Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
EASILY? based on what?.........you know Jeb has a last name of Bush?.....you know the name Bush was rejected badly within the Republican Party and that's with Jeb having the most Super Pac money than anybody only behind Hillary?
So let me get this straight, Jeb Bush was rejected badly by the Republican party and I don't mean the establishment, I meant the voters but he will unite the Republicans and independents to beat Hillary easily?
Rubio was rejected by the voters of his state..The people that knows him best and he was never the front runner......if he was his numbers would have been lower.
Kasich lost in 49 states....he would have lost his homestate of Ohio if he wasn't the sitting governor.....and he was never the front runner, if he was his poll numbers would be lower.
You can't put names that have NEVER been front runners and tested in a primary against Hillary because those numbers are not accurate. Hillary was always the front runner and she was challenged by Bernie in a contested primary.....those Republican names weren't.
You do realize how unpopular Hillary is with all her baggage. I'm almost positive that she'd have lost to Jeb, Rubio, Kasich, etc. but she will "probably" win going against Trump ...that's my opinion. You have yours.
You do realize how unpopular Hillary is with all her baggage. I'm almost positive that she'd have lost to Jeb, Rubio, Kasich, etc. but she will "probably" win going against Trump ...that's my opinion. You have yours.
She is not unpopular in her party.....the Democrat establishment is supporting her 100%. She has the support of most women, she has the support of the blacks and latinos.
Her negatives are up because she has been the front runner since day #1 and she was contested by Bernie. When you are the front runner your record will get more exposed and will come to the surface for everybody to attack.
Jeb Bush, Rubio and Kasich were NEVER the front runners, they hardly got attacked in the primaries because they had low poll numbers. That's like Hillary attacking and spending millions in O'Malley, with his mediocre poll numbers Hillary would be wasting her time and money attacking him so his negatives wouldn't go up.
your negatives goes up when you are the front runner and you get treated differently by your opponents and the media.
this is not an opinion but a fact.
if Jeb was the front runner for almost a year his record would have been exposed and his policies tied to his brother over and over not just in the primary but also by Hillary's Super Pacs but the liberal media....the reason nobody bother with Jeb is that his polls numbers were so bad that he had to dropout out of the race after South Carolina and SC was just the 3rd contest, the primary was just starting and Jeb's poll numbers were so bad he had to quit. Jeb spent 138 million dollars the most than anybody in the GOP primarty and he couldn't even get to 3rd place in 3 contests that forced him out.
If Trump had Jeb's, Kasich and Rubio's polls numbers during the primary NOBODY would bother to attack Trump, so his negatives wouldn't go up.....get it?
Trump was attacked from every side in the primary, by the GOP establishment, by Hillary and also Bernie and the media.....that's what comes by being the front runner....Jeb, Rubio or Kasich weren't put under the same scrutiny because their polls numbers were so crappy and they weren't winning primaries.
Last edited by Hellion1999; 07-11-2016 at 01:54 AM..
She is not unpopular in her party.....the Democrat establishment is supporting her 100%. She has the support of most women, she has the support of the blacks and latinos.
Her negatives are up because she has been the front runner since day #1 and she was contested by Bernie. When you are the front runner your record will get more exposed and will come to the surface for everybody to attack.
Jeb Bush, Rubio and Kasich were NEVER the front runners, they hardly got attacked in the primaries because they had low poll numbers. That's like Hillary attacking and spending millions in O'Malley, with his mediocre poll numbers Hillary would be wasting her time and money attacking him so his negatives wouldn't go up.
your negatives goes up when you are the front runner and you get treated differently by your opponents and the media.
this is not an opinion but a fact.
if Jeb was the front runner for almost a year his record would have been exposed and his policies tied to his brother over and over not just in the primary but also by Hillary's Super Pacs but the liberal media....the reason nobody bother with Jeb is that his polls numbers were so bad that he had to dropout out of the race after South Carolina and SC was just the 3rd contest, the primary was just starting and Jeb's poll numbers were so bad he had to quit. Jeb spent 138 million dollars the most than anybody in the GOP primarty and he couldn't even get to 3rd place in 3 contests that forced him out.
If Trump had Jeb's, Kasich and Rubio's polls numbers during the primary NOBODY would bother to attack Trump, so his negatives wouldn't go up.....get it?
Trump was attacked from every side in the primary, by the GOP establishment, by Hillary and also Bernie and the media.....that's what comes by being the front runner....Jeb, Rubio or Kasich weren't put under the same scrutiny because their polls numbers were so crappy and they weren't winning primaries.
I have no idea why you're taking the time to around and around with me on your argument. There's no point. What you're saying is no doubt correct. But isn't the premise of the thread that the Republicans could lose with Trump where they may have easily won with Jeb, Kasich, Rubio, etc.?
I'm not really disputing any of facts you're giving but the argument seems moot. Trump is the nominee and has a very good chance of losing to Hillary. Jeb, Kasich, Rubio, etc. may have easily won considering how unpopular Hillary is to the general electorate. The majority of independents would in all likelihood have gone to the Republican side to insure Hillary wasn't elected. Now, with Trump, he's more unfavorable than Hillary so it makes it much closer. You can go around and around in circles but I'm through here.
~amanda
She is not unpopular in her party.....the Democrat establishment is supporting her 100%. She has the support of most women, she has the support of the blacks and latinos.
Her negatives are up because she has been the front runner since day #1 and she was contested by Bernie. When you are the front runner your record will get more exposed and will come to the surface for everybody to attack.
Jeb Bush, Rubio and Kasich were NEVER the front runners, they hardly got attacked in the primaries because they had low poll numbers. That's like Hillary attacking and spending millions in O'Malley, with his mediocre poll numbers Hillary would be wasting her time and money attacking him so his negatives wouldn't go up.
your negatives goes up when you are the front runner and you get treated differently by your opponents and the media.
this is not an opinion but a fact.
if Jeb was the front runner for almost a year his record would have been exposed and his policies tied to his brother over and over not just in the primary but also by Hillary's Super Pacs but the liberal media....the reason nobody bother with Jeb is that his polls numbers were so bad that he had to dropout out of the race after South Carolina and SC was just the 3rd contest, the primary was just starting and Jeb's poll numbers were so bad he had to quit. Jeb spent 138 million dollars the most than anybody in the GOP primarty and he couldn't even get to 3rd place in 3 contests that forced him out.
If Trump had Jeb's, Kasich and Rubio's polls numbers during the primary NOBODY would bother to attack Trump, so his negatives wouldn't go up.....get it?
Trump was attacked from every side in the primary, by the GOP establishment, by Hillary and also Bernie and the media.....that's what comes by being the front runner....Jeb, Rubio or Kasich weren't put under the same scrutiny because their polls numbers were so crappy and they weren't winning primaries.
Hillary has been attacked by all sides as well and for 25 years.
The bottom line is - Independents. They don't like Hillary but they hate Trump more. You should have nominated Kasich or Rubio.
They don't, if they did he wouldn't consistently be getting his ass kicked in the polls would he?
Republican voters agree, but then Republican voters put up Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell telling us the same thing with the "tea party revolution!" that was what the country wanted etc.
And the pair of them got crushed in the end.
Then why did Trump garner more votes than any Republican nominee in known history??
Status:
"Smartened up and walked away!"
(set 27 days ago)
11,789 posts, read 5,798,330 times
Reputation: 14217
Quote:
Originally Posted by SharpshooterTom
They don't, if they did he wouldn't consistently be getting his ass kicked in the polls would he?
Republican voters agree, but then Republican voters put up Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell telling us the same thing with the "tea party revolution!" that was what the country wanted etc.
And the pair of them got crushed in the end.
I'm not even reading the rest of the thread as it's just trolling to get reactions. Conservative republicans may be upset with Trump - but Trump has crossed over and gained support from Democrats sick of their party and independents.
Many people won't even admit they plan on voting for him due to the responses they are likely to receive from Conservatives and Democrats so we'll really have to wait and see how it all pans out. The American people do want change and I predict a very close race.
I have no idea why you're taking the time to around and around with me on your argument. There's no point. What you're saying is no doubt correct. But isn't the premise of the thread that the Republicans could lose with Trump where they may have easily won with Jeb, Kasich, Rubio, etc.?
I'm not really disputing any of facts you're giving but the argument seems moot. Trump is the nominee and has a very good chance of losing to Hillary. Jeb, Kasich, Rubio, etc. may have easily won considering how unpopular Hillary is to the general electorate. The majority of independents would in all likelihood have gone to the Republican side to insure Hillary wasn't elected. Now, with Trump, he's more unfavorable than Hillary so it makes it much closer. You can go around and around in circles but I'm through here.
~amanda
you keep repeating the same thing with no evidence.
You said Trump could lose to Hillary but Jeb Bush, Kasich and Rubio would beat her "easily"....based on what?
the reason Jeb Bush, Kasich and Rubio's negatives are low its because they were NEVER the front runners and they didn't get attacked for most the primary by all sides.......if they were their negatives would be up. You keep ignoring that.
Hillary has been attacked by all sides as well and for 25 years.
The bottom line is - Independents. They don't like Hillary but they hate Trump more. You should have nominated Kasich or Rubio.
You probably would have won.
Pity, that.
That's the problem with the GOP's base, any candidate mainstream and tolerant enough to win a general election is defeated in the primaries (ie: Jeb Bush and John Kasich) ... or forced to move so far to the right that they lose any appeal to the wider electorate (ie: Mitt Romney).
The GOP is going to have spend some time in the wilderness and figure out how to ditch the bigots and the Bible thumpers. The GOP has stop being of a party of White racial resentment and evolve into a party the provides opportunities for ALL Americans (including the 30% of Americans who are non-Hispanic Whites).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
