $62 million Trump spent on neither campaign ads or offices last month go to her because she has to be unemployable after this campaign.

https://mobile.twitter.com/JoePertic...955776/video/1

Trump spending campaign funds on push polls because the media polls are too biased. The poll simply attacks the media. He is not even really attacking Clinton anymore and is just lashing out at whoever criticizes him, which is currently the media. I wonder if the Clinton camp is at all confused at what to do when your opponent does not campaign. Here are the questions:

https://mobile.twitter.com/JSwiftTWS...04721602879488

https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedAndrew/s...54440085577728

Rudy ffs, you were mayor of NYC on 9/11. :face:

Noun verb 9/11.

I wonder if mert's given up on the cause.

Trump underperforming Romney more in red states than blue states.

https://mobile.twitter.com/bcburden/...18345989746688

For all that it seems amusingly one-sided at the moment, it's worth remembering that the polls will definitely narrow as the election nears.

Clinton is constrained by her unfavorables; all that traffic could just go to Johnson, Stein, and McMullin. Trump's lack of a campaign may mean he wins at worst 15-20 states instead of 20-25. We have only had three terms once in about 75 years, I can't imagine it is a blowout.

It would be the first Democratic three-termer since FDR (which extended into a five-termer with FDR / Truman), although the Republicans have only had Reagan / Bush 41 as a three-termer since the war.

I can't see anyway Clinton doesn't win barring "events" outside both candidates' control prompting a massive shift. Another 9/11, for example, where security becomes the only thing people are prepared to vote on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikem

Trump underperforming Romney more in red states than blue states.

https://mobile.twitter.com/bcburden/...18345989746688

---

lol at the decent, God-fearing, 'Middle America' conservatives wanting nothing to do with him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GS

It would be the first Democratic three-termer since FDR (which extended into a five-termer with FDR / Truman), although the Republicans have only had Reagan / Bush 41 as a three-termer since the war.

I can't see anyway Clinton doesn't win barring "events" outside both candidates' control prompting a massive shift. Another 9/11, for example, where security becomes the only thing people are prepared to vote on.

---

But even then, do you have poll numbers that he has significantly higher favorables on security?

No, but you would expect 'Murica would swing more behind the Republicans if security became the overwhelming 'swing' criterion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mikem

Trump underperforming Romney more in red states than blue states.

https://mobile.twitter.com/bcburden/...18345989746688

---

Utah loving the Mormon Romney and hating the vulgar Trump probably skews that somewhat. If Utah goes blue :drool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewis

lol at the decent, God-fearing, 'Middle America' conservatives wanting nothing to do with him.

---

Soccer moms. Never ever fuck with soccer moms. How does a grown man in America not know this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spoonsky

Utah loving the Mormon Romney and hating the vulgar Trump probably skews that somewhat. If Utah goes blue :drool:

---

Utah has to be the one at the far end. AZ must be close for the same reason. That is built on 538's polls only data which only uses state polls as well. The sample size for everything from Idaho to the Dakotas always appears to be 4 people in eastern Oregon.