• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Hillary Clinton has a slim lead over Trump. In Georgia. (1 Viewer)

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
76,279
Reaction score
40,361
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
An outlier, but not a big one - other recent polling has also at tied, and Trump has been soft there since May.

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. When including which candidates voters “lean” toward, Clinton led Trump 43-39, and Johnson netted 12 percent....


Well done, Trump primary voters. You've put up a man so atrocious he's going to force a GOP candidate to spend resources (if Trump is capable of doing so) defending Georgia. Georgia is a possible swing state.
 
It's absolutely shocking that GA is in play for the democrats.
 
It's absolutely shocking that GA is in play for the democrats.

Given the rise in the population of people that vote almost singularly Democrat in Atlanta, Macon, Athens, Columbus, Savannah, Brunswick, Albany, Alpharetta, and other large urban areas in Georgia, I'm actually surprised it's taken this long to happen.
 
An outlier, but not a big one - other recent polling has also at tied, and Trump has been soft there since May.




Well done, Trump primary voters. You've put up a man so atrocious he's going to force a GOP candidate to spend resources (if Trump is capable of doing so) defending Georgia. Georgia is a possible swing state.

It's incredible how competitive Arizona and Georgia are with Hillary Clinton, a woman with a 60% unfavorability rating, running as a Democrat. It's not just the convention bounce either. Polling has shown them to be consistently close.
 
Given the rise in the population of people that vote almost singularly Democrat in Atlanta, Macon, Athens, Columbus, Savannah, Brunswick, Albany, Alpharetta, and other large urban areas in Georgia, I'm actually surprised it's taken this long to happen.

That's true. The same type of population growth that has made Virginia light blue and North Carolina purple is happening in Georgia. But it hasn't been fast enough that it should be here already without a candidate like Donald Trump as the nominee.
 
And, a 3 point lead in AZ.

Comedy gold!
 
An outlier, but not a big one - other recent polling has also at tied, and Trump has been soft there since May.




Well done, Trump primary voters. You've put up a man so atrocious he's going to force a GOP candidate to spend resources (if Trump is capable of doing so) defending Georgia. Georgia is a possible swing state.

I sound like a broken record on this, but wait a couple more weeks and lets see if the polls settle down to some sort of equilibrium. Polls are more meaningful now than a couple months ago, but still leave a lot to be desired.
 
That's true. The same type of population growth that has made Virginia light blue and North Carolina purple is happening in Georgia. But it hasn't been fast enough that it should be here already without a candidate like Donald Trump as the nominee.

Very true. I wasn't attempting to lessen the impact of Trump on the potential for normally red states to turn purple or light blue. I just thought it was worthwhile to point out the fact that the demographics of the US are changing faster in the south than anywhere else, and Georgia is a good example of that change. As is Virginia and North Carolina which you correctly point out.

Trump's actions in this race have devastated any reasonable expectation of a legitimate race between the historical ideals of the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. There's very little that Trump represents that mirrors the historical ideals of the GOP, or actual conservatism. He is emulating the outlier extremist version we see these days, which IMO does not represent the majority of the GOP, even if the leadership tends mirror it as well.

In fact, I read the platform written at the RNC, and with very few exceptions, mostly fiscal policy, it read nothing like my beliefs and seemed to me that even in a few areas tried to justify bigotry and discrimination. It both saddened and sickened me. Over 50 years as a staunch supporter of the GOP, I fear, has come to an end. The Democratic Party, with very few exceptions, has also moved further away from me so I find myself floundering without a political party that I can identify with.

Neither party are respecting the Constitution. Neither party respects people for who they are. Both parties demand conforming to, and supporting, their ideology rather than supporting the people and the people's freedom and liberty. This is a sad time in our country's history for anyone that actually understands the Constitution and how it's under attack, from different angles, from both parties.

Sorry for going off on a tangent.
 
It's incredible how competitive Arizona and Georgia are with Hillary Clinton, a woman with a 60% unfavorability rating, running as a Democrat. It's not just the convention bounce either. Polling has shown them to be consistently close.

Realclearpolitics has Hilliary Clinton at 43 favorable and 53 unfavorable approval ratings

Trump on the other hand is at 34-60
 
Realclearpolitics has Hilliary Clinton at 43 favorable and 53 unfavorable approval ratings

Trump on the other hand is at 34-60

It's true, Hillary has gained a bit since the convention. I expect that to be one of the things to revert somewhat though, although I expect her to keep her lead.
 
Something else from Georgia.

U.S. Sen. Johnny Isakson holds a 6-point lead over his Democratic opponent, political rookie Jim Barksdale, with less than 14 weeks to go before election day, according to a new Atlanta Journal-Constitution poll released Friday.
The poll shows the two-term Republican incumbent with 44 percent of the vote in a head-to-head matchup against Barksdale, who garnered 38 percent. Six percent of respondents selected neither candidate, while 12 percent did not answer or said they did not know who they would choose.

New AJC poll: Senate race between Johnny Isakson and Jim Barksdale within single digits | Political Insider blog
 
are you saying isakson should not be worried?

As long as he doesn't do anything stupid, yes. He's fairly popular. He was endorsed by one of their Democratic Representatives today. And the only way he loses is if Barksdale clears 50% in the first round, because there's no way a Democrat is going to win a runoff there.
 
An outlier, but not a big one - other recent polling has also at tied, and Trump has been soft there since May.




Well done, Trump primary voters. You've put up a man so atrocious he's going to force a GOP candidate to spend resources (if Trump is capable of doing so) defending Georgia. Georgia is a possible swing state.

I remember the 2008 election when the Obama campaign started rumors of them closing in down in Georgiaand it forced McCain to blow time a money campaigning there.
 
I sound like a broken record on this, but wait a couple more weeks and lets see if the polls settle down to some sort of equilibrium. Polls are more meaningful now than a couple months ago, but still leave a lot to be desired.

Forget that. Trump needs to be replaced now (GOP internal rules allow it). And even if they did not, the DNC has already demonstrated that internal rules with in a Party mean nothing and are meant to be broken
 
I sound like a broken record on this, but wait a couple more weeks and lets see if the polls settle down to some sort of equilibrium.

What's the fun in that?
 
I sound like a broken record on this, but wait a couple more weeks and lets see if the polls settle down to some sort of equilibrium. Polls are more meaningful now than a couple months ago, but still leave a lot to be desired.

It's probably smart to not draw conclusions about how this election will end. But I do think we can start looking at what it actually is right now. Clinton's convention bounce has been bigger than any candidate's in 20 years. And Trump's support is lower than any candidate's has been at any point post-convention than any candidate since 1996.

We certainly can't claim that Trump's dead yet because things happen, but I do think these mean something.
 
Business Insider is now suggesting Texas might soon be in play.

Can Hillary Clinton win Texas? - Business Insider

Seems highly unlikely. Texas is a step up from Arizona and Georgia. It was close to 10% more Republican than they were in 2012. Even if Clinton were to keep this level of support, I think her max is probably 2008 Obama - Indiana + Missouri, Arizona, and Georgia.
 
An outlier, but not a big one - other recent polling has also at tied, and Trump has been soft there since May.




Well done, Trump primary voters. You've put up a man so atrocious he's going to force a GOP candidate to spend resources (if Trump is capable of doing so) defending Georgia. Georgia is a possible swing state.

You know....if our brethren had listened to you and me for even a millisecond, and not cast a vote for that incompetent boob, and one of the decent people was the candidate right now - Kasich, Rubio, ****ing Pataki - Hillary would be down double digits in Georgia right now, and probably in a great many states in the country. But no, they had to send a "message", a "**** you" to the "establishment". Yes, well, look how well that's working. I will lose the few marbles I have left when those same people start pissing and moaning about Hillary's SCOTUS picks and Hillary working with the Democratic controlled Senate concocting gun bans and tax increases.
 
Seems highly unlikely. Texas is a step up from Arizona and Georgia....
Is it?

He had a fairly solid lead last month (+8), and polls broken out for Texas aren't common (and thus likely to be less accurate).

Trump is now doing well mostly with older non-college educated whites, mostly men, who are already largely Republican. Hispanics in Texas have also voted for Republican candidates in substantial numbers in the last few elections, e.g. 40% for Romney, nearly 50% for Bush in 2004 - do you think Trump will do that well with that constituency?

He is plummeting with other groups that, even in Texas, lean Dem. If he starts losing white women, he's in it deep, as there isn't any other group where he is likely to pick up votes.

Clinton actually winning Texas does seem like a stretch. But just making Texas competitive will be a serious problem for the Trump campaign.... one among many.
 
This is bad. I don't think people realize how bad it is that Trump is utterly destroying the GOP. It may give third-parties a chance to come in and fill-the-void, but not if Hillary gets in - at least not for a while. This is bad. The winning party gets the White House, but the losing party is punished with diminished influence. This is how one-party regimes take form. This could be really bad.

The odd part is, as despicable and disgusting as Trump is, a Trump victory would for the large part mitigate this - since Trump is so despised his administrative power would be actively opposed and contained by both sides of the aisle. A Clinton victory would enable more corruption, and President Clinton and the Democrats will be milking this for years, decades even. This will only lead to more accumulation of power for the Democrats, and thus, their donors - Wall Street.

So you get a one-party authoritarianism and crony-capitalism and state-capitalism all rolled into one - and the interventionist foreign policy is the cherry-on-top. Believe you me, the Neocons are in ecstasy over the idea of a Clinton Presidency right about now.
 
This is bad. I don't think people realize how bad it is that Trump is utterly destroying the GOP. It may give third-parties a chance to come in and fill-the-void, but not if Hillary gets in - at least not for a while. This is bad. The winning party gets the White House, but the losing party is punished with diminished influence. This is how one-party regimes take form. This could be really bad.

The odd part is, as despicable and disgusting as Trump is, a Trump victory would for the large part mitigate this - since Trump is so despised his administrative power would be actively opposed and contained by both sides of the aisle. A Clinton victory would enable more corruption, and President Clinton and the Democrats will be milking this for years, decades even. This will only lead to more accumulation of power for the Democrats, and thus, their donors - Wall Street.

We're not anywhere near a one party regime. There's been no sign that Democrats are getting close enough to have a real shot at the House yet. And Democrats would need to take a ton of Senate seats this year to not be favored to lose it in 2018 with such a favorable Republican map. Republicans also control the vast majorities of state legislatures and governorships.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom