US President 2016 - the Great Horse Race

[Terrell]

The Greens are advertising here in Central Florida. So far I've only seen them attacking HRC.

 

[fast]

Well,so long as the third party voters vote Democratic on the down tickets, it doesn't matter. Trump doesn't really have a path to victory, so it's only the Congressional races which are important now.

Are you kidding? A shrewd and remarkably uncharacteristic speech conveyed with heartfelt candor explaining why he has repeatedly tripped up, coupled with a complete, genuinely delivered about-face could easily (quite easily) not only turn the tables but devastate even a remote chance of Hillary winning, especially if he also brings his wealth to bear.

There's so (so, so, so) much he could do.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Well,so long as the third party voters vote Democratic on the down tickets, it doesn't matter. Trump doesn't really have a path to victory, so it's only the Congressional races which are important now.

Are you kidding? A shrewd and remarkably uncharacteristic speech conveyed with heartfelt candor explaining why he has repeatedly tripped up, coupled with a complete, genuinely delivered about-face could easily (quite easily) not only turn the tables but devastate even a remote chance of Hillary winning, especially if he also brings his wealth to bear.

There's so (so, so, so) much he could do.

I'm sorry. You think that Trump can pivot and convey a new character? Keep telling yourself that until November 9th like the rest of the GOP.

I agree with you that there are things that Trump could do. He's Trump, however, so those are not things that he will do.

 

[fast]

Are you kidding? A shrewd and remarkably uncharacteristic speech conveyed with heartfelt candor explaining why he has repeatedly tripped up, coupled with a complete, genuinely delivered about-face could easily (quite easily) not only turn the tables but devastate even a remote chance of Hillary winning, especially if he also brings his wealth to bear.

There's so (so, so, so) much he could do.

I'm sorry. You think that Trump can pivot and convey a new character? Keep telling yourself that until November 9th like the rest of the GOP.

I agree with you that there are things that Trump could do. He's Trump, however, so those are not things that he will do.

So, you think Trump really does have a path to victory.

 

[Terrell]

I think it's too early to call the election. I do think that at this time the odds are in HRC's favor, but I'm not sure by how much. I cannot go as far to say that this advantage is permanent, it may be, but I think we should wait & see. I still think it's possible that the middle finger vote is larger than it appears, but we'll have to wait & see. I'd warn all of us who support HRC, or simply think Trump is intolerable, to remain cautious on HRC's chances.

 

[Ford]

I think it's too early to call the election.

As we learned in 2000, it is sometimes too early to call the election even after the election!

I do think that at this time the odds are in HRC's favor, but I'm not sure by how much.

Nate Silver has it at 83.4% in Clinton's favor at the moment, or 91.7% if the election were held today. That's an awfully big hill for Trump to climb. Or pay someone to climb.

I cannot go as far to say that this advantage is permanent, it may be, but I think we should wait & see. I still think it's possible that the middle finger vote is larger than it appears, but we'll have to wait & see. I'd warn all of us who support HRC, or simply think Trump is intolerable, to remain cautious on HRC's chances.

We're 7 weeks from the first debate. Clinton's post-convention bounce may wear off, but unless there's some major event between now and then I don't see the horse race changing much.

 

[Terrell]

As we learned in 2000, it is sometimes too early to call the election even after the election!

I do think that at this time the odds are in HRC's favor, but I'm not sure by how much.

Nate Silver has it at 83.4% in Clinton's favor at the moment, or 91.7% if the election were held today. That's an awfully big hill for Trump to climb. Or pay someone to climb.

I cannot go as far to say that this advantage is permanent, it may be, but I think we should wait & see. I still think it's possible that the middle finger vote is larger than it appears, but we'll have to wait & see. I'd warn all of us who support HRC, or simply think Trump is intolerable, to remain cautious on HRC's chances.

We're 7 weeks from the first debate. Clinton's post-convention bounce may wear off, but unless there's some major event between now and then I don't see the horse race changing much.

Agreed on the first point. I remember The Florida Recount. That plus 2012 makes me hope my state doesn't have his head stuck up it's ass again.

Nate Silver does tend to get these things right.

The third point is the thing that worries me. I don't think that the convention bounce is permanent, but I hope it is.

I expect HRC to beat Trump in the debates, but if people expect her to wipe the floor with him and she underperforms I think it could be trouble for her. IOW if she's expected to win 50-3 but she only wins 30-21 that could be a problem. (I wish I had a better metaphor)

I also wonder about things happening either here or overseas that Trump could potentially use to exploit people's fears.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

As we learned in 2000, it is sometimes too early to call the election even after the election!




Nate Silver has it at 83.4% in Clinton's favor at the moment, or 91.7% if the election were held today. That's an awfully big hill for Trump to climb. Or pay someone to climb.

I cannot go as far to say that this advantage is permanent, it may be, but I think we should wait & see. I still think it's possible that the middle finger vote is larger than it appears, but we'll have to wait & see. I'd warn all of us who support HRC, or simply think Trump is intolerable, to remain cautious on HRC's chances.

We're 7 weeks from the first debate. Clinton's post-convention bounce may wear off, but unless there's some major event between now and then I don't see the horse race changing much.

Agreed on the first point. I remember The Florida Recount. That plus 2012 makes me hope my state doesn't have his head stuck up it's ass again.

Nate Silver does tend to get these things right.

The third point is the thing that worries me. I don't think that the convention bounce is permanent, but I hope it is.

This huge lead isn't much of a convention bounce as it is a combination of a bounce and Trump fucking up royally with women voters. The baby thing was pretty bad. No other politician would have gotten away with such a thing. Trump is losing support right now among Republicans and women. Those two things are from a bounce. He is making terrible mistakes of judgement. Heck 60% of Republicans polled thought the whole Khan thing was bad.

In order to recover, Trump has to stop being Trump. Of course, yesterday, he mocked how Clinton looked... something that won't play well with women.

I expect HRC to beat Trump in the debates, but if people expect her to wipe the floor with him and she underperforms I think it could be trouble for her. IOW if she's expected to win 50-3 but she only wins 30-21 that could be a problem. (I wish I had a better metaphor)

I also wonder about things happening either here or overseas that Trump could potentially use to exploit people's fears.

Naw.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I'm sorry. You think that Trump can pivot and convey a new character? Keep telling yourself that until November 9th like the rest of the GOP.

I agree with you that there are things that Trump could do. He's Trump, however, so those are not things that he will do.

So, you think Trump really does have a path to victory.

No. A generic GOP candidate would have a path to victory. Trump does not.

 

[Terrell]

As we learned in 2000, it is sometimes too early to call the election even after the election!




Nate Silver has it at 83.4% in Clinton's favor at the moment, or 91.7% if the election were held today. That's an awfully big hill for Trump to climb. Or pay someone to climb.

I cannot go as far to say that this advantage is permanent, it may be, but I think we should wait & see. I still think it's possible that the middle finger vote is larger than it appears, but we'll have to wait & see. I'd warn all of us who support HRC, or simply think Trump is intolerable, to remain cautious on HRC's chances.

We're 7 weeks from the first debate. Clinton's post-convention bounce may wear off, but unless there's some major event between now and then I don't see the horse race changing much.

Agreed on the first point. I remember The Florida Recount. That plus 2012 makes me hope my state doesn't have his head stuck up it's ass again.

Nate Silver does tend to get these things right.

The third point is the thing that worries me. I don't think that the convention bounce is permanent, but I hope it is.

This huge lead isn't much of a convention bounce as it is a combination of a bounce and Trump fucking up royally with women voters. The baby thing was pretty bad. No other politician would have gotten away with such a thing. Trump is losing support right now among Republicans and women. Those two things are from a bounce. He is making terrible mistakes of judgement. Heck 60% of Republicans polled thought the whole Khan thing was bad.

In order to recover, Trump has to stop being Trump. Of course, yesterday, he mocked how Clinton looked... something that won't play well with women.

I expect HRC to beat Trump in the debates, but if people expect her to wipe the floor with him and she underperforms I think it could be trouble for her. IOW if she's expected to win 50-3 but she only wins 30-21 that could be a problem. (I wish I had a better metaphor)

I also wonder about things happening either here or overseas that Trump could potentially use to exploit people's fears.

Naw.

I do agree that Trump is screwing up royally and it's improved HRC's odds greatly for the time being. I don't think HRC, her staff, and her supporters should relax. They need to keep hitting Trump where he's vulnerable. Clinton should assume that there are enough voters with a shorter attention span that us who follow politics more closely.

Stein is also trying to be a thorn in HRC's side, she's got ads airing here. If HRC has a way to flatten Stein, she needs to do so, quickly & ruthlessly. Hopefully Johnson can be a problem for Trump, but he can cut both ways. I doubt Darrell Castle will get any attention. CNN is giving Stein a town hall comparable to what they gave Johnson.

 

[fast]

So, you think Trump really does have a path to victory.

No. A generic GOP candidate would have a path to victory. Trump does not.

Whether he will follow the path is not at issue. Whether he has a path is. If he cannot win, then there is no path, but he can win, so there is a path. He has proven time and again that no matter how outlandish his antics, he can prevail. That's not to say he hasn't gone so far that he won't prevail, but I am saying he hasn't gone so far that he cannot prevail.

Maybe your sentiment is that it's so highly implausible that he can still pull off a victory that we may as well count him out and regard him as having no path to victory, but what I think is that your bias against him is skewing your judgement, not because you don't have good reason for thinking he won't win but because you're waffling on whether he can win, as earlier you agreed with me that there are things he could do. It doesn't matter that is character is such that he won't change. What matters is that he can. This goes to support my opposition to your claim that he has no path to victory.

 

[Keith&Co.]

No. A generic GOP candidate would have a path to victory. Trump does not.

Whether he will follow the path is not at issue. Whether he has a path is.

Well, they're both issues. The path to victory involves NOT BEING TRUMP.
Especially as the game changes. The stakes are higher, the audience is wider, and the scrutiny is going up at least a magnitude of notches.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

As we learned in 2000, it is sometimes too early to call the election even after the election!




Nate Silver has it at 83.4% in Clinton's favor at the moment, or 91.7% if the election were held today. That's an awfully big hill for Trump to climb. Or pay someone to climb.

I cannot go as far to say that this advantage is permanent, it may be, but I think we should wait & see. I still think it's possible that the middle finger vote is larger than it appears, but we'll have to wait & see. I'd warn all of us who support HRC, or simply think Trump is intolerable, to remain cautious on HRC's chances.

We're 7 weeks from the first debate. Clinton's post-convention bounce may wear off, but unless there's some major event between now and then I don't see the horse race changing much.

Agreed on the first point. I remember The Florida Recount. That plus 2012 makes me hope my state doesn't have his head stuck up it's ass again.

Nate Silver does tend to get these things right.

The third point is the thing that worries me. I don't think that the convention bounce is permanent, but I hope it is.

This huge lead isn't much of a convention bounce as it is a combination of a bounce and Trump fucking up royally with women voters. The baby thing was pretty bad. No other politician would have gotten away with such a thing. Trump is losing support right now among Republicans and women. Those two things are from a bounce. He is making terrible mistakes of judgement. Heck 60% of Republicans polled thought the whole Khan thing was bad.

In order to recover, Trump has to stop being Trump. Of course, yesterday, he mocked how Clinton looked... something that won't play well with women.

I expect HRC to beat Trump in the debates, but if people expect her to wipe the floor with him and she underperforms I think it could be trouble for her. IOW if she's expected to win 50-3 but she only wins 30-21 that could be a problem. (I wish I had a better metaphor)

I also wonder about things happening either here or overseas that Trump could potentially use to exploit people's fears.

Naw.

I do agree that Trump is screwing up royally and it's improved HRC's odds greatly for the time being. I don't think HRC, her staff, and her supporters should relax. They need to keep hitting Trump where he's vulnerable. Clinton should assume that there are enough voters with a shorter attention span that us who follow politics more closely.

Stein is also trying to be a thorn in HRC's side, she's got ads airing here. If HRC has a way to flatten Stein, she needs to do so, quickly & ruthlessly. Hopefully Johnson can be a problem for Trump, but he can cut both ways. I doubt Darrell Castle will get any attention. CNN is giving Stein a town hall comparable to what they gave Johnson.

No relaxing! I want 396 electoral votes. I want 60% of the vote. I want to tear Trump and his supporters to shreds.

 

[Terrell]

As we learned in 2000, it is sometimes too early to call the election even after the election!




Nate Silver has it at 83.4% in Clinton's favor at the moment, or 91.7% if the election were held today. That's an awfully big hill for Trump to climb. Or pay someone to climb.

I cannot go as far to say that this advantage is permanent, it may be, but I think we should wait & see. I still think it's possible that the middle finger vote is larger than it appears, but we'll have to wait & see. I'd warn all of us who support HRC, or simply think Trump is intolerable, to remain cautious on HRC's chances.

We're 7 weeks from the first debate. Clinton's post-convention bounce may wear off, but unless there's some major event between now and then I don't see the horse race changing much.

Agreed on the first point. I remember The Florida Recount. That plus 2012 makes me hope my state doesn't have his head stuck up it's ass again.

Nate Silver does tend to get these things right.

The third point is the thing that worries me. I don't think that the convention bounce is permanent, but I hope it is.

This huge lead isn't much of a convention bounce as it is a combination of a bounce and Trump fucking up royally with women voters. The baby thing was pretty bad. No other politician would have gotten away with such a thing. Trump is losing support right now among Republicans and women. Those two things are from a bounce. He is making terrible mistakes of judgement. Heck 60% of Republicans polled thought the whole Khan thing was bad.

In order to recover, Trump has to stop being Trump. Of course, yesterday, he mocked how Clinton looked... something that won't play well with women.

I expect HRC to beat Trump in the debates, but if people expect her to wipe the floor with him and she underperforms I think it could be trouble for her. IOW if she's expected to win 50-3 but she only wins 30-21 that could be a problem. (I wish I had a better metaphor)

I also wonder about things happening either here or overseas that Trump could potentially use to exploit people's fears.

Naw.

I do agree that Trump is screwing up royally and it's improved HRC's odds greatly for the time being. I don't think HRC, her staff, and her supporters should relax. They need to keep hitting Trump where he's vulnerable. Clinton should assume that there are enough voters with a shorter attention span that us who follow politics more closely.

Stein is also trying to be a thorn in HRC's side, she's got ads airing here. If HRC has a way to flatten Stein, she needs to do so, quickly & ruthlessly. Hopefully Johnson can be a problem for Trump, but he can cut both ways. I doubt Darrell Castle will get any attention. CNN is giving Stein a town hall comparable to what they gave Johnson.

No relaxing! I want 396 electoral votes. I want 60% of the vote. I want to tear Trump and his supporters to shreds.

Looks like we're on the same page. While 270 is enough to defeat Trump, I'd like her to have a solid margin of victory and a Democratic Senate.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Looks like we're on the same page. While 270 is enough to defeat Trump, I'd like her to have a solid margin of victory and a Democratic Senate.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk.

Slacker, I want the house too, and 59 seats in the Senate.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Terrell]

Looks like we're on the same page. While 270 is enough to defeat Trump, I'd like her to have a solid margin of victory and a Democratic Senate.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk.

Slacker, I want the house too, and 59 seats in the Senate.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It would be nice but I don't think we'll get the House without the Republicans having a down ballot meltdown. Gains in the House and at the state level offices would be a great election.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk.

 

[angelo]

Well,so long as the third party voters vote Democratic on the down tickets, it doesn't matter. Trump doesn't really have a path to victory, so it's only the Congressional races which are important now.

Are you kidding? A shrewd and remarkably uncharacteristic speech conveyed with heartfelt candor explaining why he has repeatedly tripped up, coupled with a complete, genuinely delivered about-face could easily (quite easily) not only turn the tables but devastate even a remote chance of Hillary winning, especially if he also brings his wealth to bear.

There's so (so, so, so) much he could do.

Get some decent advisors should be a priority.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

No. A generic GOP candidate would have a path to victory. Trump does not.

Whether he will follow the path is not at issue. Whether he has a path is. If he cannot win, then there is no path, but he can win, so there is a path. He has proven time and again that no matter how outlandish his antics, he can prevail. That's not to say he hasn't gone so far that he won't prevail, but I am saying he hasn't gone so far that he cannot prevail.

Maybe your sentiment is that it's so highly implausible that he can still pull off a victory that we may as well count him out and regard him as having no path to victory, but what I think is that your bias against him is skewing your judgement, not because you don't have good reason for thinking he won't win but because you're waffling on whether he can win, as earlier you agreed with me that there are things he could do. It doesn't matter that is character is such that he won't change. What matters is that he can. This goes to support my opposition to your claim that he has no path to victory.

Well, that's like saying there's a path up a hill since a mountain goat can walk up there, so the cow with two broken legs can therefore walk up there as well. You have to take the person walking the path into account as well to say if the potential path is a viable one for him.

It's like how Clinton has a viable path to winning Oklahoma if she just converts to radical fundamentalist Christianity and can convince the voters there that she's being honest about that and will appoint SC Justices who'll bring back public clogging so for homosexuals. It's highly implausible, but she could potentially pull off a victory there with a strategy like that, so the path exists.

 

[Sarpedon]

At this point, any decent campaign operative would realize that it wouldn't be very good for their career to work for the Trump campaign, so where would he find such people? At best, he'd get some young types with big ideas and nothing to lose, hoping they can pull off a miracle, and call themselves the ones who saved the Trump campaign. However, the problem is that they literally have no cards left to play, Trump is his own worst enemy, they've maxed out their target demographic and alienated all others, and there's no place to go. You can prioritize it all you want, but a decent crew won't board a sinking ship.

 

[blastula]

The polls look to be leveling off but no tightening yet. Clinton is up 7 in GA in latest poll.