2016 Presidential Horse Race

2016 Presidential Horse Race


  • Total voters
    183

GoldenDomer

preferred walk on
Messages
3,160
Reaction score
166
Trump to CNN after the debate about Rubio:

"He's a choke artist. It's like in sports, I was a great athlete ya know, once a choker always a choker. We saw what happened with Chris Christie, I kept thinking, "is he okay?". The sweat... We need someone who doesn't sweat."
 

wizards8507

Well-known member
Messages
20,660
Reaction score
2,661
Trump to CNN after the debate about Rubio:

"He's a choke artist. It's like in sports, I was a great athlete ya know, once a choker always a choker. We saw what happened with Chris Christie, I kept thinking, "is he okay?". The sweat... We need someone who doesn't sweat."
This guy is something else.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rwwdE2H__Zg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The CNN reporter's face is priceless.

Are there any post-debate polls?
I haven't seen anything scientific. Drudge (who's in the tank for Trump) has a very unscientific poll that shows Trump winning the debate huge. Frank Luntz' focus group had Rubio winning overwhelmingly.
 

Irish#1

Livin' Your Dream!
Staff member
Messages
44,599
Reaction score
20,063
RealClearPolitics - 2016 Presidential Race

Here is an aggregate of recent polls. Sanders pretty much dominates Clinton in head to heads versus each Republicans. His strongest competition would be Rubio. He crushes Trump and the other Republican candidates.

Clinton is favored to lose to each of the R's at this point, except Trump. This is nationally keep in mind. Interestingly enough, Kasich kills Clinton but she beats Trump and loses to everyone else.

Based on the polls I have been keeping up with, Bernie is in a statistical tie with Clinton right now and is trending up. He also crushes all candidates in the favorability category. IMO, Clinton goes down in the primaries again and it will be Sanders vs. Trump.

Take a look at the polls linked herein. I think It shows a pretty clear pattern IMO.

Been saying this all along. It's very simple. No need to analyze possible fall out, philosophies, comparisons to other past governments, presidents, etc.. People want a real change. Good or bad, Bernie and Donny offer that.
 

irishfan

Irish Hoops Mod
Messages
7,205
Reaction score
607
Last edited:

Irishman77

Well-known member
Messages
5,132
Reaction score
445
Trump killed it again. Foamio and Scruz desperate last attempt to smear Trump was a big fail. All the polls confirm this.
 

irishfan

Irish Hoops Mod
Messages
7,205
Reaction score
607
Why don't you like 538?

This. Nate Silver is a lib but he does a great job.

Felt like he's relied on past statistics (which I realize is his job) too much this election. This is a very odd election season. I don't think you can look at what has happened previously as an indicator of how Trump or Sanders will hold up.

As an example: He said Nevada Republican Caucus could be tough to call because the voter turnout would be low. He cited the fact that 25% of the 2012 Caucus-goers were Mormons there for Mitt, and predicted that those voters would not show up. This despite the fact that the previous three states had massive Republican voter numbers and Trump just had a state record-setting rally in Nevada...then Trump received more votes in Nevada by himself than were cast in all of 2012 total.

As someone who didn't want Trump at all and now is indifferent towards him, it's been amusing keeping track of Silver predict his downfall the last few months and try and compare him to past candidates. I don't think he's been able to adapt on the fly this election season, and he didn't realistically think Trump had a chance until the last week or so (when IMO it was obvious by Thanksgiving).

^it's more Silver than anything
 
Last edited:

wizards8507

Well-known member
Messages
20,660
Reaction score
2,661
Trump killed it again. Foamio and Scruz desperate last attempt to smear Trump was a big fail. All the polls confirm this.
Surely you can't be serious.

Q: How are you going to get Mexico to pay for the wall?
A: It just got ten feet higher.

That's not an answer!

Q: True or false, did you say government would pay for health insurance.
A: False.

Scott Pelley: The uninsured person is going to be taken care of. How? How?

Donald Trump: They’re going to be taken care of. I would make a deal with existing hospitals to take care of people. And, you know what, if this is probably–

Scott Pelley: Make a deal? Who pays for it?

