|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Aug 5, 2016 15:58:10 GMT
@pjones:
Article clearly says nothing of the sort and the last sentence, helpfully put in bold and italics, specifically contradicts your statement.
That is before one even gets onto the question of whether Clinton having an episode is fitter for office than Trump firing on all cylinders.
Next!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2016 16:03:35 GMT
Clinton up 4 in Georgia (+3 with 3rd parties)."The poll released Friday shows Clinton at 44 percent and Trump at 40 percent in a head-to-head matchup, within the poll’s margin of error. It is the latest showing a close race between the two candidates in Georgia, a state that has voted for the GOP nominee since 1996.
In a four-way race, Clinton led Trump 41-38, followed by Libertarian Gary Johnson with 11 percent and Green Party candidate Jill Stein with 2 percent."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2016 17:28:19 GMT
Clinton up 4 in Georgia (+3 with 3rd parties)."The poll released Friday shows Clinton at 44 percent and Trump at 40 percent in a head-to-head matchup, within the poll’s margin of error. It is the latest showing a close race between the two candidates in Georgia, a state that has voted for the GOP nominee since 1996.
In a four-way race, Clinton led Trump 41-38, followed by Libertarian Gary Johnson with 11 percent and Green Party candidate Jill Stein with 2 percent." I'm beginning to think that we're beyond the 'convention bounce' explanation, and moving into a phase where people seem to be choosing sides decisively against Trump. Difficult to see what could change the direction, although there is a while to go of course.
|
|
john07
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 14,636
|
Post by john07 on Aug 5, 2016 17:48:27 GMT
Trump clearly is in a hole at the moment. He obviously hasn't learned the 'stop digging' tactic.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2016 18:33:44 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2016 18:39:48 GMT
Clinton up 4 in Georgia (+3 with 3rd parties)."The poll released Friday shows Clinton at 44 percent and Trump at 40 percent in a head-to-head matchup, within the poll’s margin of error. It is the latest showing a close race between the two candidates in Georgia, a state that has voted for the GOP nominee since 1996.
In a four-way race, Clinton led Trump 41-38, followed by Libertarian Gary Johnson with 11 percent and Green Party candidate Jill Stein with 2 percent." I'm beginning to think that we're beyond the 'convention bounce' explanation, and moving into a phase where people seem to be choosing sides decisively against Trump. Difficult to see what could change the direction, although there is a while to go of course. The next Texas poll will be interesting. Trump is likely only ahead with a couple of points by now. Would be historic if he manages to lose both Utah and Texas.
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Aug 5, 2016 18:42:04 GMT
Who actually cares? Obviously, anybody who is interested in the Presidential election for the most powerful position in the world, cares about the abilities, judgment, experience, character, sanity and health of the candidates for that office. Just because Hillary Clinton has minor health problems doesn't mean that she is unable to do the job.
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Aug 5, 2016 18:44:21 GMT
I'm beginning to think that we're beyond the 'convention bounce' explanation, and moving into a phase where people seem to be choosing sides decisively against Trump. Difficult to see what could change the direction, although there is a while to go of course. The next Texas poll will be interesting. Trump is likely only ahead with a couple of points by now. Would be historic if he manages to lose both Utah and Texas. That'd be quite something! Presumably LBJ was the last Democrat to carry Texas?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2016 18:50:51 GMT
The next Texas poll will be interesting. Trump is likely only ahead with a couple of points by now. Would be historic if he manages to lose both Utah and Texas. That'd be quite something! Presumably LBJ was the last Democrat to carry Texas? No, Carter in 1976.
|
|
The Bishop
Labour
Down With Factionalism!
Posts: 36,804
|
Post by The Bishop on Aug 5, 2016 19:27:51 GMT
Also won by Hubert H Humphrey in 1968.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2016 20:25:25 GMT
Wonder who the GOP candidate will be in November
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Aug 5, 2016 21:05:42 GMT
Wow! Carter! I should have guessed Humphrey, but for Carter to have won in Texas shows how different the electoral calculus was back then.
Is it really possible (realistically, not technically) for Trump to be deposed as Republican candidate? Surely not at this stage?
|
|
|
Post by Lord Twaddleford on Aug 5, 2016 21:09:33 GMT
Is it really possible (realistically, not technically) for Trump to be deposed as Republican candidate? Surely not at this stage? Whilst technically yes, kinda, as I don't think the filing deadline has passed in all of the states, if the RNC was shown to be acting directly against the will of the primary voters then I think the race would go even worse for them than if they just let Trump continue as official candidate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2016 21:10:18 GMT
Wow! Carter! I should have guessed Humphrey, but for Carter to have won in Texas shows how different the electoral calculus was back then. Is it really possible (realistically, not technically) for Trump to be deposed as Republican candidate? Surely not at this stage? There has been talk about it, but they would need to do it right away (I posted the list of deadlines earlier), and it would also be fairly pointless as many Trump supporters would react in anger and stay home, so the damage to congressional candidates would be just as great (if not greater) than with Trump on the ballot.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2016 21:15:48 GMT
Wow! Carter! I should have guessed Humphrey, but for Carter to have won in Texas shows how different the electoral calculus was back then. Carter got the entire South (apart from Virginia) in 1976 as the "native son".
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Aug 5, 2016 21:16:30 GMT
Wow! Carter! I should have guessed Humphrey, but for Carter to have won in Texas shows how different the electoral calculus was back then. Is it really possible (realistically, not technically) for Trump to be deposed as Republican candidate? Surely not at this stage? There has been talk about it, but they would need to do it right away (I posted the list of deadlines earlier), and it would also be fairly pointless as many Trump supporters would react in anger and stay home, so the damage to congressional candidates would be just as great (if not greater) than with Trump on the ballot. Yes, I saw your earlier post and was wondering whether it was feasible as opposed to technically possible. Thanks! Though of course, the fact that it is even being considered is an important point, and I imagine unprecedented in modern times.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Twaddleford on Aug 5, 2016 21:20:22 GMT
Wow! Carter! I should have guessed Humphrey, but for Carter to have won in Texas shows how different the electoral calculus was back then. Carter got the entire South (apart from Virginia) in 1976 as the "native son". You can tell that political in America attitudes have really shifted over the years, nowadays it would be unthinkable to see the states of California, New Jersey, and Illinois, and possibily Michigan, vote for a losing Republican, ditto for Vermont, Washington, Oregon, and Connecticut too.
|
|
|
Post by Devil Wincarnate on Aug 5, 2016 21:20:46 GMT
If that's anywhere near accurate, then Trump's "hit the Rust Belt" strategy is even more flawed than imagined.
|
|
|
Post by Adam in Stroud on Aug 5, 2016 21:27:59 GMT
Wow! Carter! I should have guessed Humphrey, but for Carter to have won in Texas shows how different the electoral calculus was back then. Carter got the entire South (apart from Virginia) in 1976 as the "native son". That's a brilliant map for illustrating the change in US politics wrought by and since Reagan, with Carter sweeping the South and Ford winning not only in California but also the rust belt and even in big chunks of New England. I understood the Republican capture of the South, but hadn't registered that the Democrats had slightly compensated by camping on New England. Also I genuinely had no idea that Reagan had stood as a 3rd candidate then, though knew he had been on the scene since Nixon. Is the one vote he won in DC? (Actually, don't bother, I'll google it). I had it in my head that the Democrats lost the South to Nixon's "Silent Majority" strategy; I now see for the first time the real appeal of Carter to the Democrats if he gave them a chance of reversing that.
|
|
|
Post by Lord Twaddleford on Aug 5, 2016 21:32:22 GMT
Carter got the entire South (apart from Virginia) in 1976 as the "native son". That's a brilliant map for illustrating the change in US politics wrought by and since Reagan, with Carter sweeping the South and Ford winning not only in California but also the rust belt and even in big chunks of New England. I understood the Republican capture of the South, but hadn't registered that the Democrats had slightly compensated by camping on New England. Also I genuinely had no idea that Reagan had stood as a 3rd candidate then, though knew he had been on the scene since Nixon. Is the one vote he won in DC? (Actually, don't bother, I'll google it). I had it in my head that the Democrats lost the South to Nixon's "Silent Majority" strategy; I now see for the first time the real appeal of Carter to the Democrats if he gave them a chance of reversing that. That vote for Reagan (from Washington state, not DC) is actually a faithless elector, Reagan himself didn't pursue a 3rd party run in '76 and I'm pretty sure that he endorsed Ford when the latter secured the Republican nomination.
|
|