Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Who's your money on?Follow

#177 Feb 23 2016 at 1:13 PM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
But they're not real Republicans!
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#178 Feb 23 2016 at 1:18 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
This is how revolutions happen. They're not real Republicans, according to traditional conservatives as well as social right-wingers. AND YET, they register Republican and they vote in a bloc. Traditionalists on both sides are about to be marginalized.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#179 Feb 23 2016 at 4:57 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Ouch, and another...
Political Wire wrote:
A new Reuters/Ipsos poll finds Donald Trump leading the GOP presidential race with 41%, followed by Ted Cruz at 19%, Marco Rubio at 13%, Ben Carson at 10% and John Kasich at 8%.

In a three-way race, Trump leads with 46%, followed by Cruz at 25% and Rubio at 25%.
I guess we can pretend that 100% of Cruz supporters will go to the pro-amnesty guy instead of Trump...

Rasmussen had found that Trump's lead has grown since Bush dropped out, Rubio held steady and Cruz has dropped.

Edited, Feb 23rd 2016 5:01pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#180 Feb 23 2016 at 7:57 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Samira wrote:
Oh, come on, you know the folks in SC love them some NYC billionaires.


And yet, he got 32.5% of the votes in SC. So you can either imagine that conservative evangelical voters actually do love Trump *or* that a decent number of liberal voters in SC, who hate evangelicals, and hate Bush, and hate conservatives, might just show up to an open primary where it costs them nothing but a few minutes of their time to drop a vote for Trump in the ballot box and give a big "***** you" to the GOP.

One of those is a vastly more reasonable explanation for the votes he got. And yes, if that's the case, he's not going to get that kind of support in Nevada, which is both closed and a caucus. He'll have to rely solely on actual registered Republicans to caucus for him. And while I'm sure there are a number of folks willing to do that, and it's Nevada, which is a strange place all around, I'm not sure how he can expect to get anywhere near the kind of numbers he got in SC.

It's funny because all the pundits are talking about the primaries going forward as though the best that Cruz and Rubio can expect is a semi even three way split. But that assumes that Trump can get close to the same numbers he got in SC, and Rubio and Cruz will evenly split the remainder. I think that SC more or less represents the best he can get in a state race where everything was in his advantage. Now that Bush has dropped out, Rubio has emerged as the sole mainstream candidate, and I think that will result in a pretty significant shift of voters to him. How much that affects the Nevada race is hard to say. There's been very little time between SC and today. But I think it will have some effect at least, and more over time, as more endorsements come in for Rubio (he's already gotten a pretty large number just in the last couple days).

We'll know better over the next few hours, of course, but I suspect that, just as in Iowa, the polling data is not going to be very accurate and things aren't going to go as well for Trump as he thinks. Recall that I said the same thing in the lead up to Iowa, and that turned out to be the case. NH, and SC both allowed for a large number of non-Republican voters in the GOP primaries, so that helps mask Trump's weakness among conservatives. But he can't hide behind that in Nevada, and he can't hide behind that next week.

Edited, Feb 23rd 2016 6:08pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#181 Feb 23 2016 at 8:06 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Ouch, and another...
Political Wire wrote:
A new Reuters/Ipsos poll finds Donald Trump leading the GOP presidential race with 41%, followed by Ted Cruz at 19%, Marco Rubio at 13%, Ben Carson at 10% and John Kasich at 8%.

In a three-way race, Trump leads with 46%, followed by Cruz at 25% and Rubio at 25%.
I guess we can pretend that 100% of Cruz supporters will go to the pro-amnesty guy instead of Trump...


Um... The same poll had Trump at 40.6% back in January. He's not received anywhere close to that in any race so far, so I think it's safe to discount it as an extreme outlier.

Quote:
Rasmussen had found that Trump's lead has grown since Bush dropped out, Rubio held steady and Cruz has dropped.


Gee. Nationwide polling, taken right after an apparent "big win" by Trump, which includes a lot of people who still aren't thinking in terms of their own voting in their own state just yet. Again. I think that a lot of this is a general assumption that normal election year rules apply here. So the common thinking is that a candidate who does so well in the first three races must be a strong candidate. I just don't think that works in this case though. Trump has consistently underperformed local polling numbers, and even moreso national ones. People tend to poll differently when it's a choice they'll make "later", versus a choice to make "today".

But we'll just have to wait and see.

Edited, Feb 23rd 2016 6:09pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#182 Feb 23 2016 at 8:38 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Ouch, and another...
Political Wire wrote:
A new Reuters/Ipsos poll finds Donald Trump leading the GOP presidential race with 41%, followed by Ted Cruz at 19%, Marco Rubio at 13%, Ben Carson at 10% and John Kasich at 8%.

In a three-way race, Trump leads with 46%, followed by Cruz at 25% and Rubio at 25%.
I guess we can pretend that 100% of Cruz supporters will go to the pro-amnesty guy instead of Trump...

Rasmussen had found that Trump's lead has grown since Bush dropped out, Rubio held steady and Cruz has dropped.

Edited, Feb 23rd 2016 5:01pm by Jophiel


Yeah, but you fail to mention that Trump's support has swollen in part thanks to the hordes of undead that his team of necromancers are raising.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#183 Feb 23 2016 at 8:46 PM Rating: Good
***
1,159 posts
Trump ate Bush's heart, and thus gained his strength.
____________________________
Timelordwho wrote:
I'm not quite sure that scheming is an emotion.
#184 Feb 23 2016 at 10:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
The GOP Nevada caucuses are apparently a giant dumpster fire of terribleness. No one checking IDs or names, people just handing out ballots, reports of double-voting, 2/3rds of the names on the ballot aren't running any longer, etc.

On the plus side, we'll get to see how many votes Rick Santorum gets tonight!

Edited, Feb 23rd 2016 10:34pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#185 Feb 23 2016 at 11:14 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Welp, Nevada called for Trump. Currently at 42%, Rubio 25%, Cruz 21%.

Edit: Now 43% to 25% -- That's only 18 points! Barely a win! Trump needed to win by 97 points to stay competitive!!!

Apparently, Nevada was supposed to be Rubio's firewall.

Edited, Feb 23rd 2016 11:49pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#186 Feb 24 2016 at 12:31 AM Rating: Good
****
4,141 posts
gbaji wrote:
One of those is a vastly more reasonable explanation for the votes he got. And yes, if that's the case, he's not going to get that kind of support in Nevada, which is both closed and a caucus. He'll have to rely solely on actual registered Republicans to caucus for him. And while I'm sure there are a number of folks willing to do that, and it's Nevada, which is a strange place all around, I'm not sure how he can expect to get anywhere near the kind of numbers he got in SC.


Jophiel wrote:
Welp, Nevada called for Trump. Currently at 42%, Rubio 25%, Cruz 21%.
Edit: Now 43% to 25% -- That's only 18 points! Barely a win! Trump needed to win by 97 points to stay competitive!!!

____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#187 Feb 24 2016 at 6:08 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
46% -- only beat his ceiling by 11% and did as well as Rubio & Cruz combined. Trump is doomed!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#188 Feb 24 2016 at 8:17 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
46% isn't the same kind of number as 32% he got in SC, which is a clear indication of how Trump has no real support. I'm sure we'll change gear from how Nevada is an important indicator of how things really are to how Nevada never mattered. Nothing like watching Frankenstein's monster rampaging through the village. Good job, conservatives. Smiley: thumbsup
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#189 Feb 24 2016 at 8:23 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Gbaji wrote:
I honestly was very very happy with the results in SC on Saturday, and think this marks a turning point in the campaign.

See? Gbaji was right! Trump's S. Carolina blow out was a turning point in the campaign...
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#190 Feb 24 2016 at 9:07 AM Rating: Good
***
1,159 posts
The next few months will mark a phase I like to call 'how Gbaji learned to stop worrying and love the Trump'.
____________________________
Timelordwho wrote:
I'm not quite sure that scheming is an emotion.
#191 Feb 24 2016 at 9:12 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
10,601 posts
Actually he makes some good points, and while his rhetoric is over the top, a lot of what he says needs to be addressed.....Smiley: nod
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#192 Feb 24 2016 at 9:21 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Actually he makes some good points, and while his rhetoric is over the top, a lot of what he says needs to be addressed.....Smiley: nod
Gbaji or Trump?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#193 Feb 24 2016 at 9:30 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
10,601 posts
I'm channeling Gbaji of the future

Edited, Feb 24th 2016 9:30am by Xsarus
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#194 Feb 24 2016 at 9:43 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Settle your shit, kids. Rubio's got this one all figured out.
Marco, on Fox News this morning, wrote:
You don’t win the nomination by how many states you win.

This is technically true; you win the nomination by collecting delegates. But, uh, you collect delegates by winning states. And, more specifically, you need to collect those delegates before the winning guy does which is kind of impossible since he's winning more delegates. Especially in the GOP format which lacks the same robust superdelegate system the Democrats "enjoy".
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#195 Feb 24 2016 at 9:50 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
You can also get the nomination by other people dropping out, though not exactly a realistic strategy.

Edit: Though now that I mention it, it wouldn't surprise me if Trump does just that. Kind of a big "Fuck you" to everyone.

Edited, Feb 24th 2016 10:52am by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#196 Feb 24 2016 at 10:06 AM Rating: Good
Citizen's Arrest!
******
29,527 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Settle your shit, kids. Rubio's got this one all figured out.
Marco, on Fox News this morning, wrote:
You don’t win the nomination by how many states you win.

This is technically true; you win the nomination by collecting delegates. But, uh, you collect delegates by winning states. And, more specifically, you need to collect those delegates before the winning guy does which is kind of impossible since he's winning more delegates. Especially in the GOP format which lacks the same robust superdelegate system the Democrats "enjoy".
Not that the Dems aren't tied down too, at least partially. If the superdelegates went en masse to and tipped the scales against the candidate overwhelmingly winning the popular vote, your voter base might decide you don't really need them at the polls on election day either. Smiley: tongue
#197 Feb 24 2016 at 10:26 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
The One and Only Poldaran wrote:
Not that the Dems aren't tied down too, at least partially. If the superdelegates went en masse to and tipped the scales against the candidate overwhelmingly winning the popular vote, your voter base might decide you don't really need them at the polls on election day either.

Oh, sure. I wasn't implying otherwise. Just saying that Rubio has no path to winning that isn't, you know, actually winning states. Of which he is currently 0-4. And realistically winning a majority of states because you're not going to pick up all the delegate rich big states and not the little ones if you're actually popular.

Part of the issue is that Cruz and Rubio don't like each other much (less so after the Cruz doctored video slamming Rubio) and both are at 17 delegates (far below Trump's 80) so neither is inclined to cede the fight to the other guy. Cruz will pin his hopes on Texas, Rubio on Florida and both will suffer for it. Cruz is, to his credit, at least leading the polls in his home state.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#198 Feb 24 2016 at 10:32 AM Rating: Good
Citizen's Arrest!
******
29,527 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Part of the issue is that Cruz and Rubio don't like each other much (less so after the Cruz doctored video slamming Rubio) and both are at 17 delegates (far below Trump's 80) so neither is inclined to cede the fight to the other guy. Cruz will pin his hopes on Texas, Rubio on Florida and both will suffer for it. Cruz is, to his credit, at least leading the polls in his home state.
We'll see what happens when Ben Carson gets back from picking up his laundry or whatever.

Yeah. Probably nothing.
#199 Feb 24 2016 at 10:44 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Gbaji wrote:
I do find it funny to watch the pundits trying to scratch their heads and figure out how Trump did so well in counties with such high evangelical voters. The whole time I'm watching them doing this, I'm practically screaming at the TV: "You're looking at a Republican county map. Go pull up the Democrat map of what voters exist in which counties, and it'll suddenly make sense". Once you realize that Trump is actively working to appeal to liberal voters, his victories in NH and SC make a lot more sense, as well as the apparent lack of negative impact his very non conservative statements and actions have had.

As it turns out, this is almost certainly not true. In S. Carolina, Rubio was strongest in Charleston and Columbia -- the most urban and moderate parts of the state. Trump cleaned up everywhere else, beating Rubio and Cruz with conservative voters throughout.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#200 Feb 24 2016 at 10:47 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,240 posts
Jophiel wrote:
The One and Only Poldaran wrote:
Not that the Dems aren't tied down too, at least partially. If the superdelegates went en masse to and tipped the scales against the candidate overwhelmingly winning the popular vote, your voter base might decide you don't really need them at the polls on election day either.

Oh, sure. I wasn't implying otherwise. Just saying that Rubio has no path to winning that isn't, you know, actually winning states. Of which he is currently 0-4. And realistically winning a majority of states because you're not going to pick up all the delegate rich big states and not the little ones if you're actually popular.

Part of the issue is that Cruz and Rubio don't like each other much (less so after the Cruz doctored video slamming Rubio) and both are at 17 delegates (far below Trump's 80) so neither is inclined to cede the fight to the other guy. Cruz will pin his hopes on Texas, Rubio on Florida and both will suffer for it. Cruz is, to his credit, at least leading the polls in his home state.


Hypothetically someone could win zero states and sail into the nomination under the flowing case: two candidates who hate each other swing between 1st and 3rd, with the nom winner hitting solid 2nd in most states, and then other minor candidates pledging their delegates to the perpetual 2nd place guy leaving him with most delegates but not a plurality. Since neither of the other candidates woe ally with the other, a brokered convention would lead to one of them taking VP or high Cabinet slot to the on the Nom's ticket in exchange for delegates.

That's probably not likely here, but a similar situation could happen.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#201 Feb 24 2016 at 10:51 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Timelordwho wrote:
Hypothetically someone could win zero states and sail into the nomination under the flowing case...

This might be Rubio's best chance Smiley: grin
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 110 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (110)