Trump cheats at golf - the ONE and ONLY politics thread

Obama won New York 63-35 in 2012. Good luck with that one.

 

Perhaps what is aiding him is that none of the other candidates have any depth or details on substantive issues either (certainly none that would withstand the mildest of scrutiny). Cruz is considered deplorable by his own rank and file and suffers from RPF (Resting Punchable Face). Rubio is a blatant puppet whose presentation is so scripted he [Rubio.exe encountered a problem and is shutting down].

Trump is famous, his presentation is compelling and he is crapping over a process from which many voters feel disenfranchised.

 

I think he's going to lose big.

 

But that all comes with the assumption that supporters of the other GOP candidates wouldn't move to Trump if their first choice dropped out. I don't believe that is clear. I think they hate Clinton much more than Trump.

 

The idea that Trump isn't qualified to be president might make sense if qualifications were a prerequisite. Obama was elected because he gave good speeches. He ran in 2008 after a cup of coffee in the Senate.

 

I don't think people care about depth. Or are too stupid this time around the realize why depth is important. Think about this: eight years ago Palin was slammed for being a dim bulb and it affected McCain's campaign. The biggest takeaway from last night was that Trump has no clue what the fuck he's talking about (admittedly because Fox and Crubio ganged up on him) and yet what's trended all morning is Trump's dick and Cruz's booger. Boogers 'n Dicks. Be awesome if this were a nation of second graders.

 

So you are saying that Obama has done a good job?

 

"Not qualified" isn't at the top of my list of reasons not to vote for Trump.

 

No it doesn't. I'm sure a lot of those supporters will go to Trump. Almost all of them. And he'll still lose. That's why I said "44%" and not "30%."

Trump isn't going to lose because he's unpopular within the Republican party. He's going to lose because he has less popularity outside of it than the average Republican national figure, and decades of demographic shifts have left the Republican party with an insufficient coalition to win the general election unless its candidate can push into demographics it doesn't usually do well with. George Bush was unusually popular with women and Hispanics for a Republican, and that's why 2004 was the only time since *1988* that a Republican candidate won the popular vote. Trump has no such demographic inroads, and in fact is worse off than a generic Republican with any demographics that might have had some susceptibility to Republican inroads.

Everyone has always known the angry poor white male vote that Trump has tapped into was there. The GOP has subtly courted it since Reagan and the Southern Strategy. But they always courted it subtly because openly pandering to it was general-election poison. Women don't respond as well to men to the tough-man act, and Otherizing Hispanics is a great way to win that poor white male vote that Republicans were getting anyway and throwing away the Hispanics that the party has been courting as a key to reversing their demographic problem for 20 years.

 

Thought you were the one with the extensive Rolodex of GOP insiders.

 

I genuinely hope your assessment is correct.

 

Anything's possible, of course. I don't like to use the term "no chance."

If Clinton is indicted after the nomination, then maybe. That's almost certainly not going to happen, despite what her more fervent opposition will tell you, but if it did that would have a chance to tank her.

Absent a Clinton collapse, Trump's path to victory probably involves a series of major catastrophes in just the right timing that scares people and makes them flee to the bluster he projects temporarily. A major economic collapse over the summer combined with an October terrorist attack the size of 9/11 might do it. I'm not sure I'd bet on it even then, but it's his best chance.