Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-28-2016, 12:54 PM
 
30,065 posts, read 18,665,937 times
Reputation: 20884

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeyCNY View Post
Then it would be official: Trump will be a worse candidate than Romney--in virtually every attribute category possible.

It's amazing how the GOP never learned their lesson from 2012.
Well.......................... let's see.

1. 14% of dems say that they will not vote for Hillary.

2. For dems to win, there needs to be a large turnout (see 2012 elections).

3. Young people (who turned out for Obama), don't like Hillary

4. Hillary may be indicted.

5. Sanders may run as a third party candidate.

6. Hillary HAS NOT had large turnouts.


Could Hillary win? Of course she could. However, her road to victory is far more difficult than people think, as she is facing many obstacles not presented to Obama.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-28-2016, 01:00 PM
 
Location: Type 0.73 Kardashev
11,110 posts, read 9,814,649 times
Reputation: 40166
I wouldn't go quite as far as 'almost certain' yet, but 'very likely'? Yes.

Trump is very likely to be the nominee. Who else?

Rubio has no path. He hasn't won a state yet. He's not expected to win a single Super Tuesday state. Remember, in the modern primary & caucus era, not Republican has ever won the nomination without winning Iowa or New Hampshire - Rubio couldn't even manage a top-two finish in either state.

Cruz? Well, he's won Iowa. And he'll probably win Texas on Tuesday. That'll leave the states won at Trump 9, Cruz 2. Not exactly a path to the nomination for Ted. And it's not clear that he'd be a much better general election candidate than Trump, given how much his own party reviles him.

Kasich? Please.

Really, the only way Trump isn't the nominee at this point is if all three of his challengers (sorry, Carson - you're just a nobody pretending to run for President in order to cash in on the spotlight) stay in the race and force a brokered convention. But if that happens, the Trumpkins stay home en masse on election day and whoever the GOP props up as their nominee (probably Rubio, who hasn't yet shown he's ready for prime-time anyway) gets clobbered.

There's always some uncertainty, but there's a reason the betting markets have the Democrats (ie, Clinton) at almost 2-1 to win the Presidency.

2016 President – Winner – PredictWise

Oh, and in case you're wondering? Yeah, the prediction markets - where people put money on elections - favored the Democrats (ie, Obama) to hold the White House from the beginning of 2012 right through election day.

So, What Do the Political Odds Markets Say About the Election? - The Atlantic
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2016, 01:01 PM
 
Location: Arlington VA
549 posts, read 625,718 times
Reputation: 603
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
Well.......................... let's see.

1. 14% of dems say that they will not vote for Hillary.

2. For dems to win, there needs to be a large turnout (see 2012 elections).

3. Young people (who turned out for Obama), don't like Hillary

4. Hillary may be indicted.

5. Sanders may run as a third party candidate.

6. Hillary HAS NOT had large turnouts.


Yeah, and remember: Hillary voters WILL NEVER vote for Obama, resulting in an overwhelming McCain landslide.

And also remember: There is OVERWHELMING evidence that Obama has a fake birth certificate, and Trump will reveal this evidence in October 2012, resulting in the eventual Romney landslide.

LOL. Don't teabaggers ever get sick and tired of their laughable "predictions"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2016, 01:04 PM
 
599 posts, read 401,710 times
Reputation: 609
I am a Trump supporter and will say that our next president is likely to be Hillary Clinton. I hope her email scandal will kill her among the fact that her policies as president will kill the Second Amendment among other things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2016, 01:11 PM
 
Location: Swiftwater, PA
18,773 posts, read 18,140,967 times
Reputation: 14777
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
Well.......................... let's see.

1. 14% of dems say that they will not vote for Hillary.

2. For dems to win, there needs to be a large turnout (see 2012 elections).

3. Young people (who turned out for Obama), don't like Hillary

4. Hillary may be indicted.

5. Sanders may run as a third party candidate.

6. Hillary HAS NOT had large turnouts.


Could Hillary win? Of course she could. However, her road to victory is far more difficult than people think, as she is facing many obstacles not presented to Obama.

In South Carolina 386,000 Democrats voted and 737,000 Republicans voted. Yes; Hillary had more votes than Trump; but the Republican votes were split between all the other Republican candidates. It is very easy to see that, once many of the others disappear after Super Tuesday, that Trump will have more support than Hillary. The Democrats simply do not have any excitement and no promise of change with Hillary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2016, 01:21 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis
2,526 posts, read 3,051,742 times
Reputation: 4343
I truly don't believe that Clinton is electable. She has more baggage than any presidential candidate in recent history. The Democratic Party is being naive if they think Clinton is the best available candidate for the Democratic nomination. I suspect that whoever The Republicans end up nominating, would hit Clinton with a constant barrage of everything from Whitewater to Benghazi.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2016, 01:41 PM
 
52,431 posts, read 26,628,813 times
Reputation: 21097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringo1 View Post
Trump was talking about a third party run today on Face the Nation. Apparently he is not happy with how the GOP is treating him.
I watched it. He said he wasn't being treated unfairly by the RNC, but he didn't say anything about running 3rd party.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2016, 01:45 PM
 
11,181 posts, read 10,532,733 times
Reputation: 18618
Quote:
Originally Posted by PyroZach View Post
Iher policies as president will kill the Second Amendment among other things.
Whoa! are you guys giving up on Obama doing that? Get tired of waiting?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2016, 01:45 PM
 
9,725 posts, read 15,172,833 times
Reputation: 3346
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogead View Post
I truly don't believe that Clinton is electable. She has more baggage than any presidential candidate in recent history. The Democratic Party is being naive if they think Clinton is the best available candidate for the Democratic nomination. I suspect that whoever The Republicans end up nominating, would hit Clinton with a constant barrage of everything from Whitewater to Benghazi.
The only problem with "hitting Clinton with a constant barrage of everything from Whitewater to Benghazi" is that we've already heard all those things repeated over and over for the last 20+ years. They are "sigh provoking" but not a reason to not vote for her. She'll be the Dem nominee despite already knowing all of those things. Anyone who wastes money running TV commercials on those things "over and over again" is truly just throwing money away. It's like trying to make a black stain on a white blouse blacker. It's just dumb.

Wait until you see what the Republican candidate gets hit with.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2016, 01:47 PM
 
11,181 posts, read 10,532,733 times
Reputation: 18618
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogead View Post
I suspect that whoever The Republicans end up nominating, would hit Clinton with a constant barrage of everything from Whitewater to Benghazi.
What do you mean "would hit", have you been living off-grid?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top