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.
Is her heard numerous times from many Dems that it doesn’t matter who the Dem nominee is. Trump is guaranteed to lose. So there should be no hesitation in nominating Warren, or Hillary again etc
Elizabeth Warren would be a bad nominee for the Democrats, I don't think they can win with her. Trump would eat her lunch, that's why his supporters are all over these forums licking their chops at the chance that her or Hillary will run.
However, on the other hand, If I supported Trump, I'd be very worried about Beto as an opponent .
Bring him on, as I suspect the hype is greater than the substance. For example, much of Obama's sketchy past was omitted by the MSM and others for fear of being labeled racist.
Good old Robert Francis is not going to be able to pretend to be brown any more than Warren can pretend to be red.
Plus Bob has a sordid past involving drugs, theft, drunk driving, hit & run, etc.
`
I doubt Bob will be viewed in the same light as JFK, mainly because he does not have the pedigree, much less the gravitas.
Is her heard numerous times from many Dems that it doesn’t matter who the Dem nominee is. Trump is guaranteed to lose. So there should be no hesitation in nominating Warren, or Hillary again etc
Trump isn’t guaranteed to lose, but the eventual Democratic nominee will give him an extremely tough race. His negatives are too high to win any race easily. He was elected by a strategically placed minority of voters and he has never come close to approaching majority job approval in any of the polling aggregators. He’s not going to win a majority, but must hope to defy the odds and bet on the electoral college slot machine works for him once again, even though there have never been back to back elections where the winner loses the national popular vote. It’s only happened 6 times in 58 Presidential Welctions. His best change would be a low turnout election, but I don’t see that happening.
Trump isn’t guaranteed to lose, but the eventual Democratic nominee will give him an extremely tough race. His negatives are too high to win any race easily. He was elected by a strategically placed minority of voters and he has never come close to approaching majority job approval in any of the polling aggregators. He’s not going to win a majority, but must hope to defy the odds and bet on the electoral college slot machine works for him once again, even though there have never been back to back elections where the winner loses the national popular vote. It’s only happened 6 times in 58 Presidential Welctions. His best change would be a low turnout election, but I don’t see that happening.
Of course, you gave Trump zero chance of winning in 2016. So, keep trying.
Of course, you gave Trump zero chance of winning in 2016. So, keep trying.
You're betting that lightning will strike the same spot twice.
That bet is a very long one, as lightning can strike twice, but next-to-never does. Things always change in 4 years. Thinking 2016 will repeat depends on everything staying just as it was 2 years ago.
You're betting that lightning will strike the same spot twice.
That bet is a very long one, as lightning can strike twice, but next-to-never does. Things always change in 4 years. Thinking 2016 will repeat depends on everything staying just as it was 2 years ago.
I don't know what will happen. I do know that I wouldn't be a smug and condescending about any prediction as he is.
I don't know what will happen. I do know that I wouldn't be a smug and condescending about any prediction as he is.
I don’t see what was smug or condescending about what I said. Trump could win. It’s just that unless his base broadens significantly, his most likely path is similar to 2016, and that was by the skin of his teeth. If there was anything over the edge, it would have been stating flatly that we won’t win a majority. It’s highly unlikely because (1,) he’s never had had majority approval since he was elected and (2.) the only R to win a majority in the pop vote since 1992 was GWB in 2004, so it’s a pretty safe assumption, but it could be taken for arrogance, I suppose.
It’s just my take on the mathematical probability. You’re free to disagree, and only time will tell who is correct.
Last edited by Bureaucat; 12-16-2018 at 07:23 PM..
Bring him on, as I suspect the hype is greater than the substance. For example, much of Obama's sketchy past was omitted by the MSM and others for fear of being labeled racist.
Good old Robert Francis is not going to be able to pretend to be brown any more than Warren can pretend to be red.
Plus Bob has a sordid past involving drugs, theft, drunk driving, hit & run, etc.
`
I doubt Bob will be viewed in the same light as JFK, mainly because he does not have the pedigree, much less the gravitas.
`
Beto has never pretended to be a minority though. He explained his nickname, which his parents gave him in childhood. I don't think attempts to smear him as someone pretending to be a minority are going to go over well with voters.
With respect to his supposed "sordid past" your accusations are completely disingenuous. He has a record of two arrests. He got a DWI in 1998, which was later dismissed after he completed "DWI school," a misdemeanor diversion program. His other arrest was in 1995, when he and his friends were horsing around, and he snuck under a fence at the University of Texas-El Paso. That set off an alarm, and he was arrested under the "burglary" portion of the state's penal code. UTEP declined to press charges.
Beto has owned up to both incidents and been transparent regarding them. People make mistakes. Mistakes made during youth are hardly a "sordid past." You don't need to be squeaky clean to win an election, and the fact that a candidate has made mistakes in his/her youth may actually make the candidate more relatable to voters. I highly doubt voters are going to care that he had a couple misdemeanor arrests in his 20s.
The reason why Beto has a lot of traction right now is because he's previously demonstrated, both in House and Senate elections, that he is a skilled campaigner. There's an article out today about how his congressional campaign was a bit of a brawl. Any election with Trump involved is bound to get ugly, so it bodes well that he has shown the ability to both go low and go high, so to speak, on the campaign trail. He also has a charisma and authenticity that a lot of people find appealing.
All of which, in my mind, add up to make him a dangerous opponent for DJT.
Last edited by Valhallian; 12-17-2018 at 11:39 AM..
Beto has never pretended to be a minority though. He explained his nickname, which his parents gave him in childhood. I don't think attempts to smear him as someone pretending to be a minority are going to go over well with voters.
With respect to his supposed "sordid past" your accusations are completely disingenuous. He has a record of two arrests. He got a DWI in 1998, which was later dismissed after completed "DWI school," a misdemeanor diversion program. His other arrest was in 1995, when he and his friends were horsing around, and he snuck under a fence at the University of Texas-El Paso. That set off an alarm, and he was arrested under the "burglary" portion of the state's penal code. UTEP declined to press charges.
Beto has owned up to both incidents and been transparent regarding them. People make mistakes. Mistakes made during youth are hardly a "sordid past." You don't need to be squeaky clean to win an election, and the fact that a candidate has made mistakes in his/her youth may actually make the candidate more relatable to voters. I highly doubt voters are going to care that he had a couple misdemeanor arrests in his 20s.
The reason why Beto has a lot of traction right now is because he's previously demonstrated, both in House and Senate elections, that he is a skilled campaigner. There's an article out today about how his congressional campaign was a bit of a brawl. Any election with Trump involved is bound to get ugly, so it bodes well that he has shown the ability to both go low and go high, so to speak, on the campaign trail. He also has a charisma and authenticity that a lot of people find appealing.
All of which, in my mind, add up to make him a dangerous opponent for DJT.
Beto is George McGovern. All Trump has to do is make a campaign ad out of Beto cheerleading for NFL players who kneel and you're looking at another 49 state blowout win for the Republican.
Despite what you hear from the mainstream media and the DNC (they are the same entity), Americans love their country and are not about to go all in on the ridiculous agenda of the social justice warriors. Were Beto nominated, he'd go all in on that nonsense and would be creamed accordingly, as he should.
Beto has never pretended to be a minority though. He explained his nickname, which his parents gave him in childhood. I don't think attempts to smear him as someone pretending to be a minority are going to go over well with voters.
With respect to his supposed "sordid past" your accusations are completely disingenuous. He has a record of two arrests. He got a DWI in 1998, which was later dismissed after completed "DWI school," a misdemeanor diversion program. His other arrest was in 1995, when he and his friends were horsing around, and he snuck under a fence at the University of Texas-El Paso. That set off an alarm, and he was arrested under the "burglary" portion of the state's penal code. UTEP declined to press charges.
Beto has owned up to both incidents and been transparent regarding them. People make mistakes. Mistakes made during youth are hardly a "sordid past." You don't need to be squeaky clean to win an election, and the fact that a candidate has made mistakes in his/her youth may actually make the candidate more relatable to voters. I highly doubt voters are going to care that he had a couple misdemeanor arrests in his 20s.
The reason why Beto has a lot of traction right now is because he's previously demonstrated, both in House and Senate elections, that he is a skilled campaigner. There's an article out today about how his congressional campaign was a bit of a brawl. Any election with Trump involved is bound to get ugly, so it bodes well that he has shown the ability to both go low and go high, so to speak, on the campaign trail. He also has a charisma and authenticity that a lot of people find appealing.
All of which, in my mind, add up to make him a dangerous opponent for DJT.
Yep. While it is not known at this point if he will run, I understand why the GOP camp is up in arms. Considering he came witin less than 3% in Texas, they really should be very nervous.
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.
