• 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.

Swing-state stunner: Trump has edge in key states

It will be interesting to see where Hilary goes to attack. What can she honestly attack Trump on that she isn't guilty of herself? Sexist? Well, nope she insinuated all the women that her husband slept with were lying whores. Rich? She herself is massively rich and in fact has benefited from her positions of power to make millions her entire career. Hates minorities? She herself has an interesting past in regards to her statements about minorities and her obvious lack of care about anyone but herself. Liar? She is the queen of lying to the American people and as it seems Congress as well. So I guess she will try to make more things up about him and see if it sticks.

On the other hand, Trump really only needs to repeat over and over, "This woman lied to the American public as well as to Congress about her mishandling of classified information. Someone that the director of the FBI said was extremely careless and would also face a strong chance of losing security clearances from their negligence should not be president.
 
pilot16 said:
A lot of HRC supporters are being overly optimistic and not facing reality. There is a huge anti establishment populist movement. Sanders tapped into it and Trump did. With Sanders no longer in the game, its not surprising those in certain rust belt and coal states are heading to Trump. They aren't in the stock market and they don't see things as wonderful economically. Sanders got it, Clinton doesn't. If Clinton doesn't get it, she will lose. People are angrier than we think deep under the surface.
Click to expand...

Deep under the surface?

Seems more like just under the skin and ready to blow.
 
code1211 said:
What happens when the 24/7 review of Benghazi, Hillary's cover ups and the email/classified document stuff gets aired.
Click to expand...

Its already been aired. Those who care and have made it an issue were haters of Clinton from the start - those who do not care have seen it and simply do not share the right wing obsession with the issue.

There really has been no counter punching delivered at Hillary at all. She did very little as a Senator and she was a disaster as the Secretary of State.
Click to expand...

I see no disaster in her term at State. Her record as Senator from NY is getting no criticism of substance.



Reckless? Deliberately entering into a conspiracy to circumvent the laws of the USA for her own benefit strikes me not as reckless, but rather as very careful and very devious.
Click to expand...

We shall see.

This careful deviousness is not a one off, but rather an ongoing demonstration of the flaunting of the law that she knows will not be enforced fairly or appropriately. The selective enforcement of law is a tool used by this administration to punish and reward
Click to expand...

Again, see my initial remarks about the rights obsession with such matters while much of the public is indifferent to the loud drumbeat of Benghazi.
 
code1211 said:
Far behind in what way?
Click to expand...

The rest of the world sees him as a loud buffoon. And they are right. He will be the most divisive leader since Nixon without any of the political sense that Nixon sometimes demonstrated on some issues.
 
pilot16 said:
Polls are all over the place because its early. If we want to look at this race honestly, we can look at the states. I would guess approximately 35-40 states are already in the bag. We know who is going to win those. The game will be won or lost in the other 10 or so. States like MI,OH,FL,VA,WI,PA. I think had Sanders won the nomination, this race would be all over. He would easily have won coal country, steel country and the unions. Now its anybodys guess. If Clinton cant convince these states she is really going to overturn the TPP (Pres Obama is expected to sign it this fall) and she goes all in for gun control, she will be in big trouble.
Click to expand...
I don't see HRC beating Trump in TPP and trade agreements. The prototype agreement (NAFTA) was promoted by her husband in the 90's, and they are closely associated with trade deals. Trump has run strongly on this from the getgo, whereas she is attempting to pivot (initially due to Sanders),

Trump has the authenticity here, and it seems clearly visible.
 
I think we really do not know what kind of president Trump would be.
 
Anagram said:
And Hillary was up double digits with the 50+ voters. That was a weird one.
Click to expand...
I'm wondering if these are boomers that lived through the '70's feminist/women's rights era, and see the significance of a female President in a manner that their younger counterparts don't?
 
longview said:
I think we really do not know what kind of president Trump would be.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

Up until March, he was running on single-payer healthcare!

He's been a Dem, an Indie, and now a Republican!

