Elections GOP 2016 Primary Thread V4: Can Trump be Trumped Edition

GearSolidMetal said:
Still irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Eh, if he can carry Ohio and independents in other swing states, I think that would make him relevant.

Of all the few candidates to capitalize on if/when Trump's numbers take a significant tumble, then those supporters sure as hell isn't going over to Kasich.
Click to expand...
After Trump, the race is pretty tight. Anyone in that pack could springboard up. If Kasich can couple another strong debate performance with the massive ad campaign he's about to unleash, his chances will increase.

Everyone that was in the kiddie debate that wasn't named Fiorina? Zero chance.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree with this.

Trump - To which I have to ask again... what could take this campaigning juggernaut down?
Click to expand...
If anything is going to take Trump down, I predict it will be bad debate performances. He said he didn't prepare for the first debate and his RCP average poll numbers went down after his performance.
 
Tropodan said:
What's so bad about Chris Christie? He sounds like the most straight shooter of them all, substantive, captivating.

Please don't tell me that a nation as fat as you guys are prejudice against him because he's fat....
Click to expand...

lol who wants to elect someone to run the entire country when he can't even take care of himself ? .. you could say he did manage to get elected to run a state .. but this is a different animal
 
Tigerknee said:
Its funny watching the media put a hit on him everyday and he still can't be stopped. Fuck the liberal media
Click to expand...

its funny how a significant part of america is totally illogical. they believe trump when he says thousands of muslims cheered 9/11 in new jersey but there is no video proof of it or any for that matter. there is video of trump making fun of a disabled reporter and trump fans say it didnt happen.
 
Tol said:
Eh, if he can carry Ohio and independents in other swing states, I think that would make him relevant.
Click to expand...

And what issue does he represent that independents will flock to him that seperate him from the rest of the field?

After Trump, the race is pretty tight. Anyone in that pack could springboard up. If Kasich can couple another strong debate performance with the massive ad campaign he's about to unleash, his chances will increase.
Click to expand...

Right now it's tight. But if Trump's numbers plunge, they're not going to be evenly distributed among the others. One, maybe two, will get the bulk of the former Trump supporters.

And Kasich don't be one of them.

If anything is going to take Trump down, I predict it will be bad debate performances. He said he didn't prepare for the first debate and his RCP average poll numbers went down after his performance.
Click to expand...

I've seen polls that say Trump's support has risen, including today's national Quinnipac poll that says Trump is at 28%. That's far higher than before the debate.

I also saw polls that said Kasich lost a point after the debate.

Not saying which is accurate or innacurate, they all usually fall under the same 'margin for error.'
 
Romney: Trump's controversial comments will hurt the GOP nominee
90

Mitt Romney thinks that Donald Trump’s controversial comments could taint the ultimate Republican nominee — even if it ends up being someone other than the businessman.
“Some of the things he’s said — particularly about Hispanics — will be problematic certainly for him if he were to go to the next stage. But for whoever our nominee is,” Romney said in an interview with Democratic strategist David Axelrod for his "The Axe Files" podcast. “Now if our nominee happened to be somebody like Marco Rubio or Jeb Bush who have strong Hispanic roots themselves and connections themselves that might not be as big an issue. But if it were maybe somebody else that didn’t have those connections, why it could probably remain as a shadow above their campaign.”
Click to expand...

Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz? Ted Cruz!
gettyimages-484798272.jpg

I still have many doubts about Ted Cruz’s ability to win the Republican nomination. He has a lot of precedent working against him; as I wrote seven months ago, “Let’s Be Serious About Ted Cruz From The Start: He’s Too Extreme And Too Disliked To Win.” And Cruz has, if anything, become even more hated by his colleagues in Washington, which hurts him tremendously in the all important endorsement primary. He continues to make controversial statements on a range of issues that hurt his viability in a general election.

But I think it’s time to at least walk the headline back a bit.
Click to expand...
 
The Future Of Polling May Depend On Donald Trump’s Fate
Does Donald Trump lead the race for the Republican presidential nomination? Or does he lead it by a “yuuuuuge” margin? Bloomberg recently released a poll that gave Trump 24 percent to Ben Carson’s 20 percent. On the same day, Ipsos released a poll that put Trump at 37 percent to Carson’s 14 percent. Normally, I’d suggest you average the results and move on. But these two polls are emblematic of a deep divide this year first noted by Jonathan Robinson: The Bloomberg poll was conducted over the phone with live interviewers; the Ipsos poll was conducted online.
Click to expand...

Trump threatens to boycott CNN debate, demands $5 million
Donald Trump on Monday night threatened to boycott the next Republican presidential debate unless hosting network CNN donates $5 million to charity.
“How about I tell CNN, who doesn’t treat me properly, I’m not gonna do the next debate, OK?” Trump said at a rally in Georgia. “How about we do this for CNN: I won’t do the debate unless they pay me $5 million, all of which money goes to the Wounded Warriors or goes to vets?”
It's the same move the Republican front-runner pulled before the GOP debate hosted by CNN in September. Trump sent a letter to CNN President Jeff Zucker, asking him to donate all profits from the debate to veterans charities. Despite not getting an official response from CNN, Trump made it to the debate.
Click to expand...
 
Lead Salad said:
Paul, Huckabee and Christie all fell behind him in the RCP average. He's at #8 now.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep..._republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html

Also, CNN is getting a ton of shit for their criteria. They are using some polls from July to determine who gets in. Fiorina actually may get snubbed for this reason. Really dumb move on CNN's part. I don't know how they didn't think there would be a candidate that could surge from the Fox debate and they shouldn't make the criteria go against starting off lower.
Click to expand...

Wow. That's fucking low.

Believe it or not, I saw this as a real opportunity for them to take advantage of the backlash at Fox News and put on a fair debate to all candidates and win over some regular viewers.

I knew they'd somehow fuck it up.

It still can be a good debate. As long as they don't bring on Jorge Ramos to interrogate Trump.
 
GOP campaigns take shots at each other over fundraising hauls
90

The campaign chest-thumping over fundraising numbers devolved into a snarkfest, with candidates' aides taking shots at each other over seemingly inflated figures and big spending, with little to show for it.
Vincent Harris, the chief digital strategist for Sen. Rand Paul's presidential campaign, kicked off some of the skirmishing on Friday with a few knocks on former Florida governor Jeb Bush's fundraising numbers.
Click to expand...

Jeb Bush slashes campaign salaries
90

Jeb Bush’s campaign slashed hundreds of thousands of dollars in salaries over the last three months as the struggling candidate's fundraising machine slowed to a more middling pace, new campaign-finance reports indicate.
No longer able to raise unlimited sums with his super PAC, Bush hauled in $13.4 million in the third quarter of the year for his campaign. That’s more than all of his GOP rivals except Ben Carson. But Bush also spent more than many of them, leaving him with about as much money in the bank as Marco Rubio. Ted Cruz has more.
Click to expand...
 
Trump running a smart campaign damn. How fucked up will it be that a guy who has missed out on the "major league" debates wins NH lolllllllll @ GOP
 
Remeber how I posted that after the immigration plan that Trump released, if he released a tax plan that people loved then this nomination could be his to take?

http://www.hngn.com/articles/124178...an-will-simplify-tax-code-make-super-rich.htm

"So we are going to simply the tax code, take away some of the deductions, and hedge fund guys have to pay up," Trump said. "Now, I'm going to lower taxes, but these hedge fund guys are making a lot of money. I mean, I [can] tell you I have friends that laugh about how little they pay, and it's not fair to the middle class, and the middle income people and the middle class. We're destroying that and, you know, that's what built this country, and we are destroying the middle class in this country."
Click to expand...

"I know it better. I'm the king of the tax code," he said. "And I'm going to come out with a plan, a simplification, a plan getting rid of some of the deductions, which are ridiculous and complicated."
Click to expand...

"So we are going to simply the tax code, take away some of the deductions, and hedge fund guys have to pay up," he said, according to the Times. "Now, I'm going to lower taxes, but these hedge fund guys are making a lot of money. I mean, I [can] tell you I have friends that laugh about how little they pay, and it's not fair to the middle class, and the middle income people and the middle class. We're destroying that and, you know, that's what built this country, and we are destroying the middle class in this country."

"So I will have a plan. The hedge fund guys won't be happy, but pretty much everybody else is [going to] love it," said Trump.
Click to expand...

...Based on Trump's statements, it doesn't sound like it's the Fair Tax, Flat Tax, or whatever Republicans that have wanted to change the tax code from the bottom up, have wanted.

But, he's said he's weeks out from releasing it. And I bet he's just making a few promises and he doesn't even know what it's going to be.
 
RedAger said:
Trump running a smart campaign damn. How fucked up will it be that a guy who has missed out on the "major league" debates wins NH lolllllllll @ GOP
Click to expand...
Well, he has this not being a suicidal cuckservative thing going for him that really sets him apart from the rest.
 
GearSolidMetal said:
I've seen polls that say Trump's support has risen, including today's national Quinnipac poll that says Trump is at 28%. That's far higher than before the debate.

I also saw polls that said Kasich lost a point after the debate.

Not saying which is accurate or innacurate, they all usually fall under the same 'margin for error.'
Click to expand...

We've talked about this and I notice it across the board with these forums. You can't point to one poll and act like it's the most accurate. You have to look at averages. Trump did dip after the debates (the three before this most recent one). Also, Kasich has risen while Paul, Christie and Huckabee have fallen. Cherrypicking is never useful if you want to analyze data.
 
Trump knows his debates are his weakness - so this is nothing more than trying to get out of the last one before Iowa (I believe) while making it look like he stuck it to librul media CNN. And being on Dec 15th, the ratings will be much lower, so he can point and say "look at those ratings, they're shit because I wasn't there".
 
I watched Walker's foreign policy speech. My god that was painful to watch. Like watching paint dry.
 
Trump leads 'Which Republican Candidate could best handle the economy' polls by HUGE numbers.


ap_200478929412.jpg


http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-poll-nevada-south-carolina-2015-10

When voters in Nevada were asked who could best handle ...

The economy, 67% of Republicans in Nevada said Trump, 60 points ahead of his next-closest challenger, former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina.
Click to expand...

And when GOP voters in South Carolina were asked who could best handle ...

The economy, 59% said Trump, which put him more than 50 points ahead of former Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson.
Click to expand...

It's well known that the economy is the #1 issue for Republican primary voters, and general election voters. And saying that Trump is leading that poll in two different states, by that HUGE margin, says alot.
 
ShoelessRye said:
Trump knows his debates are his weakness - so this is nothing more than trying to get out of the last one before Iowa (I believe) while making it look like he stuck it to librul media CNN. And being on Dec 15th, the ratings will be much lower, so he can point and say "look at those ratings, they're shit because I wasn't there".
Click to expand...

It's fucking genius, comical, and diabolical all at the same time
 
This thread is hilarious. Overwhelming support for Rand and then Trump. People don't actually know what they want or what they believe. It's like going from Ron Paul to Romney. They aren't even near the same ideology or belief system.
 
GearSolidMetal said:
These headlines always bring a big smile to my face.

Raised over $130 million between his official campaign and Super Pacs, and he's already slashing the pay of his loyal campaign workers, a mere month and a half after the first debate.

I freaking love it.
Click to expand...

Campaign and SuperPAC money is different. Most candidates SuperPACs are 4-5 times more money because of the few restrictions. The problem is the money is limited because of the lack of coordination with the candidate. Jeb is cutting his campaign budget which deals with his travel, lodging, staff payroll ,etc. That is the budget that is being tightened. His SuperPAC however, is what has a shit load of money (I think around 80-100mil) but can't be used for those type of expenses I mentioned early.

This same thing happened to Perry. He still had millions in SuperPAC money but his campaign budget was dry and he couldn't pay staff and would've had to handle hardly enjoyable travel/low tier hotels so he decided to quit.

So far, I haven't seen a problem with SuperPACs thus far. I do agree it complicates things but the struggle for a candidate is still there. The threat of primaries lasting longer I think won't happen. The crazy amounts of money pouring in are far more restricted and not in the poltiicans hands.
 
ShoelessRye said:
Trump knows his debates are his weakness - so this is nothing more than trying to get out of the last one before Iowa (I believe) while making it look like he stuck it to librul media CNN. And being on Dec 15th, the ratings will be much lower, so he can point and say "look at those ratings, they're shit because I wasn't there".
Click to expand...

I'm annoyed with CNN cause the polls really do show the field thinning a lot. Hardly anyone has more than 3% now but their debate criteria may get 9-10 candidates on the stage after the previous had only 8. I understand factoring in NH and Iowa polls but you can't lower the bar in order to do that. Average them in with national polls.
 
GearSolidMetal said:
I've seen polls that say Trump's support has risen, including today's national Quinnipac poll that says Trump is at 28%. That's far higher than before the debate.

I also saw polls that said Kasich lost a point after the debate.

Not saying which is accurate or innacurate, they all usually fall under the same 'margin for error.'
Click to expand...

Given that he was polling at 26-29 just before the debate, no, 28% is not "Far higher." Hell, I'm pretty sure you posted some of those polls yourself.
 
Lead Salad said:
Newest poll out shows Carson continuing to drop, now virtually tied with Rubio/Cruz
Quinnipiac
Trump 27
Rubio 17
Cruz 16
Carson 16
Bush 5
Fiorina 3
Christie 2
Kasich 2
Paul 2
Huckabee 1
Graham 0
Pataki 0
Santorum 0
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/images/polling/us/us12022015_U45hkpp.pdf
Click to expand...

When it's that close between a #2-#4 place and within the margin of error, it should be considered a 3-way tie.

They should be asking for those that support a candidate with less than 5%, what their 2nd choice would be when their favorite candidate drops out.

That's what is moving the polls, the momentum each candidate gains with what drop-out from a candidate.

For example, how much support would Rubio gain if Bush,
Kasich, Christie, and McDonnell all dropped out. Most of that would probably go to Rubio, most.
 
Quipling said:
Given that he was polling at 26-29 just before the debate, no, 28% is not "Far higher." Hell, I'm pretty sure you posted some of those polls yourself.
Click to expand...

The other thing is it's a specific poll. It's a weak support for your argument to point at a specific poll.
 
How Trump almost blew up the third GOP debate
90

Donald Trump, the billionaire-businessman-turned-Republican-frontrunner, often boasts on the campaign trail about his cunning negotiating skills, promising to best the likes of China, Mexico and Iran to get the most incredible, most tremendous deals.
This week, it was CNBC that got Trump'd.
Under mounting pressure, the network bowed to the demands of Trump and other presidential candidates for the Oct. 28 presidential debate — a decision that capped a flurry of behind-the-scenes negotiations that drew in some of the most powerful figures from the TV network and the Republican Party.
Click to expand...
 
GearSolidMetal said:
When it's that close between a #2-#4 place and within the margin of error, it should be considered a 3-way tie.

They should be asking for those that support a candidate with less than 5%, what their 2nd choice would be when their favorite candidate drops out.

That's what is moving the polls, the momentum each candidate gains with what drop-out from a candidate.

For example, how much support would Rubio gain if Bush,
Kasich, Christie, and McDonnell all dropped out. Most of that would probably go to Rubio, most.
Click to expand...

McDonnell (?) isn't in the race. However, all of the candidates with less than 3% have a total of 10% of the vote between them, with 15% if you include Bush. If that were to split 60% Rubio, and 40% between everyone else, that'd still leave Trump in the lead, though it would be narrowed meaningfully. Bush Kasich and Christie are less meaningful, with only 9ish% of the vote between them.

Moreover, most of the little guys are going to stick around with their 3% prayers - apart from Bush, they've got controlled burn rates, and I can see most everyone but Fiorina sticking around on issues. Certainly Paul, Huckabee, and Kasich.


No, I suspect most of the change will come as Carson bleeds out. His campaign churns money as fast as it makes it, and they've got an extremely outdated structure that mostly provides short-term gains at high cost. He's also had a pretty bad month, and his polls are starting to reflect that.
 
Quipling said:
Given that he was polling at 26-29 just before the debate, no, 28% is not "Far higher." Hell, I'm pretty sure you posted some of those polls yourself.
Click to expand...

Could have sworn that Trump was 24-26% around the time of the debates.

Ah... just looked it up, and I was remembering the Fox News poll. He was at 26%, then 25% afterward.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...-after-first-debate-sanders-gains-on-clinton/

Different polls. They're all running together. But I don't recall any polls that had Trump as high as 28% pre-debate.
 
2GunTommy said:
Who the hell would listen to anything corporate owned Romney says anyway. he just doesnt like Trump speaking the truth. God forbid the people wake up and see the establishment for what it truly is.
Click to expand...

The idea that Trump isn't "the establishment" is hilarious.
 
Quipling said:
McDonnell (?) isn't in the race. However, all of the candidates with less than 3% have a total of 10% of the vote between them, with 15% if you include Bush. If that were to split 60% Rubio, and 40% between everyone else, that'd still leave Trump in the lead, though it would be narrowed meaningfully. Bush Kasich and Christie are less meaningful, with only 9ish% of the vote between them.
Click to expand...

Meant Graham, not McDonnell, although they're of both equal sleeziness.

The numbers you posted, from the polls, are correct. That doesn't mean they're insignificant. Every percentage point, of each early primary state, is of a major consequence.

Moreover, most of the little guys are going to stick around with their 3% prayers - apart from Bush, they've got controlled burn rates, and I can see most everyone but Fiorina sticking around on issues. Certainly Paul, Huckabee, and Kasich.
Click to expand...

Depending on your favored candidate, this is something to curse or celebrate.


No, I suspect most of the change will come as Carson bleeds out. His campaign churns money as fast as it makes it, and they've got an extremely outdated structure that mostly provides short-term gains at high cost. He's also had a pretty bad month, and his polls are starting to reflect that.
Click to expand...

Of the top 4, Carson is the candidate that's most likely to drop out. But he could be just as stubborn as the candidates with 3%. It could be the 8% of undecided that historically make their decisions within the last week of their individual primaries.
 
GearSolidMetal said:
Could have sworn that Trump was 24-26% around the time of the debates.

Ah... just looked it up, and I was remembering the Fox News poll. He was at 26%, then 25% afterward.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...-after-first-debate-sanders-gains-on-clinton/

Different polls. They're all running together. But I don't recall any polls that had Trump as high as 28% pre-debate.
Click to expand...

Use RCP. It's awesome and you it's not like its biased cause they are just posting the most recent national polls. Great resource.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep..._republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html
 
speakhandsforme said:
The idea that Trump isn't "the establishment" is hilarious.
Click to expand...

Cmon he is going against what the establishment wants, thats why some are questioning if he is a "real republican" He has spoken against the TPP. What other republican has done that? He has spoken against the Iraq war and the decision to go there. He talks about taxing wall street more. And he is beholden to no one for corporate campaign finance. He talks about actually doing things to stop illegal immigration instead of spewing rhetoric while pandering to big businesses who want it to continue due to their need for slave labor. Like him or not he is going against the grain when it comes to the establishment.

He is exactly what this country needs at a time where we have deals like the TPP going on behind closed doors and Hilary talking about giving illegals free healthcare and tuition. Someone who isnt owned by his corporate masters who paid for his campaign and actually will say FU to the establishment and work for the good of the American people.
 
GearSolidMetal said:
Meant Graham, not McDonnell, although they're of both equal sleeziness.

Of the top 4, Carson is the candidate that's most likely to drop out. But he could be just as stubborn as the candidates with 3%. It could be the 8% of undecided that historically make their decisions within the last week of their individual primaries.
Click to expand...

Graham has 0% of the vote, so his dropping out doesn't mean much. While Carson may stick around, I'm more concerned with whether most of his supporters are going to do the same. We saw how fast Fiorina's support faded after that honeymoon ended.
 
Lead Salad said:
Says a lot about those voters/polled people.
Click to expand...

We get that you're not a Trump supporter, and I'm not a huge fan of his either, but the numbers are the numbers for those polls.

And look at the other options. We have a surgeon, a less successful businesswoman, and a bunch of politicians. It's not a stretch that they listen to Trump's speeches about bringing back the economy by making great trade deals, his new tax plan, and kicking illegal immigrants out, and coming to the conclusion that he'd be the best for the economy.
 
Quipling said:
Graham has 0% of the vote, so his dropping out doesn't mean much. While Carson may stick around, I'm more concerned with whether most of his supporters are going to do the same. We saw how fast Fiorina's support faded after that honeymoon ended.
Click to expand...

Graham has 0% of the polls, his very few supporters spread out to other candidates would have very little effect, or whatever percentage of a point he has going to a single candidate, would probably increase their support by a point, which is a big deal. Points matter, as I said in a previous post.

Carson and Fiorina dropping out during the early primaries would be huge for whoever candidate most of their support would flock to, and that's probably Cruz.
 
Trump just tweeted...

'Jeb just lost three of his top fundraisers - They Quit!'

Interesting....
 
speakhandsforme said:
The idea that Trump isn't "the establishment" is hilarious.
Click to expand...

Um.... he's making fun of John McCain, minimizing Jeb Bush, talking about topics that 'the establishment' would rather not make political issues (immigration).

So, yeah, calling him anti-establishment isn't exactly a stretch.
 
Graham is running to be Sec.Def or Sec of State. But he never got enough support to make any impact. I still think he wants to play kingmaker in SC more than anything, and use that to try and win favor. Graham's best chance at Cabinet work would be a President Rubio and McCain/Graham took Rubio (and Ayotte) under their wing as freshmen senators to school them in the world of GOP foreign policy.

SC could be interesting in that Nikki Haley seems to by tying herself into the Bush campaign, with some even saying she's angling for the running mate gig with Bush.
 
Lead Salad said:
Campaign and SuperPAC money is different. Most candidates SuperPACs are 4-5 times more money because of the few restrictions. The problem is the money is limited because of the lack of coordination with the candidate. Jeb is cutting his campaign budget which deals with his travel, lodging, staff payroll ,etc. That is the budget that is being tightened. His SuperPAC however, is what has a shit load of money (I think around 80-100mil) but can't be used for those type of expenses I mentioned early.

This same thing happened to Perry. He still had millions in SuperPAC money but his campaign budget was dry and he couldn't pay staff and would've had to handle hardly enjoyable travel/low tier hotels so he decided to quit.

So far, I haven't seen a problem with SuperPACs thus far. I do agree it complicates things but the struggle for a candidate is still there. The threat of primaries lasting longer I think won't happen. The crazy amounts of money pouring in are far more restricted and not in the poltiicans hands.
Click to expand...

Still, that says alot about the condition of Jeb's campaign that he's not attracting the donations directly to this campaign, and not Super Pacs, to keep the current salary of his employees going.
 
ShoelessRye said:
Graham is running to be Sec.Def or Sec of State. But he never got enough support to make any impact. I still think he wants to play kingmaker in SC more than anything, and use that to try and win favor. Graham's best chance at Cabinet work would be a President Rubio and McCain/Graham took Rubio (and Ayotte) under their wing as freshmen senators to school them in the world of GOP foreign policy.

SC could be interesting in that Nikki Haley seems to by tying herself into the Bush campaign, with some even saying she's angling for the running mate gig with Bush.
Click to expand...

He will endorse Rubio IMO. Both are clear neocons and he doesn't like Cruz.
 
GearSolidMetal said:
I'll use it to check out the different polls, but I don't trust the average of the polls.

Rasmussen having Trump at 17%, when every other poll has him in the mid-20, at least? And they have Graham at 1%, when the other polls have him at 0.3-0%.
Click to expand...

Facepalm. You don't understand what scientific polling is. The point is that despite variance from poll to poll, it will ultimately bring up to a more reliable number. You've told me too many times about paranoia with one poll or another. You can't be helped.
 
I just realized while driving around that despite my disgust with Trump and this primary process, he may be a great idea for Speaker of the House. Obviously I know this wouldn't happen and a ton of shit would go down if he ever were but think about it. Speaker of the House has pretty much three main jobs: make sure deals get done, pressure members to keep in line with the votes they need, and get shit on by everyone possible. I think Trump actually could do this job. Also, being a speaker is a fairly policy light job (a reason Paul Ryan shouldn't do it).

I can't believe I'm saying it but the more I think about it, the more it makes sense. Can you imagine the news cycles that would go on during those terms in Congress. It would be fucking amazing to watch and I actually wouldn't feel like America was being destroyed. It's the one place Trump can go and I don't want to rid him from the earth for entering politics.
 
Speaking of Graham.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...turns-on-cruz-gops-attitudes-toward-hispanics


How are you going to bring us together if your whole career has been about dividing us?" Graham said.

"I am tired of that crap," he said, adding that he never understood why anyone thought they could shut down the government to repeal Obamacare.

"I believe Donald Trump is destroying the Republican Party," Graham said, his voice rising with disgust.

"It's not self-deportation it's forced deportation," Graham said.

Now "we're going to round them all up?"

"You think you're going to win an election with that sort of garbage?"

A few murmured "no."

Graham then attacked Cruz's hardline stance on abortion, asking the crowd who agreed whether they believed there should be exceptions allowed for abortion if a woman had been raped.

Many cheered.

"Ted Cruz doesn't have an exception for rape and incest" and would therefore lose, Graham said.

With Cruz as the nominee the debate with the Democrats would be "about the nominee of the Republican Party" telling a women who has been raped that she has to keep the rapist's baby.

"Not the speech you thought you were going to hear? Not the speech I thought I was going to give."

"I'm the first guy to come to an RJC event and never mention Israel in 15 minutes," Graham, a longtime staunch supporter of Israel, said to applause.

"I don't have to. You know where I'm at."
 
Lead Salad said:
Facepalm. You don't understand what scientific polling is. The point is that despite variance from poll to poll, it will ultimately bring up to a more reliable number. You've told me too many times about paranoia with one poll or another. You can't be helped.
Click to expand...

True, but what if another poll had Trump in the 40%-55% area right now? We'd be right to discount the credibility of that poll.
 
GearSolidMetal said:
Still, that says alot about the condition of Jeb's campaign that he's not attracting the donations directly to this campaign, and not Super Pacs, to keep the current salary of his employees going.
Click to expand...

His pace has slowed down and the result is making cuts in his spending. I think he was half of Carson's haul this report and Rubio's team brought in more them him too (and bragged about it specifically when they found it out, saying they are more fiscally conscious). I can say I'm glad money hasn't ruled this primary cycle. The numbers Jeb was putting up seemed unstoppable but he still doesn't gain traction with his base.
 
GearSolidMetal said:
When it's that close between a #2-#4 place and within the margin of error, it should be considered a 3-way tie.

They should be asking for those that support a candidate with less than 5%, what their 2nd choice would be when their favorite candidate drops out.

That's what is moving the polls, the momentum each candidate gains with what drop-out from a candidate.

For example, how much support would Rubio gain if Bush,
Kasich, Christie, and McDonnell all dropped out. Most of that would probably go to Rubio, most.
Click to expand...

Most of the polls do have the second choice listed. I couldn;t find it in this one. Another huge thing to note is those three (Rubio, Cruz, Carson) also have really really good favoribility ratings, over 50 and hardly an unfavorable.
 
GearSolidMetal said:
True, but what if another poll had Trump in the 40%-55% area right now? We'd be right to discount the credibility of that poll.
Click to expand...

Not if it's scientific and has been from a historically trusted pollster. It would likely mean there was a significant boost from the time of the other polls to that one.

Also, you don't see examples like that so it's a bad argument.
 
GearSolidMetal said:
Um.... he's making fun of John McCain, minimizing Jeb Bush, talking about topics that 'the establishment' would rather not make political issues (immigration).

So, yeah, calling him anti-establishment isn't exactly a stretch.
Click to expand...

I think he is using the term differently. By establishment, he is thinking the corporate powers which often dictate and control policy of the politicians they help get in office. You are thinking establishment in terms of the Republican party hierarchy.
 
After San Bernardino massacre, Rubio hits Cruz for surveillance vote
In the wake of Wednesday's massacre in San Bernardino, California, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio on Friday dinged Ted Cruz and his other fellow senators and GOP presidential rivals for their votes to end the National Security Agency's bulk collection of phone metadata.
“A couple points. First of all, we have to have robust intelligence gathering capabilities to disrupt plots. It’s one of the reasons why I was opposed to this law that even some of my opponents running for president voted for, this USA [Freedom] Act that passed a few months ago. It took away the right to collect metadata, which means that we can now not access the phone records of individuals that we either suspect of being involved in terrorism or who carry out an attack to see who they were coordinating or talking to," Rubio told "CBS This Morning."
Click to expand...


Cruz fires back at Rubio on NSA comments
Sen. Ted Cruz's campaign is ratcheting up its criticism of Sen. Marco Rubio, issuing on Friday the latest salvo in the Republican presidential candidates’ battle over the National Security Agency.
In a statement set to go out widely later Friday, the Cruz campaign accuses Rubio of desperation and demands that he “formally correct” recent comments he made about the USA Freedom Act, a measure supported by Cruz but opposed by Rubio that puts restrictions on how the NSA collects data.
Click to expand...
 
Lead Salad said:
Not if it's scientific and has been from a historically trusted pollster. It would likely mean there was a significant boost from the time of the other polls to that one.

Also, you don't see examples like that so it's a bad argument.
Click to expand...

Ah, just noticed the date next to the poll title for Rasmussen. It's for nearly three weeks ago. That explains it.
 
Lead Salad said:
I think he is using the term differently. By establishment, he is thinking the corporate powers which often dictate and control policy of the politicians they help get in office. You are thinking establishment in terms of the Republican party hierarchy.
Click to expand...

Gotchya.

He was the former, he'd be taking campaign money from those said corporate powers.
 
ShoelessRye said:
Graham is running to be Sec.Def or Sec of State. But he never got enough support to make any impact. I still think he wants to play kingmaker in SC more than anything, and use that to try and win favor. Graham's best chance at Cabinet work would be a President Rubio and McCain/Graham took Rubio (and Ayotte) under their wing as freshmen senators to school them in the world of GOP foreign policy.

SC could be interesting in that Nikki Haley seems to by tying herself into the Bush campaign, with some even saying she's angling for the running mate gig with Bush.
Click to expand...

Diamond Jim said:
He will endorse Rubio IMO. Both are clear neocons and he doesn't like Cruz.
Click to expand...

Agreed. McCain and Graham will definitely back Rubio. He is the most hawk in the field that has a chance of winning since Graham has no chance. He's already leveraging.

Graham rips into Cruz as a hard-liner who cannot win
Lindsey Graham tossed out his planned speech before the Republican Jewish Coalition on Thursday to rip into the candidate who preceded him on stage, calling Ted Cruz an unelectable hard-liner who would alienate women and Latinos and cause the Republican Party to lose in 2016.
Graham had stood backstage as he listened to Cruz answer a question about how he would appeal to pro-choice women by saying he would instead bring more conservatives to the polls. Graham called that a recipe for electoral disaster.
Click to expand...
 
GearSolidMetal said:
Ah, just noticed the date next to the poll title for Rasmussen. It's for nearly three weeks ago. That explains it.
Click to expand...

I've mentioned before Rasmussen was always off a few points (2-3) with the 2012 GE election in favor of Romney. They misjudged the turnouts from 2008 and it kept them varied from the rest of the pollsters the entire race. It became really obvious their polls weren't necessarily wrong but they were always off from the average by that same amount of percentage points.

I'm not sure how they could mess up a primary poll however. It's generally easier when you are looking at one party instead of two and how many of each group (as well as independents) will participate. 2012's primaries seemed spot on with what was happening.
 
Anyone looking forward to Trumps actions if he isnt winning? I just cant see him going out quietly like other politicians and get behind the party. Whoever wins will be bruised badly by trump and his attacks. I just cant see past Hillary right now
 
GOP candidates double down on guns after San Bernardino
First, Republican presidential candidates offered their thoughts and prayers for the victims of Wednesday's shooting in San Bernardino, California, where two killers wielding assault-style rifles slaughtered 14 innocent victims and wounded 21 others.
Then they immediately mounted an unapologetic defense of the right to bear arms.
Story Continued Below
Ted Cruz chose symbolism, deciding to go ahead with a previously scheduled event where the Texas senator plans to unveil his "National 2nd Amendment Coalition." The event is to be held Friday at a 17,000-square-foot indoor shooting range in Johnston, Iowa, that defines its corporate purpose as, "to glorify God in all we do and to be a positive influence to all who come in contact with CrossRoads Shooting Sports LLC."
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,282,982
Messages
58,474,390
Members
176,047
Latest member
derpmaster3000

Share this page

Back
Top