• 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!

White House Watch: Trump 43%, Clinton 39%

I think you are wrong here.

On the one hand, the GOP Elite don't support Trump because his election would guarantee that the sweet deal they have set up in the government and the money that will be at stake from their global corporate bedmates would be extremely threatened.

On the other hand, the rank and file GOP are split between those who eagerly support Trump, those who support Trump because he won the primaries, those who don't want Trump to upset the GOP apple cart and the low-info, useful idiots who have no ability, nor any desire, to look at the facts instead of the sound bites.

It really has nothing to do with the things you mention because...1) regardless what Trump has said in the past, he's not advocating any of those things now, and...2) As a Republican, he would never be able to do the things you mention.

btw, populism doesn't necessarily mean that mob rule will follow. Bottom line, you attempts at spinning scare tactics might affect the feeble-minded, but it won't affect anyone else.

He's been a diehard liberal every day of his life, up until 2011, when he started talking about running for President as a Republican. How can you possibly think he isn't lying out of his fat orange ass every time he opens his mouth?
 
Last edited:
He's been a diehard liberal wvery day of his life, up until 2011, when he started talking about running for President as a Republican. How can you possibly think he isn't lying out of his fat orange ass every time he opens his mouth?

What are you talking about? Trump's one of the most trustworthy individuals i've ever known. There's no way he'd lie, that's not in his nature. ;)
 
It's a Rasmussen poll and they usually lean conservative and they have a reliable group of conservatives to poll and their polling usually reflects that.

Yes...I agree...however, there is no way of knowing for sure without the numbers.
 
Yes...I agree...however, there is no way of knowing for sure without the numbers.

As far polling goes, I think the combined polling averages at RealClearPolitics is probably the best way to look at polls.
 
He's been a diehard liberal every day of his life, up until 2011, when he started talking about running for President as a Republican. How can you possibly think he isn't lying out of his fat orange ass every time he opens his mouth?

I'm a realist.

I understand the "possibility" that he's running a game on everyone. But I don't blindly "assume" he's running a game. Compared to Hillary, though, I know for a fact that she ONLY runs games. That makes him the lesser of two evils in my opinion.

But, whether he's running a game or not, if elected he still has to contend with the rest of the government. That, alone, will limit any effect of any game he might be running.

In other words, until he proves otherwise I will give him the benefit of the doubt as to whether he's lying or not. Hillary has already proven...without a shadow of doubt...that she's a baldfaced liar and cannot be trusted whatsoever.
 
As far polling goes, I think the combined polling averages at RealClearPolitics is probably the best way to look at polls.

I agree...especially when you throw out those outrageous outliers.
 
I agree...especially when you throw out those outrageous outliers.

I think the outliers are included in the polling averages at RCP. I see Rasmussen polls on the list all the time.
 
I think the outliers are included in the polling averages at RCP. I see Rasmussen polls on the list all the time.

I don't see that Rasmussen poll as an outlier. I mean, it only has Trump ahead by 4 points. That doesn't even come close to those recent +10 and +12 for Hillary polls.

In any case, I've already said that I'd rather see the numbers. If someone were to pay for the access and post them, that would go a long way toward me having a more concrete opinion of Rasmussen's poll.
 
I'm a realist.

I understand the "possibility" that he's running a game on everyone. But I don't blindly "assume" he's running a game. Compared to Hillary, though, I know for a fact that she ONLY runs games. That makes him the lesser of two evils in my opinion.

But, whether he's running a game or not, if elected he still has to contend with the rest of the government. That, alone, will limit any effect of any game he might be running.

In other words, until he proves otherwise I will give him the benefit of the doubt as to whether he's lying or not. Hillary has already proven...without a shadow of doubt...that she's a baldfaced liar and cannot be trusted whatsoever.

You're not a realist, you're an optimist. Trump's no better than Hillary; if anything, he's worse. Both of them would have to deal with the rest of the government, thus limiting any games they would try to play, so either one would be limited by congress.

Trump, however, is unpredictable.

We know what to expect from Hillary. Trump, however, flops faster than any politician I've ever seen. He's like Hillary on steroids in that regard, and there isn't a damn thing he's said since the start of this election cycle (besides Mexico) that he hasn't contradicted. He's liked Cruz and hated Cruz, he's thought Megyn was a great moderator and he's thought she was a terrible one, he's been for and against gun control, he's been for and against abortio - hell, the man couldn't even make up his ****ing mind whether or not he would debate Bernie Sanders!

Hillary is corrupt, two-faced, and manipulative, but at least she's consistent. We know what to expect from her, and how to deal with her. Trump is everything on that list but consistent - in fact, the man is a complete and utter wild card. You might not see him for what he is, but I am not going to trust that the Clinton donor has miraculously changed his mind on every issue he's ever had an opinion on in less than a year.

I'm not going to support Clinton, and I'm sure as hell not going to support her ADHD counterpart.
 
mycroft is using good logic in his posts about trump and people should factor in how trump was working businesses in liberal ny.. many think he may be liberal but him pretending to be a liberal helped his business... ALSO he can see he needed to pretend that he MAY be still a liberal in order to get some liberal voters .. mycroft said it best the lesser of two evils because it is a slam dunk understanding that she is the most corrupt in politics..and why the lower IQ's are her supporters... one can check science to see about her supporters IQ's
 
Linky - White House Watch - Rasmussen Reports™


So wait, CBS, FOX had Hitlery beating Trump by an average of 6 points, and as much as 13 points last week..

Does anyone know how to poll anymore.


Tim-

Do not trust that poll, atleast yet. If it is true it will show in the rcp average in a week or two, if not it will be an outlier. Either way just as the same was said to people praising how hillary will win based off a poll months before the election, the same will be said here.

Polls at this point in time are a guideline, and the election is too far away. Add into this that this election has broken every trend in elections, you can safely bet no polls will matter until right before the election.
 
I'm tellin' ya....don't trust polls. The Hildabeast supporters are screaming from the rooftops, and a LOT of Trump supporters are staying quiet.
 
I think the outliers are included in the polling averages at RCP. I see Rasmussen polls on the list all the time.

I can not call rasmussen an outlier as much as erratic, since in previous polls it has shown hillary with large leads. However even on the ones with hillary ahead it still did not match too close to the average, meaning their polling methods might be very flawed.


Just wait a week, and you will know if it is accurate or an outlier.
 
I can not call rasmussen an outlier as much as erratic, since in previous polls it has shown hillary with large leads. However even on the ones with hillary ahead it still did not match too close to the average, meaning their polling methods might be very flawed.


Just wait a week, and you will know if it is accurate or an outlier.

I think an outlier is any poll by any pollster that goes against the trend of all the other polls. For instance, if you look at the RCP link below....it shows the June 30 polls all trending toward Clinton that day...except Rasmussen. It doesn't mean that Rasmussen is the outlier...it just means their poll that day is. If could be any poll that goes against the trend of the others. If a Reuters or Gallup poll was the only poll bucking the trend then that poll would be the outlier, but not Reuters or Gallup.


RealClearPolitics - 2016 Election 2016 Presidential Polls
 
Or ignore individual polls, and trust 538.
 
Linky - White House Watch - Rasmussen Reportsâ„¢


So wait, CBS, FOX had Hitlery beating Trump by an average of 6 points, and as much as 13 points last week..

Does anyone know how to poll anymore.


Tim-

Nope. I don't believe it. Really. It doesn't make sense, and Judge Judy says, "If it doesn't make sense, it isn't true."

Nate Silver says, "Donald Trump Has A 20 Percent Chance Of Becoming President." And that's the truth.

Trump followers are beginning to sound like Sanders supporters. They can't hear the truth through the sounds of their drumbeats.

Fact: The GOP can't win the presidency unless they win over the female vote. (Is there anyone in doubt how Trump will fare with the female vote?)

Fact: The GOP can't win the presidency without getting a sizable hispanic vote (sizable for Republicans). (Is there anyone in doubt how Trump will fare with the hispanic vote?)

That's it in a nutshell. You only need to ask #bindersfullofwomen Romney.
 
Nope. I don't believe it. Really. It doesn't make sense, and Judge Judy says, "If it doesn't make sense, it isn't true."

Nate Silver says, "Donald Trump Has A 20 Percent Chance Of Becoming President." And that's the truth.

Trump followers are beginning to sound like Sanders supporters. They can't hear the truth through the sounds of their drumbeats.

Fact: The GOP can't win the presidency unless they win over the female vote. (Is there anyone in doubt how Trump will fare with the female vote?)

Fact: The GOP can't win the presidency without getting a sizable hispanic vote (sizable for Republicans). (Is there anyone in doubt how Trump will fare with the hispanic vote?)

That's it in a nutshell. You only need to ask #bindersfullofwomen Romney.

I agree, but I never quite understood what was wrong with Romneys comment.
 
The Party is already on thin ice and will end up going through a reform, no matter what happens with Trump. I know several Republicans that refuse to back Trump no matter what the Party wants, all of them know Trump is a lifelong Liberal and they only back those with a conservative track record, something Trump does not have.

The GOP went through that reform back in 2012/13, following Obama's reelection, and they put forward a slate of candidates for the Senate that were electable and preferred by the electorate and they thus won back control of the Senate. They should have done it as far back as 2010 when they had the Senate in sight but then Tea Party types kidnapped the party and nominated a bunch of loons that cost the GOP the Senate.

The only reform the GOP needs is in process, a rule of some sorts that prohibits non-Republicans, non-conservatives, like Trump, running for their party nomination for President. It's almost as if WalMart allowed itself to be taken over by Target insurgent plants and sat by and watched while the coop destroyed their business.

And you're right, many Republicans refuse to support Trump and it's really simple why - it's because Trump is neither conservative nor a Republican. Conservative Republicans are left with no one to support in a very important election year when the result likely will be President Hillary Clinton - that scares and disgusts them. Their choice is to stay home and cause the election of Clinton or go vote for Trump and risk the credibility and respect of their nation - not a choice many want to make.
 
The GOP went through that reform back in 2012/13, following Obama's reelection, and they put forward a slate of candidates for the Senate that were electable and preferred by the electorate and they thus won back control of the Senate. They should have done it as far back as 2010 when they had the Senate in sight but then Tea Party types kidnapped the party and nominated a bunch of loons that cost the GOP the Senate.

The only reform the GOP needs is in process, a rule of some sorts that prohibits non-Republicans, non-conservatives, like Trump, running for their party nomination for President. It's almost as if WalMart allowed itself to be taken over by Target insurgent plants and sat by and watched while the coop destroyed their business.

And you're right, many Republicans refuse to support Trump and it's really simple why - it's because Trump is neither conservative nor a Republican. Conservative Republicans are left with no one to support in a very important election year when the result likely will be President Hillary Clinton - that scares and disgusts them. Their choice is to stay home and cause the election of Clinton or go vote for Trump and risk the credibility and respect of their nation - not a choice many want to make.

Bottom line...Trump will never be as bad for our country as Hillary will be.

Credibility and respect from other countries is not a suitable qualifier for the position of President. Personal character...blowhard vs liar...is. When you have an entire party operating under "the ends justify the means", it's time to chose the lesser of two evils in order to prevent that one supreme evil.
 
Bottom line...Trump will never be as bad for our country as Hillary will be.

Credibility and respect from other countries is not a suitable qualifier for the position of President. Personal character...blowhard vs liar...is. When you have an entire party operating under "the ends justify the means", it's time to chose the lesser of two evils in order to prevent that one supreme evil.

I have no love or respect for Hillary Clinton, but I think your view of the two is a little biased. Hillary Clinton is no greater a liar than Donald Trump - you simply may notice Clinton's lies and duplicity because she's been in the national public eye and under public scrutiny for more than 2 decades and Trump is relatively new to that level of scrutiny. You're kidding yourself if you think Trump is honest - he's not just incredibly stupid - his stupidity is calculated.
 
I have no love or respect for Hillary Clinton, but I think your view of the two is a little biased. Hillary Clinton is no greater a liar than Donald Trump - you simply may notice Clinton's lies and duplicity because she's been in the national public eye and under public scrutiny for more than 2 decades and Trump is relatively new to that level of scrutiny. You're kidding yourself if you think Trump is honest - he's not just incredibly stupid - his stupidity is calculated.

This goes for anyone worth an excess of hundreds of millions of dollars. You don't get that rich by being honest, having ethics or being a decent human being.
 
This goes for anyone worth an excess of hundreds of millions of dollars. You don't get that rich by being honest, having ethics or being a decent human being.

Some do - I think Bill Gates is a pretty honest and decent man and he's handled his immense wealth ethically and wisely
 
Some do - I think Bill Gates is a pretty honest and decent man and he's handled his immense wealth ethically and wisely

Mircosoft has been guilty of al kinds of impropriety and Bill completely screwed Steve Jobs. But I have to agree Bill is one of the better ones.
 
Bottom line...Trump will never be as bad for our country as Hillary will be.

Credibility and respect from other countries is not a suitable qualifier for the position of President. Personal character...blowhard vs liar...is. When you have an entire party operating under "the ends justify the means", it's time to chose the lesser of two evils in order to prevent that one supreme evil.


yes that is the bottem line and the wise will look at what really is the bottem line and come to the same conclusion
 
Its not too late> Johnson/Weld are on every ballot in every state. They are bothe twice elected governors in liberal states and they were elected in landslides. The ONLY critique anyone has to say about them is "They are Libertarians" but then when you ask them to address their platform they fall into the mindless anti-libertarian rhetoric proving they dont know the first thing about the party platform.

This election people should vote Libertarian for President and then vote their party if they want for congress.

I don't ENTIRELY disagree with you.

When Johnson/Weld start polling at competitive numbers I'll consider voting for them.

But I won't vote for them when the only realistic possibility of beating Hillary Clinton is a vote for Trump.

I am probably one of the very few members of this community who has actually cast a vote for Gary Johnson in a past presidential election and I will gladly do so again if he can demonstrate in some concrete way that he has a reasonable chance of actually winning an election.

But I'm not protest voting this year.

I'm voting to keep Hillary Clinton out of office.

And as far as things go I don't dislike Trump all that much (I've supported him since he threw his hat in the ring and voted for him in the TX primary).

If we HAVE to end up with Trump, I can live with that and I expect he will do a better job of probably anybody other than Gary Johnson.

But the Libertarian Party is a joke at this point.

They've got no game, no money, and they can't even get their candidates in to a debate.

By all means, vote for him if you feel you want or need to, as I've said - I've actually done so and am in no position to throw stones.

But for me it's much too important this election that we break away from the Obama administration and any who have had ties to it.

If they weren't actually politicians who are running the country, if they were absolutely any other kind of organization, they would be fighting a mountain of RICO charges in federal court.

We HAVE to be rid of them.

I could accept liberal, and even progressive policy, from clean and decent people, but these folks are disgusting, gutter-dwelling criminals.

They're the greatest threat this nation faces at the current time, in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom