2016 Electoral College polling thread

[MisterChester]

****.

WTHR/Howey now reporting that Trump is up by 5 in Indiana with a 4 pt. MOE.

Dammit.

I'm not panicking. Hillary is up by the same amount in some supposedly safe states. Polls are very volatile this season which doesn't help my confidence in any of them.

 

[Hawkeye]

So based on the polls I guess we should all throw in the towel and say Welcome to President Hilary?

 

[T.Lex]

So based on the polls I guess we should all throw in the towel and say Welcome to President Hilary?

Well, INGO certainly tends to jump to conclusions early, if not often. So, that course of conduct wouldn't necessarily be atypical.

But, as with all polling, it is a barometer. It doesn't tell you exactly what the weather will be tomorrow at any given time, but it can give you an idea what it'll be like.

 

[jamil]

I think he can win the general if he pulls his head out of his butt.

When he did the couple of weeks of "good Trump" he rose in the polls. Then he did the debate unprepared, missed some opportunities, and let Hillary succeed in convincing some middle voters that she's not all that dangerous.

As far as his head placement, he can't seem to help himself. Apparently having his head there pleases him. I don't know why else he's up at 3AM tweeting stupid ****.

So based on the polls I guess we should all throw in the towel and say Welcome to President Hilary?

I wouldn't throw in the towel yet, but the people who really believe Trump will win should start thinking about the what-ifs.

 

[Ericpwp]

The 3am does not bother me, global business happens at all hours. At least he would be up for a 3am phone call.

As for the content...



He can't just leave what's not important alone.

 

[jamil]

The 3am does not bother me, global business happens at all hours. At least he would be up for a 3am phone call.

As for the content...



He can't just leave what's not important alone.

Oh, I don't care that he's up at 3AM. I know a lot of people who don't seem to need much sleep. It's that a presidential nominee for a major party is up at 3AM tweeting the kind of thoughts most of us gave up after high school.

 

[BugI02]

What will the Trump supporters do if it is a landslide victory for Hitlery?

Wake up the next day and begin the fight to limit the damage

Put our pants on one leg at a time

Man the battlements to stave off any attempt by #neverTrump to retake the Republican Party

Start working on Paul 2020, Pence 2020 or some such

Never to forgive, never to forget

 

[bwframe]

...the people who really believe Trump will win should start thinking about the what-ifs.

A lot of us are prepared for our enemy to win the election. We worry about the rest of those who seem to have no clue to what can/will happen when she does. Those who walked the line, if not out and out helped the anti-gun candidate win are a concerning batch of folks who don't seem to have a true grasp of reality.

 

[jamil]

Wake up the next day and begin the fight to limit the damage

Put our pants on one leg at a time

Man the battlements to stave off any attempt by #neverTrump to retake the Republican Party

Start working on Paul 2020, Pence 2020 or some such

Never to forgive, never to forget

Really? That's your litmus test? So it's not about ideology, or national goals, it's about whether someone kissed the ring.

A lot of us are prepared for our enemy to win the election. We worry about the rest of those who seem to have no clue to what can/will happen when she does. Those who walked the line, if not out and out helped the anti-gun candidate win are a concerning batch of folks who don't seem to have a true grasp of reality.

At least you only have to prepare for one enemy winning the election. I'm preparing for two.

 

[BugI02]

How can you conclude that that statement is not about ideology. Were you not paying attention during the anti-globalism, 'fair' trade over 'free' trade part of the lecture. The former tenants of the GOP are persona non grata

 

[BugI02]

I would have guessed you would focus more on the last statement

 

[bwframe]

...At least you only have to prepare for one enemy winning the election. I'm preparing for two.

Like I said...

 

[BugI02]

Really? That's your litmus test? So it's not about ideology, or national goals, it's about whether someone kissed the ring.

Well, you won't see me having any use for Cruz; and he certainly is smooching the circular band now

 

[jamil]

How can you conclude that that statement is not about ideology. Were you not paying attention during the anti-globalism, 'fair' trade over 'free' trade part of the lecture. The former tenants of the GOP are persona non grata

Did you assume the only reason to oppose a Trump presidency are those issues? It's possible to agree with you on those ideological things, or at least to some degree, yet believe Trump is not competent, or, that his proposals won't solve those problems, or that he favors other things a #nevertrumper might oppose, or that is demeanor is not fitting for the presidency.

I would think the top priority if Trump loses is to shore up support against Hillary. You guys go trying to build your empire and not only will you come up short--not all that many people think like you do--but Hillary will get all she wants whenever she wants.

 

[jamil]

Well, you won't see me having any use for Cruz; and he certainly is smooching the circular band now

The only use I ever had for him was that he was slightly less scary than Trump. Now? Not so much. In the future? I don't know yet. It depends on the other choices at the time. I'll say this. I'd vote for Pence before Cruz, and that's a statement I probably wouldn't have made before the VP debate.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Latest Reuters/Ipsos Polls:

Pennsylvania:
Clinton 45% (+3)
Trump 42

Florida:
Clinton 48% (+2)
Trump 46

Ohio:
Clinton 44 (+1)
Trump 43

 

[BugI02]

Did you assume the only reason to oppose a Trump presidency are those issues? It's possible to agree with you on those ideological things, or at least to some degree, yet believe Trump is not competent, or, that his proposals won't solve those problems, or that he favors other things a #nevertrumper might oppose, or that is demeanor is not fitting for the presidency.

I would think the top priority if Trump loses is to shore up support against Hillary. You guys go trying to build your empire and not only will you come up short--not all that many people think like you do--but Hillary will get all she wants whenever she wants.

Way to close that barn door, now that all the horses are out

 

[T.Lex]

Man the battlements to stave off any attempt by #neverTrump to retake the Republican Party

Start working on Paul 2020, Pence 2020 or some such

WTF? Paul (I'm wondering which one, but for these purposes, it doesn't really matter) I can understand. But Pence? He's as completely GOP establishment as you can get. That's WHY he was picked (or at least a big part of it).

Never to forgive, never to forget

Ah yes, nothing says "principle" more than pettiness.

Those who walked the line, if not out and out helped the anti-gun candidate win are a concerning batch of folks who don't seem to have a true grasp of reality.

Wow - that's ironic coming from a Trump supporter. The thing about "grasp on reality." IF Trump loses - and that's not a done deal yet - and SO MANY OF US said he was unlikely to win IN REALITY, Trump supporters will say principled conservatives were the problem?

Yep, that's ironical.

 

[BugI02]

Did you assume the only reason to oppose a Trump presidency are those issues? It's possible to agree with you on those ideological things, or at least to some degree, yet believe Trump is not competent, or, that his proposals won't solve those problems, or that he favors other things a #nevertrumper might oppose, or that is demeanor is not fitting for the presidency.

I would think the top priority if Trump loses is to shore up support against Hillary. You guys go trying to build your empire and not only will you come up short--not all that many people think like you do--but Hillary will get all she wants whenever she wants.

Do you think that this same caveat does not apply to #neverTrump? You castigate us for trying to build our empire while you attempt to rebuild yours. I've told you elsewhere, the old compact is broken. It was broken when, after years of supporting the candidates you gave us (often through clenched teeth), you failed to support our candidate. All quid and no quo, making a bargain you never intended to keep

Do you think you can succeed without us? You are too sanguine by half

WTF? Paul (I'm wondering which one, but for these purposes, it doesn't really matter) I can understand. But Pence? He's as completely GOP establishment as you can get. That's WHY he was picked (or at least a big part of it).

It would depend on if Pence picks up the mantle of Trump. He has a chance to redefine himself (at least with us) by what he supports going forward. He earned that chance by supporting Trump and not in any half-hearted way.
(Rand)Paul because many of Trump's supporters were also Rand Paul supporters before we backed Trump



Ah yes, nothing says "principle" more than pettiness.

Did you really think it would be that simple? That we would hold hands, hum a few bars of kumbaya and then we would start heeding neverTrump's pundits and supporting neverTrump's hand-picked tools ... err, I mean candidates. I submit that neverTrump is less interested in saving conservatism than it is in saving it's own narrow vision of conservatism

I further submit that neverTrump has taught me I can act upon any narrow, selfish impulse and cloak it in 'principles'. Henceforth it will be against my 'principles' to give aid or comfort to any member of the Back-Stabbing Hand Washer wing of the nonLeft. They're too mean. They're too crude. They're too petty They're hucksters and con-men, ad nauseam


Wow - that's ironic coming from a Trump supporter. The thing about "grasp on reality." IF Trump loses - and that's not a done deal yet - and SO MANY OF US said he was unlikely to win IN REALITY, Trump supporters will say principled conservatives were the problem?

Yep, that's ironical.

You find no irony in talk about mitigating the damage that a Clinton presidency will wreak after doing so much to make electing her possible? You are right to point to the things Trump could have done better to further his cause, but please don't attempt to downplay the effects of so much friendly fire. NeverTrump made common cause with my enemies and became an enemy themselves.

Hosea 8:7

My opposition to all things neverTrump and BSHW (back stabbing hand washer) will certainly be no less 'principled' than was the opposition by those to Trump

 

[BugI02]

I have posted elsewhere that neverTrump desperately wants and works toward a huge Trump loss, because they know they will own it if he suffers a narrow loss. I have been vocal in suggesting that the divisions in the Republican party will not simply be papered over

Apparently some at the National BSHW Review are coming around to that viewpoint, too

Donald Trump?s 2016 Election Defeat & the Future of the GOP | National Review


"From the standpoint of Republican unity, the worst possible outcome of the November election would be a narrow defeat for Trump. The nominee’s Republican supporters would be enraged at those Republicans who balked at Trump, and the party would be consumed by recriminations."


"Republicans who do not wish to become a fully Trumpified party could respond to these voters in two ways in the event of a Trump defeat. The first would be to hope that a big loss would destroy Trump as a political force and that nobody else would be able to mobilize his core vote as he did; then Republicans could go back to ignoring the working-class nationalists in the expectation that this group would continue to vote for the GOP over the Democrats. The risk of this path would be that the calculation might prove incorrect in the presidential race of 2020. But it would have an advantage if the core Trump vote were composed of racist idiots, as some anti-Trump Republicans believe ..."

Remind you of anyone?