true that paugs

why are there so many people that just assume Hilary will beat Trump?

it's a legitimate question

1) Trump alienates way too much of the electorate for him to realistically win. His main demographics are:

- rich business conservatives (the 1% essentially)
- disenfranchised working class white males
- evangelicals

whereas Clinton's are:

- ethnic minorities
- women
- college educated whites

of course these are just generalisations and stereotypes, but don't act like they have no basis. Hillary simply appeals to a lot more people than Trump does.

2) The polls

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#now

Fivethirtyeight correctly predicted 99/100 states in the past 2 elections. Nate Silver is pretty reliable.

3) It's rigged, lol

You don't need me to tell you that American politics is absolutely rigged against anybody anti-establishment.

4) The debates

Yeah, Trump's ratings tanked after the debates. Congrats Trump.

Trump created a lot of ads, conspiracies, and has a whole lot of dirt on Clinton, but because of his alienating policies and the political establishment, he just can't win.

At the very least, it obviously isn't ruled by the Jews though; if so, you'd see Bernie Sanders still in the race.

Edited 10/12/2016 23:40:25

But the strain is showing.

Trump basically turned the Republican Party upside down. Nobody expected it, and he's got a bigger, more vocal following than any other Republican candidate could have mustered. And the "alt-right" alongside many other new Conservatives who don't see eye to eye with the establishment are something big. And Bernie gathered a respectable following, but he was "too big of a threat to the party" so Hillary rigged it.

Whoever wins, both parties will need to realize that they have an ever-growing population dissatisfied with how things have been running, and they need to change or be left behind.

why are there so many people that just assume Hilary will beat Trump?

Because you can't go out and start calling people of Hispanic ethnicity rapists and murderers.
You can't go out and say what a certain person does in the bathroom is disgusting.
You can't go out and say all blacks live hell.
And many, many more examples, but you can't just go saying that. One of the pollers who was Republican said that there isn't enough "Old white males that believe in the things he does.

On WL it would be like saying all those who like SR deserve the death penalty while all those who like WR will receive 38 virgins for taking in heaven and thats their bag.

Edited 10/13/2016 01:24:08

1) Trump alienates way too much of the electorate for him to realistically win. His main demographics are:

- rich business conservatives (the 1% essentially)
- disenfranchised working class white males
- evangelicals

whereas Clinton's are:

- ethnic minorities
- women
- college educated whites

of course these are just generalizations and stereotypes, but don't act like they have no basis. Hillary simply appeals to a lot more people than Trump does.

Women is really the only election killer of that group. College educated whites are statistically unreliable when it comes to voting. Ethnic minorities are increasingly important but it's still possible to when without much support there.

But yeah, Trump already screwed any prayer he has with women, and that's 50% of the electorate. His ship is sunk.

Because you can't go out and start calling people of Hispanic ethnicity rapists and murderers.

When will people stop mis-qouting this? He was talking about illegal immigrants. Are illegal immigrants a race suddenly?

You can't go out and say what a certain person does in the bathroom is disgusting.

Uh. Says who? You absolutely can say, depending on what it is. I'm not sure what you're talking about here though to be honest.

You can't go out and say all blacks live hell.

Unless you're Black Lives Matter or some other individual/group who's been granted permission to exaggerate about racial issues, then it's fine. But don't dare a white person say so.

[Censored by Clinton Foundation]

Edited 10/13/2016 03:18:27

When will people stop mis-qouting this?

So I looked at the quote.

First, the truth that there is anything misquoted is already something. Next, he did not say the word "illegal immigrant" or "immigrating illegally" at all in that speech. Just "people from Mexico" and he later goes on to say "It’s coming from more than Mexico. It’s coming from all over South and Latin America, and it’s coming probably— probably— from the Middle East." (http://time.com/3923128/donald-trump-announcement-speech/).

Third, the numbers don't stick with him. (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/07/16/voices-gomez-undocumented-immigrant-crime-san-francisco-shooting/30159479/; https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/02/surprise-donald-trump-is-wrong-about-immigrants-and-crime/).

Fourth, it seems that this is kind of irrelevant. How about him saying that he's going to shield Christianity, or saying that all the lands that did not side with America in the Cold War were uncivilised?

Trump basically turned the Republican Party upside down.

War/militarism: +
Against inmigration: +
Social: +
Healthcare: +
Environment: +
Capitalism: +

how has he turned anything upside down, this is your normal sleazy bloodthirsty conserve

Edited 10/13/2016 04:00:57

how has he turned anything upside down, this is your normal sleazy bloodthirsty conserve

Probably the most important one is trade. Previously Republicans were very much for free trade, whereas trump is constantly bashing it as "taking away jobs".

And why would this not be possible? It would be advantageous for Russia to have Trump be the president rather than Hillary.

It would be advantageous for any country that is not Saudi Arabia or the Islamic State to have Trump be the president rather than Hillary.

Where's the smoking gun? Showing quid-pro-quo?

Page 8. General Electric:
"They gave $400,000 to House Dems last cycle, but they are facing headwinds this cycle.
-Issues around Cromnibus, Trade and Medical Device Tax, but are happy w/ Dem Help on Ex-Im
- Upset that SGR fix not totally funded, but Dems want repeal of Medical Device Tax to be fully funded before repealing"

It would be advantageous for any country that is not Saudi Arabia or the Islamic State to have Trump be the president rather than Hillary.

Really? I`d say that most European Countries will not benefit from Trump. I might even say most countries allied with the US won`t have a real advantage if Trump gets ellected.

When your allies are actively supporting one candidate and your adversaries are agitating for the other, it's time to take a step back and think about why that might be.

Then take a second step back and ask "why are these guys my allies/adversaries again?" and notice something's awfully off.

Eh democracies tend to ally each other EU/US while authoritarian regimes like to avoid being too cuzzy with democratic ones (it's a general rule, don't start to give counter examples!). I totally see why Russia would support Trump when it comes to that.

The 20 first economies after the US want to have Hillary as the US president; the only exception is Russia. Electing Trump will not only definetly not make your country great again (his economy policies are nothing but stupid, he defends a police state and not saying the poor example he is to people) but will probably finish the decline of America. Hillary is also a poor choice, but it makes more sense economically, diplomatically and not being a sexual predator-wise. But hey you could have nominated Bernie or Kasich, both reasonable and undoubtfully better than these clowns.

The most corrupt politician in history vs the most dangerous psychopath

Never thought I'd say this......I miss 2012

( I honestly hate everything about Bernie Sanders economic plans but I would have voted for him over this clown )

Edited 10/13/2016 16:06:18

I have a really bad feeling Trump might not leave. He will keep coming counting on the idiotic realm of the party to nominate him. If the party doesn't learn from this asshole not to nominate mentally unstable lizards, I'm cutting all ties. I've had it. I'm sick of getting looked down upon by stuck up evangelicals and trying not to strangle the southern rednecks with the IQ of 5.

Previously Republicans were very much for free trade, whereas trump is constantly bashing it as "taking away jobs".

Were they? You likely know better than me, but it seems like shielded trade is something all conserves like.

It would be advantageous for any country that is not Saudi Arabia or the Islamic State to have Trump be the president rather than Hillary.

Who says even Arabia would mind, just America worsening itself.

However, bigger military is something that many smaller lands will mind much about. I bet all OPEC that is not allied with America really doesn't want Trump.

democracies tend to ally each other EU/US while authoritarian regimes

As they say, evil loves evil. But "democracy" ok.

decline of America

what?

Edited 10/13/2016 18:05:47

Were they? You likely know better than me, but it seems like shielded trade is something all conserves like.

That's pretty much not true. Take for example the vote on NAFTA:

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/103-1993/h575

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/103-1993/s395

In both the house and the senate more democrats voted against NAFTA then for it, whereas over 75% of republicans supported it.

The 20 first economies after the US want to have Hillary as the US president; the only exception is Russia

Wrong Trump has a Chinese heart and is a follower of Deng Xaoiping

Actually that's not accurate. Historically, take a look at the Hoover congress for example. Republicans have actually been very in favor of the tariff and protectionism. Hoover was a progressive Republican At the time, and it showed in trade and agriculture.