Can Socialist & Libertarian be far behind? (alright, Socialist might be a reach)

But no - we know the man's public persona, but we don't know the man!
 
Chomsky said:
I'm wondering if these are boomers that lived through the '70's feminist/women's rights era, and see the significance of a female President in a manner that their younger counterparts don't?
Click to expand...

Could be, maybe the Midwest is special. More likely a poor sample though. Seeing a huge reverse of those splits in all other state polling.
 
haymarket said:
Its already been aired. Those who care and have made it an issue were haters of Clinton from the start - those who do not care have seen it and simply do not share the right wing obsession with the issue.



I see no disaster in her term at State. Her record as Senator from NY is getting no criticism of substance.





We shall see.



Again, see my initial remarks about the rights obsession with such matters while much of the public is indifferent to the loud drumbeat of Benghazi.
Click to expand...

I think that the commercials that will undoubtedly be aired with unrelenting frequency will help to put this into the American consciousness.

Right now, to most people, the connection between Hillary's lack of foresight and a dead ambassador that she stationed in a war zone with inadequate security is not clear.

After some good, pointed, visual ads, it might be more clear.

The same is true about her intentional conspiracy to avoid the use of the Department of State Servers.

Her complicity in the intentional destabilization of the governments of half of the Muslim World and the bungled SOFA in Iraq allowed the rise of ISIS. Any influence the USA had on Middle Eastern affairs is evaporating.

Hillary and her boss did a bang up job being "flexible" for the expansionist Vladimir Putin. Ukraine and the rest of the old Warsaw Pact Countries are probably feeling the chill that living in the Soviet shadow provides. China looks to be annexing the South China Sea as their own little lake working on a stage that Hillary and Obama have set for them.

It took World War 2 to end the British Empire. It only took Hillary and Obama to end the American Empire.

Make no mistake. The situation was not a perfect one after W. They inherited a problem and with every move made things worse.

If that record of failure as Secretary of State is not viewed as a disaster, I guess I don't know what disaster means.
 
Last edited:
code1211 said:
I think that the commercials that will undoubtedly be aired with unrelenting frequency will help to put this into the American consciousness.

Right now, to most people, the connection between Hillary's lack of foresight and a dead ambassador that she stationed in a war zone with inadequate security is not clear.

After some good, pointed, visual ads, it might be more clear.

The same is true about her intentional conspiracy to avoid the use of the Department of State Servers.

Her complicity in the intentional destabilization of the governments of half of the Muslim World and the bungled SOFA in Iraq allowed the rise of ISIS. Any influence the USA had on Middle Eastern is evaporating.

Hillary and her boss did a bang up job being "flexible" for the expansionist Vladimir Putin. Ukraine and the rest of the old Warsaw Pact Countries are probably feeling the chill that living in the Soviet shadow provides. China looks to be annexing the South China Sea as their own little lake working on a stage that Hillary and Obama have set for them.

It took World War 2 to end the British Empire. It only took Hillary and Obama to end the American Empire.

Make no mistake. The situation was not a perfect one after W. They inherited a problem and with every move made things worse.

If that record of failure as Secretary of State is not viewed as a disaster, I guess I don't know what disaster means.
Click to expand...

Its not an issue that people care about other than those on the right already obsessed with it. And no amount of advertising and insults can change that.
 
haymarket said:
Its not an issue that people care about other than those on the right already obsessed with it. And no amount of advertising and insults can change that.
Click to expand...

Which of the issues cited is "not an issue"?
 
haymarket said:
The rest of the world sees him as a loud buffoon. And they are right. He will be the most divisive leader since Nixon without any of the political sense that Nixon sometimes demonstrated on some issues.
Click to expand...

So, you do not see Obama as divisive?

It's very difficult to see Obama speak and not hear a message of divisiveness.
 
shrubnose said:
Trump will get his butt handed to him in November because the same hate and fear that has attracted lots of White males to vote for him has attracted lots of other voters to vote against him.

