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.
This should have been a fairly straight forward election for the GOP.
I always characterized this election way back a year or two ago that Americans, quite simply did not want to elect another politician named CLINTON or BUSH. I've had strong suspicions that Americans were looking to purposefully avoid electing those two dynasties if they could.
So logically I assumed that if the Republicans could put any electable candidate not called BUSH, they would have an excellent chance in this election as Americans were looking to vote away from one of those dynasty families that have been in power for so fricking long.
So it isn't surprising that almost every Republican (apart from Cruz who doesn't fit my definition of electable) polled positively against Clinton, simply because they weren't called CLINTON. "Anybody but Hillary" is the mindset of many Americans, please give me something else.
Sadly, however, they have arguably put up the worst presidential candidate for one of the two major parties in our lifetime, certainly in terms of unfavorable ratings lack of resources, lack of knowledge of how the government is run etc. Outlandish racial remarks etc, offending everyone.
I mean they've effectively found the only candidate to have higher unfavorables than her.
This was an easy election to win for Republicans. And for me I think they've blown it. There's a lot of crowing from Democrats that they have a lock on elections, but they don't.
This reminds me of the 2010 Delaware senate race between what should have been Mike Castle (R) vs Chris Coons (D). Moderate Mike Castle was projected to win by 10+ points, but they primaried him and put in "Tea Party" Christine O'Donnell who was projected to lose by 15 points, the voters knew of those polls, but put her in anyway. And she lost by exactly that.
Republicans have a terrible judgment of electability in the past few years.
Last edited by SharpshooterTom; 07-08-2016 at 02:11 PM..
I disagree, I think Trump is EXACTLY what this country needs right now and obviously the voters agree...
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.
To me, you can also spin this around and say that if the Democrats were running just about anybody else instead of Hillary, they might have this pretty much wrapped up. It seems as if both sides decided to see just how low they could go in selecting a candidate and still win; like some sort of a crazy dare.
So what have we wound up with? A race to the bottom reality show to amuse us. Unfortunately we are going to have to live with one of them for four years as the booby prize.
Hillary will win, but she will be a one-term President, if she even finishes out her term without impeachment or resigning.
Realistically, this election does NOT favor the GOP not matter what way you slice it. Obama's Presidency is coming to a close with healthy approval rating, peace, economic expansion, and without scandal. Given those circumstances, the party in power usually always remains in power.
Hillary was the worst choice to carry on Obama's legacy though, and I blame the media for coronating her as inevitable for years. I don't believe the American people wanted Hillary, but the media forced her down our throats. I would have been excited to vote for Bernie or Biden or Elizabeth Warren to carry on the great legacy of the last eight years, but not Hillary.
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.
Ummm, a year ago, Trump was considered to be a non-factor by most (if not all) Democrats and many Republicans. He is now in contention for running this country. I will do my best to make sure he gets there.
Realistically, this election does NOT favor the GOP not matter what way you slice it. Obama's Presidency is coming to a close with healthy approval rating, peace, economic expansion, and without scandal. Given those circumstances, the party in power usually always remains in power.
Bill Clinton had FAR better approval ratings, a FAR better economy (most jobs ever, great GDP), and Al Gore still lost to the chimp. Not necessarily true therefore.
Obama is around 50% (Bill's was around 60%+, upwards of 70% for parts of his second term) most of Obama's presidency has been below 50% approval.
Its largely because the opposition to Hillary is laughable.
Hillary will win, but she will be a one-term President, if she even finishes out her term without impeachment or resigning.
Realistically, this election does NOT favor the GOP not matter what way you slice it. Obama's Presidency is coming to a close with healthy approval rating, peace, economic expansion, and without scandal. Given those circumstances, the party in power usually always remains in power.
Hillary was the worst choice to carry on Obama's legacy though, and I blame the media for coronating her as inevitable for years. I don't believe the American people wanted Hillary, but the media forced her down our throats. I would have been excited to vote for Bernie or Biden or Elizabeth Warren to carry on the great legacy of the last eight years, but not Hillary.
Bill Clinton had FAR better approval ratings, a far better economy (most jobs ever, great GDP), and Al Gore still lost. Not necessarily true therefore.
Obama is around 50% (Bill's was around 60%+, upwards of 70% for parts of his second term) most of Obama's presidency has been below that.
Al Gore lost because he tried to distance himself too much from Bill Clinton, thanks to impeachment and the Lewinsky scandal. Gore didn't run on Clinton's legacy but on how he wouldn't be more of the same. If he ran on Clinton's accomplishments, he would have won in a landslide.
Also in 2000, the GOP had a candidate that energized all factions of conservatives and polled well with Latinos.
I say we take up a collection to get him out of the race. I'd donate $100-200.
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.