Donald Trump: —the government’s gonna pay for it.

Q: True or false, did you import workers to build Trump Tower?
A: False.

After 15 Years in Court, Workers' Lawsuit Against Trump Faces Yet Another Delay - NYTimes.com

Q: Comment on President Fox' statement that he's not paying for the fucking wall.
A: That's filthy language and he should apologize.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wN7KHWdyrbI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Q: Would you appoint justices that uphold and defend the Constitution?
A: Ted Cruz is a liar!
 

Rhode Irish

Semi-retired
Messages
7,057
Reaction score
900
RealClearPolitics - 2016 Presidential Race

Here is an aggregate of recent polls. Sanders pretty much dominates Clinton in head to heads versus each Republicans. His strongest competition would be Rubio. He crushes Trump and the other Republican candidates.

Clinton is favored to lose to each of the R's at this point, except Trump. This is nationally keep in mind. Interestingly enough, Kasich kills Clinton but she beats Trump and loses to everyone else.

Based on the polls I have been keeping up with, Bernie is in a statistical tie with Clinton right now and is trending up. He also crushes all candidates in the favorability category. IMO, Clinton goes down in the primaries again and it will be Sanders vs. Trump.

Take a look at the polls linked herein. I think It shows a pretty clear pattern IMO.

I am not actively supporting any candidate in this race, so I really don't have much of an agenda here. But I think most savvy election observers recognize that the head to head polls don't mean that much at this point. Clinton's biggest weakness in those head to head polls is actually a strength for her in the real campaign: she has spent the last 20+ years being vetted by the press and her political opponents. All of her dirt is out there already, and that obviously hurts her in these head to head polls. But, as the election plays out, these other guys will go through their own vetting processes with the press and their political opponents. If you don't recall what that looks like in the lead-up to a presidential election, I will remind you that it is very ugly and savage and it will impact favorability ratings and poll results and the overall trajectory of the race. That will happen, it is inevitable.
 

beryirish

Dry Land Is Not A Myth!
Messages
5,949
Reaction score
539
I know - it's so hard hearing him talk. They made fun of Rubio for being Robio or whatever. But it's Trump that keeps repeating himself.

Big Big Big, Make Deals Make Deals, I lead in the Polls, Erase the Lines, Erase the Lines.
 

wizards8507

Well-known member
Messages
20,660
Reaction score
2,661
I know - it's so hard hearing him talk. They made fun of Rubio for being Robio or whatever. But it's Trump that keeps repeating himself.

Big Big Big, Make Deals Make Deals, I lead in the Polls, Erase the Lines, Erase the Lines.
My wife deplores politics but she walked by me watching the debate last night and she goes "We're gonna win so much, your head is going to fall off."
 

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
Last night was the first debate I've watched for this election. All I can say is, how in the hell is Kasich not more of a contender? He really hit home with me, and he actually explained what he plans to do. People are really starting to piss me off trying to make that movie Idiocracy into our reality with the side shows they are supporting.

Mike Judge's co-writer tweeted this yesterday:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I never expected <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/idiocracy?src=hash">#idiocracy</a> to become a documentary.</p>— Etan Cohen (@etanjc) <a href="https://twitter.com/etanjc/status/702545314733895680">February 24, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

NDohio

Well-known member
Messages
5,869
Reaction score
3,060
This is why Trump supporters are the first political group that I simply do not understand. How can they not see the obvious? This guy isn't a conservative, he's not in it to serve the electorate, he's only doing this for himself. How isn't this obvious to absolutely everyone?

Two years ago, Trump was getting roasted on Comedy Central...now he's going to be the POTUS? Are you fucking kidding me?

Trump killed it again. Foamio and Scruz desperate last attempt to smear Trump was a big fail. All the polls confirm this.

LOL
 

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
TAC's editors just published a short article titled "After Neoliberalism":

This year is shaping up to be the most unconventional moment in American politics in a generation. A race that mere months ago seemed to promise yet another Bush vs. another Clinton has so far given us instead the populist insurgencies of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. Whether or not either of them gets his party’s nomination, the neoliberal consensus of the past two decades seems about to shatter. Free trade, immigration, waging war for democracy, and even the relative merits of capitalism and “democratic socialism” have all come into question. Perhaps more fundamentally, so has the right of Clintons and Bushes—and those like them—to rule.

Trump is a billionaire, but his base of support rests among the people once identified by the sociologist Donald Warren as “middle American radicals.” Nearly 40 years ago, Warren’s idea was adapted by the hard-right political thinker Sam Francis as the basis for paleoconservatism—a conservatism very unlike that of the postwar conservative movement, one that would champion the class interests and cultural attitudes of middle- and lower-income whites. The Pat Buchanan presidential campaigns of 1992 and 1996 put Francis’s ideas to the test. They fell short of propelling Buchanan to the GOP nomination, and by the end of the 1990s there was nary a trace of paleo ideology to be found among conservatives or Republicans. The return of the Bush family to power in 2000 seemed to confirm that nothing had changed after a decade of skirmishes.

Now suddenly there’s Trump. And on the left, there’s Sanders, a throwback to a time when progressives embraced the socialist label. That had fallen out of fashion even before the end of the Cold War—indeed, the Democratic Leadership Council, the policy group that paved the way for Bill Clinton’s nomination, was founded in 1985 precisely to move the Democratic Party toward “market-based solutions.”

That economic populism should find a foothold in both parties after the Great Recession and eight years of lagging prosperity under Barack Obama is not entirely surprising. What is more remarkable is the weakness of the bipartisan establishment, whose conventional wisdom is no longer meekly accepted by the rank and file of either party. Every Republican except Trump has tried, to one degree or another, to present himself as a champion of conservative orthodoxy. But that orthodoxy no longer commands the loyalty of a sufficient number of voters to preclude a phenomenon like Trump. Nor does DLC-style neoliberalism appear to be the consensus among Democrats any longer.

A void is opening in American politics, and Trump and Sanders are only the first to try to fill it. Neither of them may succeed. Yet it is hard to see any source of renewal for the crumbling establishment they are fighting to replace. Just as the end of the Cold War marked the passing of an era, and partially or wholly transformed the left and right alike, so another era is drawing to a close now, with further political mutations to come. Trump and Sanders need not be the future, but what Bush and Clinton represent is already past—no matter who wins in November.

Conservatives of Burkean temperament view all of this warily. There is an opportunity here to replace stale ideologies with a prudence that is ultimately more principled than any mere formula can be. But there is also the risk that the devil we know is only making way for another we don’t. At times like these, it is important to know what to conserve, which is not a label or ideology, but a healthy and humane republic.
 
Last edited:

Rhode Irish

Semi-retired
Messages
7,057
Reaction score
900
This is why Trump supporters are the first political group that I simply do not understand. How can they not see the obvious? This guy isn't a conservative, he's not in it to serve the electorate, he's only doing this for himself. How isn't this obvious to absolutely everyone?

Two years ago, Trump was getting roasted on Comedy Central...now he's going to be the POTUS? Are you fucking kidding me?

This is Bill James, of baseball wizardry fame, giving what I think is a pretty good take on what is driving Trump's popularity to this point (which doubles as a pretty smart take on the current state of our culture). He also has a pretty hopeful opinion of how this will all turn out that I happen to share, so I definitely think it is worth the read.

SIAP, and sorry in advance for the weird text-wall formatting he went with here, but sucking it up and dealing with that will be rewarded.

Trump, as in Rump | Articles | Bill James Online
 

Wild Bill

Well-known member
Messages
5,519
Reaction score
3,264
RealClearPolitics - 2016 Presidential Race

Here is an aggregate of recent polls. Sanders pretty much dominates Clinton in head to heads versus each Republicans. His strongest competition would be Rubio. He crushes Trump and the other Republican candidates.

Clinton is favored to lose to each of the R's at this point, except Trump. This is nationally keep in mind. Interestingly enough, Kasich kills Clinton but she beats Trump and loses to everyone else.

Based on the polls I have been keeping up with, Bernie is in a statistical tie with Clinton right now and is trending up. He also crushes all candidates in the favorability category. IMO, Clinton goes down in the primaries again and it will be Sanders vs. Trump.

Take a look at the polls linked herein. I think It shows a pretty clear pattern IMO.

He has momentum but he's not polling well in the super Tuesday states, and getting trounced in Ohio and Pennsylvania. I'm not sure how he can overcome these deficits, regardless of momentum.
 

yankeeND

!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Messages
4,607
Reaction score
255
Mike Judge's co-writer tweeted this yesterday:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">I never expected <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/idiocracy?src=hash">#idiocracy</a> to become a documentary.</p>— Etan Cohen (@etanjc) <a href="https://twitter.com/etanjc/status/702545314733895680">February 24, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

lmao, that's right on time!
 

BGIF

Varsity Club
Messages
43,946
Reaction score
2,922
Gov Chris Christie just endorsed Trump for president at a PC in Texas carried by all the cablenews stations.
 

Whiskeyjack

Mittens Margaritas Ante Porcos
Staff member
Messages
20,894
Reaction score
8,126
Slate's Jamelle Bouie just published an article titled "People Are Still Underestimating Donald Trump":

For the first time in the GOP presidential race, the Republicans who want the nomination are turning their aim to the outsider who’s running away with it.

From the jump at Thursday’s pre–Super Tuesday CNN debate, Marco Rubio was in Donald Trump’s face. “You’ve hired a significant number of people from other countries to take jobs that Americans could have filled,” said the Florida senator, blasting Trump for using unauthorized labor. Rubio hit Trump on his bankruptcies, and hit him on the scandal that is Trump University. And it was effective. Trump looked rattled. He couldn’t talk over Rubio and couldn’t give a good response. But after muddling through a question on immigration, Rubio lost the thread of these attacks later in the debate.

Ted Cruz attacked too, but he went to more familiar ground, hitting Trump for his ideological heterodoxy. “Nobody who supports far-left liberal Democrats who are fighting for judicial activists can possibly care about having principled constitutionalists on the court,” said the Texas senator, questioning Trump’s commitment to finding a suitable replacement for the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Rubio, himself a strongly ideological conservative, jumped in, attacking Trump for his commitment to a health care system—possibly under some form of government involvement—that wouldn’t let Americans “die on the streets.” “This is a Republican debate, right?” asked Rubio at the end of this exchange.

On Twitter, pundits and observers were thrilled with this skirmish. Finally, Republicans were hitting Trump and taking his threat seriously. “Best thing Rubio has done is to belittle Trump, undercutting him when he tries to apply his ‘dealmaking’ to everything,” tweeted Philip Klein of the Washington Examiner. “Exposing ignorance.” Likewise, said Ian Tuttle of National Review, “Interruption is succeeding for Trump, but Rubio & Cruz have looked like adults and his equals—and on substance, obviously his superiors.”

Both statements are true. But does that matter?

Earlier this week in Nevada, I attended two events for Trump. One, at an arena in the south of Las Vegas, was a last hurrah before the caucus. The other, the next night, was to celebrate Trump’s massive victory in that caucus. When I spoke to Trump supporters, at both events, I heard a single refrain: Trump says what we’re all thinking, Trump doesn’t talk down to us.

These aren’t idle comments. Trump has ideas and beliefs, but he’s not winning because Republicans back his policies or hold his ideology. He’s winning because, like the most effective demogogues, he’s built an emotional bond with his audience.

Somehow, pundits don’t see this, and so they cheer for Rubio’s attacks on Trump’s knowledge and Cruz’s attacks on Trump’s ideology (or lack thereoef), blind to the fact that competence and belief are orthogonal to his appeal. They’re not even key to actual Republican voters, who Trump’s rise has shown are more tribal than ideological.

They don’t care that Trump doesn’t have specifics, that he can’t give details on the wall with Mexico, or his trade war with China. What they see is that Trump is like them. He talks like them. He jokes like them. He shares their anger and their prejudice. He shares their fear. He even talks about the government like they do. Majorities of Americans think their tax dollars go largely to foreign aid; they think we spend too much on other countries when there are problems in the United States that need solving. When Trump says, “We’re losing so much with Mexico and China,” he’s speaking directly to millions of Americans who think they’re funding adversaries and enemies, at the cost of their own opportunity and success.

On the same score, Trump speaks to a deep fear of loss, a product of the trauma of the Great Recession. It’s the basis for his entire riff on health care. “We are going to have private health care,” he said, “but I will not allow people to die on the sidewalks and the streets of our country if I’m president.”

All of this is why Cruz and Rubio will fall flat with their attacks. For the most part, they hit him from the right, as if Trump was just another politician, walking an ideological bridge too far. But that’s wrong. Trump doesn’t win his support from the most conservative Republicans; his base is among moderates and “somewhat” conservative voters. On the same score, it doesn’t make sense to hit Trump for his lack of policy knowledge. He isn’t winning because he’s competent; he’s winning because he connects with millions of Republicans who feel, strongly, that their leaders aren’t interested in them or their lives. Trump, more than anyone else in the GOP field, feels their pain.

The only way to stop Trump is to attack that and discredit the idea that Trump is anything but selfish. You need to show that he’s a con man who doesn’t care about them, who will exploit their trust and discard them as soon as he wins power. In short, you need to break those bonds of empathy and show Trump for the liar and opportunist that he is.

Which is why, of all the attacks on Trump, the only one that landed—that has resonance with his supporters—is Rubio’s Halloween Gambit to knock Trump off balance with his blows on Trump University, which goes after the core of Trump’s appeal. Show that he exploited ordinary Americans, and you mar his facade of compassion and understanding.

If Team Rubio is smart, it will focus all of their fire on this point, and force Trump to respond. No, it won’t be enough to save Super Tuesday, where Trump holds a definitive lead. But it might be what it takes to block Trump before it’s too late, and finally open Rubio’s path to victory.
 

kmoose

Banned
Messages
10,298
Reaction score
1,181
Q: True or false, did you import workers to build Trump Tower?
A: False.

After 15 Years in Court, Workers' Lawsuit Against Trump Faces Yet Another Delay - NYTimes.com

I'm not defending Trump, but your link only supports his answer to the question. The folks suing Trump worked for a contractor that was hired to raze an existing building.

1. Trump didn't "import" any of them, or even directly hire them. He's no more responsible for illegal labor than you would be, if you contracted Merry Maids to clean your house, then Merry Maids used undocumented workers.

2. They didn't work on Trump Tower; they were tearing down an existing building. It might be splitting hairs, but that's politics.
 

irishfan

Irish Hoops Mod
Messages
7,205
Reaction score
607
Gov Chris Christie just endorsed Trump for president at a PC in Texas carried by all the cablenews stations.

I know people don't have the most favorable views of Christie, but it probably throws some more legitimacy behind Trump's campaign.
 

BGIF

Varsity Club
Messages
43,946
Reaction score
2,922
I know people don't have the most favorable views of Christie, but it probably throws some more legitimacy behind Trump's campaign.

The legitimacy may be questioned by some but the weight of the endorsement can't be denied.
 

wizards8507

Well-known member
Messages
20,660
Reaction score
2,661
I'm not defending Trump, but your link only supports his answer to the question. The folks suing Trump worked for a contractor that was hired to raze an existing building.

1. Trump didn't "import" any of them, or even directly hire them. He's no more responsible for illegal labor than you would be, if you contracted Merry Maids to clean your house, then Merry Maids used undocumented workers.

2. They didn't work on Trump Tower; they were tearing down an existing building. It might be splitting hairs, but that's politics.
There are a number of cases and a number of articles out there. I just picked one. On the particular details of that particular article, you're correct.
 

wizards8507

Well-known member
Messages
20,660
Reaction score
2,661
I know people don't have the most favorable views of Christie, but it probably throws some more legitimacy behind Trump's campaign.

The legitimacy may be questioned by some but the weight of the endorsement can't be denied.
What legitimacy? Anyone likely to be swayed by a pompous blowhard is already supporting Trump.

Christie is buying his way onto the ticket.
 
Last edited:
Top