Basileus777
Member
The biggest threat to Trump may actually be Cruz as he is already siphoning Carson's supporters and is a candidate that could actually appeal to Trump's base.
Cruz is absolute pondscum. I can't see why any of those with Libertarian tendencies would take him over Rand Paul. Bloodlust I suppose.
Sad.
Almost every libertarian I know has no clue as to what they're voting for. The few I work with hate Obama/hilary, religion, the mention of gun regulation, taxes, and people against marijuana. I think the modern libertarian message has become a bit garbled.
Trump will beat Hilliary in the general election because of terrorism, trade and illegal immigration.
you don't know how many people in the south are bat shit insane like trumpThe majority of the US is on Hillary's side of these issues, no?
Trump in general would lead to RECORD numbers of lapsed republicans and moderates voting Democrat IMO. It would be a worse beating than Romney got from Obama.
It's not garbled at all. The bases for libertarianism is "Fuck you, I got mine."
you don't know how many people in the south are bat shit insane like trump
you don't know how many people in the south are bat shit insane like trump
Yet still basically every betting site has Rubio as the odds favorite.
It's because Trump and Carson aren't actually running for president. Neither really has an infrastructure and one is on a book tour right now.
I think the idea is it has to be someone with political experience at the end of the day, and most people tend to think Cruz is too nutty to ultimately win.
I'm on PredictIt and have Rubio at 27 cents a share from way back when and cruz at 8 cents a share.
I think Cruz is a real threat for the anti-establishment votes to run to and get behind a guy who is a politician and can actually get support.
I think the entire republican party is going full speed with Rubio because Trump/Carson/Cruz is a landslide victory for Dems.
Trump has been building the infrastructure, it's actually Rubio that's lagging behind there.It's because Trump and Carson aren't actually running for president. Neither really has an infrastructure and one is on a book tour right now.
Actually Trump is the only one with any ground game right now.
I know how insane it sounds, but it's true.
Rubio thinks his campaign is UBER and can be run without ground game. (He's literally said this) Meanwhile Trump is hiring guys and getting volunteers like crazy. He's got Santorum's Iowa guy running his strategy in that state.
Secretly, this is because Rubio doesn't really have any money.
By the October filing date Rubio had raised $14.6 million (plus $4 million from his Senate war chest) and spent $7.7 million, leaving him $10 million on hand. For comparison's sake, Jeb raised $24 million, Hillary raised $77.5 million and Bernie Sanders raised $41.5 million.
Rubio's doing better in outside funding, with $17.3 million in his SuperPAC and another $15 million from some other source (probably also related to his Senate campaign), but that money is not accessible to his campaign staff. He can't use it to set up offices or hire volunteers.
Basically, Jeb's deliberate effort to cut off Rubio's funding sources early in the campaign worked. If you look only at internal funds, which is what he needs to keep running, his budget is a lot closer to Rand Paul's than Jeb Bush's. He probably just can't afford to run a strong ground game right now.
(http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/election-2016-campaign-money-race.html?_r=0)
Didn't Rubio get two billionaire donors on board recently? Did they publicize those donors a lot because they need to look like they got money?
I think I read somewhere that Singer's endorsement is worth about $3 million all together from his bundler network. But that's still peanuts.Basically, yes.
But also, those donors are really only useful for setting up superPACs. Paul Singer can still only give $2,600 to Rubio directly, no matter how rich he is.
One of the lessons of the superPAC age is that internal campaign cash is just a lot more valuable than external cash, both directly (campaigns are guaranteed the best ad rates, for example, while superPACs aren't) and indirectly (because superPACs can't hire volunteers for your rallies or pay your filing fees).
Trump will beat Hilliary in the general election because of terrorism, trade and illegal immigration.
The majority of the US is on Hillary's side of these issues, no?
This is completely at odds with what a majority of the country thinks.Trump is already saying Hillary has no strength or stamina and wouldn't make a strong president.
In contrast, Trump would be so strong on the military, strong on the boarders, strong on refugees, strong against ISIS, strong on trade and strong but firm on illegal immigrants that will be sent back to their country humanly.
Trump attacking Hillary for being weak only increases my belief he's a Clinton double agent.Trump is already saying Hillary has no strength or stamina and wouldn't make a strong president.
In contrast, Trump would be so strong on the military, strong on the boarders, strong on refugees, strong against ISIS, strong on trade and strong but firm on illegal immigrants that will be sent back to their country humanly.
Here's how I see it. Republican voters are sliding towards irrelevance. Like their party, they are becoming more and more extreme, and more and more of the country at large are looking at that extreme and going... fuck no. The voters got in a bunch of candidates who played to the tea party, without getting their hands too dirty with the extreme beliefs... but then those candidates didn't do the crap they told the extremists they were going to do, like repeal Obamacare, etc.
Then along comes Trump.
Instead of subtly playing to the people who feel like they have 'lost' their America to the foreigners, to the Muslims, to the gays, to feminists etc etc, without condemning any of those groups, Trump is just like yeah, I hate all that stuff too. Apart from the gays. But fuck Brown people. And women. You know?
And those voters go... HE SAID IT! HE SAID WHAT WE THINK! WE LOVE HIM!
And the other candidates must have all gone... Oh shit. He said it. No we either have to be outwardly racist too, to play to the extreme base of our voters but definitely taking a position the country disagrees with, or we have to take a position that's a lot safer in the general election and just hope that those voters eventually move away from Trump... because if they don't... we're fucked.
Wow, so the Clinton double-agent thing is still a valid conspiracy theory?
John Kasich's campaign manager on Twitter today:Wow, so the Clinton double-agent thing is still a valid conspiracy theory?
Sometimes you have to wonder if "Donald Trump for President" is not really a highly secret tool created by the Clinton campaign.
When history is written about campaign cycle, not going to be shocked to read about back channel communications between Trump & B. Clinton.
any chance trump will just keep saying crazier and crazier things to see how much it takes to break the batshit back of the gop because he doesn't actually want to be the nominee but is starting to worry they just might pick him?
How many polls do you need to see that Trump is a serious thing?
I think some of you are still in denial it can actually happen (some of you even think he is not running for real) But I see him extremely focused and disciplined, I don't have any doubt that he is not playing around or trying to promote himself, he wants this.
The fact that he has that image of running the campaign with his own resources (that I guess is something that Republicans really appreciate), combined with a press that can't get enough of him will dwarf anything that the established GOP can throw at him. He has a HUGE advantage over any other candidate for being the only one that with those cualities.
i just don't see how he can make it without a legit campaign financing arm this day and age. once the PAC money starts rolling in voters will follow, as the last GOP primary has shown. i know the similarities between this primary and the last aren't exactly 1:1 but look at Romney, pretty much had all the political makings of failure: Massachusetts gov, 'architect of obamacare', visage of an establishment politican... pretty much the antithesis of "the base", fresh off teabag mania, but he was still able to steamroll his way to the nom with relative ease. i don't see how rubio won't do the same when the rubber hits the pavement
though this is kind of uncharted territory in politics, so it's not too far out there to suggest things could go the other way. but i don't think anybody in the prediction markets is putting smart money on trump right now
Do people really think republicans are half the country? Trump is going to get trashed if he wins the primary. A lot of people who wouldn't vote would vote just for him to not take office
Of all the factors that have lead to this, overall party affiliation percentages is the least relevant.Are we still talking of the country where the Congress and Senate have a republican majority?
Do people really think republicans are half the country? Trump is going to get trashed if he wins the primary. A lot of people who wouldn't vote would vote just for him to not take office
Take a look at a map of America with state reps taken into account. The country is predominantly red.
You're talking about races where turnout is often 30% at best.
Take a look at a map of America with state reps taken into account. The country is predominantly red.
Are we still talking of the country where the Congress and Senate have a republican majority?
Take a look at a map of America with state reps taken into account. The country is predominantly red.
It's because Trump and Carson aren't actually running for president. Neither really has an infrastructure and one is on a book tour right now.
Are we still talking of the country where the Congress and Senate have a republican majority?