Wait and see.




"Better days are coming." ~ But not for today's out of touch,running out of time,GOP.
Click to expand...

A most likely scenario, however, we have to remember that he only needs to win those more blue collar, whiter states that Sanders won. MI, PA and FL are within his reach. Whether he can bring them home is another question. A populist election is hard to gauge.
 
code1211 said:
So, you do not see Obama as divisive?

It's very difficult to see Obama speak and not hear a message of divisiveness.
Click to expand...

You do know that Obama is not running for President. But hey I will bite, you want to replace one divisive President with another, Genius.:roll:
 
pilot16 said:
A most likely scenario, however, we have to remember that he only needs to win those more blue collar, whiter states that Sanders won. MI, PA and FL are within his reach. Whether he can bring them home is another question. A populist election is hard to gauge.
Click to expand...
True but I would remind you that it is not the popular vote that gets one elected to the Whitehouse.
 
code1211 said:
Which of the issues cited is "not an issue"?
Click to expand...

Her tenure at State.
Benghazi.
Trying to blame her for the problems of the Middle East.
The supposed end of the so called American Empire and blaming her for that.
Blaming her for the antics and personality of Putin.

Most people just don't give a crap about this stuff.
 
code1211 said:
So, you do not see Obama as divisive?

It's very difficult to see Obama speak and not hear a message of divisiveness.
Click to expand...

Sure - some people who hated him from jump street hate him today. I see no increase in that over his eight years - in fact his numbers today are pretty good given that a solid 50% favorable approve of him despite nearly 8 years of right wing hate directed at him which seem to have not moved the needle a bit.
 
pilot16 said:
I keep hearing Lindsey Graham in my head, "would you rather be shot or poisoned?" lol
Click to expand...

More like, "would you rather be shot or have all your limbs painfully sawed off slowly, with a dull hand saw, one by one, until you die from blood loss?"

I REALLY don't want either. But if I HAD to choose...
 
320 million people....... and this is the best we can come up with?

What does this say about the maturity level of American voters?

I cannot wrap my head around it, as much as I try.
 
Casper said:
True but I would remind you that it is not the popular vote that gets one elected to the Whitehouse.
Click to expand...

But that's my point. Its only the electoral college vote that matters. So even if Clinton wins 90% of the votes in CA, she still only gets so many predetermined electoral votes. But if Trump can win whiter, blue collar states like MI, PA, FL and OH he can win by electoral votes. Does this leave us open for someone getting the popular vote but not winning the electoral votes?
 
pilot16 said:
A lot of HRC supporters are being overly optimistic and not facing reality. There is a huge anti establishment populist movement. Sanders tapped into it and Trump did. With Sanders no longer in the game, its not surprising those in certain rust belt and coal states are heading to Trump. They aren't in the stock market and they don't see things as wonderful economically. Sanders got it, Clinton doesn't. If Clinton doesn't get it, she will lose. People are angrier than we think deep under the surface.
Click to expand...

I think a lot of Trumpers are being overly optimistic and not facing reality.

It is false to claim being 'anti-establishment' is some monobloc that will all vote for one candidate. Some think the government gets in the way of business, some think it protects business from their own folly with taxpayers footing the bill while billionaires get sweet bonuses. (too big to fail) I don't see those two groups supporting the same candidate.

Some want the EPA disbanded, some want it strengthened. Being angry at Gubmint can be as diverse as the our nation but do note trump's followers are not very diverse at all

The rust belt maybe angry but there is little any President can do to bring their traditional jobs back. Any talk otherwise is just fooling the masses.

I'd say the 'massive' anti-establishment movement isn't enough to win a general election. it isn't going to play well with those who didn't vote in the PUB primaries. People who don't want to throw the baby out with the bath water. People who do have 401(K) plans which is far more than some want to think. Don't have to play the stock market to take an interest in it.

We live in interesting times... :peace
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom