Support NeoGAF

[params7]

I believe Trump would definitely build the wall. Deportation probably not. Although he would likely go after criminals and try attacking sanctuary cities and stuff. I'm just guessing. Maybe he really would try and deport a ton of people.

I'm not sure why so many of the candidates seem to want to maybe start WW3 with Russia. Trump and Paul where the only ones saying slow the fuck down. Especially Paul.

Agreed mostly. I never took Trump seriously from the moment he started his deport-all-illegals rhetoric. The wall will happen though, but the deportations will probably be targeted at gang and sanctuary areas like he himself has talked about when pressed for more details by journalists on this subject.

Trump has the same stances on Syria intervention as Rand (though both of them want to do it for different reasons - Trump simply wants Russia to deal with ISIS and prop Assad back up which Trump thinks will also stop the European migration crisis, while Rand simply doesn't want to spend any money on foreign interventions).

Fiorina and Rubio really think of Putin as the world mafia crime lord. Jeb just wants to go to war no matter what. Sad to see on the other side of the aisle, Hillary is also hawkish on the whole thing.

 

[Manmademan]

Nope. He's actually spending less than most of the other big candidates.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/donald-trump-not-spending-campaign-money

He's spending more of the money he gets in small donations than spending his own money:
http://www.nytimes.com/politics/fir...-donald-trumps-campaign-outpace-self-funding/

wrong.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2015/10/26/jeb-bush-outspent-gop-rivals-chief-among-them-donald-trump/MTsDstkXYgYcXaq29MLQAN/story.html#comments

My article is more recent than yours BTW. and breaks down campaign spending specifically by early voting states- minus television advertising.

Trump is spending far, far more money on infrastructure and ground game than everyone else.

 

[Beelzebufo]

Not Cruz? Also he's retired. I'm no Carson supporter, but he was a good neurosurgeon, no?

Cruz I can at least see why like crazy warmongering people would like him. And he actually has some ideas about politics, even if they're not very good. Carson has exactly zero appeal.

And apparently, but that's even scarier. I guess he really does have gifted hands, because the heads not doing any work.

After watching those highlights, Carson reminds me of Paul Rudd's character in Parks and Rec if you removed all of his redeeming qualities.

 

[Vicetrailia]

Rand on income inequality, pure bullshit spewing from his mouth.

And all of their arguments against minimum wage are cowardly, especially Rubio because he pretended to piece together an answer. Conservatives gonna conserve.

 

[AngryNapkin]

There's a difference between saying something in a campaign that's red meat to voters to get them to pay attention, and actually doing that thing once elected. Even if Trump could win the general (he can't) building a massive wall would need to get past congress, which it won't.

You realize the same thing could be said about anyone and any policy or idea? Say Bernie gets elected or Rand gets elected (outer most extreme candidates).

Every single thing they discuss has to get past the smell test of congress.

Please do explain what an insane President could "actually" do without Congress.

 

[Manmademan]

You realize the same thing could be said about anyone and any policy or idea? Say Bernie gets elected or Rand gets elected (outer most extreme candidates).

Every single thing they discuss has to get past the smell test of congress.

Please do explain what an insane President could "actually" do without Congress.

yes, I absolutely do realize this, which is why I usually end up laughing at berniebros whenever the argument about what Bernie would do if elected comes up. Bernie can't do *any* of the things he wants to do with a hostile congress. He'll end up in the exact same position obama is, making speeches while house republicans tell him to go fuck himself.

The big thing I'm most concerned about is the ability of the president to nominate candidates for the supreme court which is ABSOLUTELY not something you want Rand Paul to be doing, as well as dismantling certain programs like Obamacare via executive orders.

Wacky things like building giant walls, clearly insane tax policy, or (sadly) revoking all funding to israel and pulling out of the middle east are never, ever going to happen.

 

[AngryNapkin]

yes, I absolutely do realize this, which is why I usually end up laughing at berniebros whenever the argument about what Bernie would do if elected comes up. Bernie can't do *any* of the things he wants to do with a hostile congress. He'll end up in the exact same position obama is, making speeches while house republicans tell him to go fuck himself.

The big thing I'm most concerned about is the ability of the president to nominate candidates for the supreme court which is ABSOLUTELY not something you want Rand Paul to be doing, as well as dismantling certain programs like Obamacare via executive orders.

Wacky things like building giant walls, clearly insane tax policy, or (sadly) revoking all funding to israel and pulling out of the middle east are never, ever going to happen.

So you want more liberal judges and you seem somewhat reasonable here so you think a Republican can dismantle ACA via executive order? It would still have to go through Congress, and the courts have already ruled that ACA was constitutional.

Executive Orders are always smaller changes to how laws are implemented, something as embedded as ACA can't be signed away by the President when he enters office.

The only thing the President can do day one is most anything dealing with the military.

 

[Davey Cakes]

The fact that Trump aligns with Sanders on a couple of issues makes Trump look better, I will admit.

After watching the debates, my brother and I (huge Bernie Sanders supporters) actually feel that Kasich and Paul (the two guys at the far edges of the stage), as well as Trump are the most appealing candidates up there. The lowest polling and the highest polling. Everyone in between just doesn't cut it.

Kasich unfortunately went off the rails. Rand needs to work on his economic approach. Trump needs to cut it with the deportation BS that Kasich called him out on. Basically, you have two guys who are a bit nutty but at least serve as occasional voices of reason. Then you have a guy who's just really...convicted.

I don't know. With some candidates it's easier to see through to their potential. Others, not so much.

The next debate should probably cut Kasich and Bush at the very least. It's obvious that certain candidates could benefit from more time. Kasich did himself in unfortunately. Bush is a lost cause and his struggle is becoming pathetic.

The worst part of this debate was all the talk about needing to make the military even larger. I had to laugh at that. Even after recognizing that Trump isn't THAT bad in comparison to the other candidates, I was still a bit unsettled about how he and the others think that our military isn't large enough. It's pretty much factually too large. Christ almighty.

If we're not going full isolationist then we better accept that any threats to us are probably not worth handling alone. We need the world at our backs for the bigger conflicts. We can't just say "let's make ourselves more of a military super power than we already are!" and I'm tired of this idea that we need to be big enough that "no one can mess with us."

 

[Manmademan]

So you want more liberal judges and you seem somewhat reasonable here so you think a Republican can dismantle ACA via executive order? It would still have to go through Congress, and the courts have already ruled that ACA was constitutional.

Executive Orders are always smaller changes to how laws are implemented, something as embedded as ACA can't be signed away by the President when he enters office.

The only thing the President can do day one is most anything dealing with the military.

Nah, Romney was promising to do the same thing. It's possible to order various federal agencies to simply not implement key parts of the ACA to effectively dismantle it.

Executive Order

If Gov. Romney is elected president but Republicans do not gain control over both houses of Congress, then he may use Executive Orders to reduce the breadth of the ACA. Gov. Romney publicly stated that he would issue Obamacare waivers to all 50 states, making them exempt from complying. The ACA allows for these waivers subject to various restrictions. Individual states would need to apply for the waivers through the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Some states are likely to be interested, but others may reject the waiver offer. Additionally, these waivers would not take effect until 2017. Ses Scott Brown (R-Mass.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) have sponsored a bill aimed at moving the effective date of the waivers to 2014. The use of an Executive Order in this fashion would be consistent with Romney's stated goal to empower the states to choose whether the ACA fits each state's needs; however, the usefulness of waivers is largely dependent on the date they become effective.

Budgeting

The federal budget is another tool that Gov. Romney may use to delay enforcement of the ACA. The Budget and Accounting Act requires that the President submit the annual budget. Therefore, Gov. Romney, if elected, would have the authority to cut the funding required for the ACA to succeed, which could result in delays in enforcement until such time as it is either repealed or waivers are able to take effect.

The Reality of Repeal

Gov. Romney has been careful to state that on day one he will "act to" repeal the Affordable Care Act, as repeal could not happen that quickly. Actual repeal of the Affordable Care Act faces several challenges. In fact, even through reconciliation, it would require that the movement to repeal or suppress the terms of the ACA be supported by a majority in both houses of Congress. However, if elected, President Romney will have means to hinder its effectiveness. After surviving one of the largest Supreme Court Reviews of a statute in the history of our nation, the future of the Affordable Care Act may still depend on it persevering past one last obstacle -- the 2012 election.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brad-burd/romney-obamacare-repeal_b_1988394.html

Repealing it requires congress, but it's possible to cripple it in such a way via health and human services or via the budget that it becomes neutered to the point of uselessness.

There's some debate on how effective said waivers would BE as well as who would actually bother to use them, but this is not the first time that particular strategy has come up- again Romney was leaning on it heavily in 2012.

As for the courts- there have been more than a few critical decisions (the ACA itself, marriage equality, citizens united) that passed or were struck down by razor thin 5-4 margins. there are 2 liberal justices due to retire in the next 4-8 years, one liberal (Ginsberg at 79 years old and Breyer at 74) and one conservative leaning but sometimes moderate (kennedy at 76 years old)

replace even one of these with another Scalia and the court is going to be locked into making some pretty awful decisions for the next twenty years, let alone all three.

 

[Hexa]

wrong.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2015/10/26/jeb-bush-outspent-gop-rivals-chief-among-them-donald-trump/MTsDstkXYgYcXaq29MLQAN/story.html#comments

My article is more recent than yours BTW. and breaks down campaign spending specifically by early voting states- minus television advertising.

Trump is spending far, far more money on infrastructure and ground game than everyone else.

Both sources appear to be based on the same fec filing so they're both right. Trump is outspending others on the ground in the first couple states, but is being outspent nationally. That's an interesting campaign strategy because while in general people focus on the first couple states, usually not with such pin point focus. Also he's focusing on the ground game over media since he seems to have media coverage in the bag without having to pay for advertising. I wonder if it'll pay off. Definitely a very Trump approach though.
Also, I see nothing that suggests he's been using a lot of his own money.

 

[HylianTom]

How popular is Rubio with Hispanics?

There was a poll released this week showing each candidate's approval/disapproval with Hispanic voters. Of the GOP candidates, Jeb was most popular, but still barely above-water (approval>disapproval).

Hillary and Rubio were the two candidates I'm watching, so I made a point to note:
Hillary was wildly, wiiiiiiiildly popular.. if she's the nominee, Nevada(6) and Colorado(9) look near-certain to be hers.

Rubio was underwater, with 40% approval and disapproval near 60%.

 

[Manmademan]

Both sources appear to be based on the same fec filing so they're both right. Trump is outspending others on the ground in the first couple states, but is being outspent nationally. That's an interesting campaign strategy because while in general people focus on the first couple states, usually not with such pin point focus. Also he's focusing on the ground game over media since he seems to have media coverage in the bag without having to pay for advertising. I wonder if it'll pay off. Definitely a very Trump approach though.
Also, I see nothing that suggests he's been using a lot of his own money.

Your early articles indicate that trump spent 1.9 million of his own money in the spring quarter before leaning more on donations in the most recent quarter. but I admit we simply don't know the extent to which he is self funding, only that he has the ability to do so.

As for the early state strategy, that article glosses over that Trump is doing the same thing elsewhere in states like Florida and Virginia. He's the only candidate that has gone through the (extremely frustrating) process of getting himself on the VA ballot so far- or at least that was the case a week or two back.

As i mentioned to another poster, momentum is absolutely a thing in the primaries. winning several in a row can not only make you inevitable, it can knock out fundraising and volunteering for everyone else that doesn't. Since the 1970s there have only been two candidates that managed to win their nomination without taking Iowa or New Hampshire, and none within the last twenty years.

Trump pretty much has new hampshire, barring something crazy happening. if he takes Iowa along with it, it's lights out for the rest of the field.

 

[Anoregon]

There was a poll released this week showing each candidate's approval/disapproval with Hispanic voters. Of the GOP candidates, Jeb was most popular, but still barely above-water (approval>disapproval).

Hillary and Rubio were the two candidates I'm watching, so I made a point to note:
Hillary was wildly, wiiiiiiiildly popular.. if she's the nominee, Nevada(6) and Colorado(9) look near-certain to be hers.

Rubio was underwater, with 40% approval and disapproval near 60%.

Is there a specific reason Hillary is very popular among hispanic voters? It's not shocking or anything, it's just a specific candidate/demographic relationship that I am fairly ignorant about.

 

[Manmademan]

Is there a specific reason Hillary is very popular among hispanic voters? It's not shocking or anything, it's just a specific candidate/demographic relationship that I am fairly ignorant about.

because republicans have been throwing hispanics and latin american immigrants under the bus for about a decade now with some extremely toxic language?

The GOP is close to losing hispanic voters permanently with that the same way they've lost black and LGBT voters.

 

[HylianTom]

Is there a specific reason Hillary is very popular among hispanic voters? It's not shocking or anything, it's just a specific candidate/demographic relationship that I am fairly ignorant about.

I don't fully understand it either, to be honest. I'm guessing she benefits by just plain contrast against the GOP. And I notice that it seems like she's on Univision or Telemundo doing interviews about every other week (which often flies under the radar of English-speaking media/voters), so I'm wondering if that's helping her stats too.

 

[Interfectum]

How long before Jeb pulls out of the race? He's a complete and utter disaster.

 

[params7]

How long before Jeb pulls out of the race? He's a complete and utter disaster.

Jeb! can fix it (his own campaign).

 

[Lubricus]

because republicans have been throwing hispanics and latin american immigrants under the bus for about a decade now with some extremely toxic language?

The GOP is close to losing hispanic voters permanently with that the same way they've lost black and LGBT voters.

I remembered hearing this on NPR:

AUDIE CORNISH, HOST:

Marco Rubio has also denounced President Obama's decision to thaw diplomatic relations with Cuba. A hard line against Cuba was once a reliable way to draw votes from the influential and Republican leaning Cuban-American constituency in southern Florida. But sociology professor Guillermo Grenier of Florida International University says that's changing. He's been tracking public opinion in the Cuban-American community for more than two decades. He told me the Republican Party is gradually losing strength among Cuban-American voters.

GUILLERMO GRENIER: Well, only 46 percent of the Cuban-Americans now are Republicans. There's been a trend driven by demographic change in the community that is not spreading across the population equally. That it is the old Republicans are still staying Republicans, but the new Cuban arrivals, especially since 1995, are splitting up between the Democrats and the independents.

http://www.npr.org/2015/04/13/399414358/after-years-of-gop-support-cuban-americans-become-more-democratic

 

[Anoregon]

because republicans have been throwing hispanics and latin american immigrants under the bus for about a decade now with some extremely toxic language?

The GOP is close to losing hispanic voters permanently with that the same way they've lost black and LGBT voters.

Oh, I understand why Hispanic (and really any minority) voters aren't fans of Republicans, but I was curious if there is anything about Hillary specifically that makes her appealing, as opposed to just being the democrat candidate and therefore automatically a better choice than virtually any Republican.

 

[PlayALLtheGames]

Same shit we've heard a million times over. Global jihadists, world is better when America's army is huge, raising minimum wage closes businesses, etc.

All the while trying to convince people that the country is worse off than it was in 2008.

And Fiorina's chest-thumping about foreign policy, what the fuck was that? I don't think any world leaders would take that stupid bitch seriously.

 

[Manmademan]

I remembered hearing this on NPR:



http://www.npr.org/2015/04/13/399414358/after-years-of-gop-support-cuban-americans-become-more-democratic

That's just florida cubans, who have traditionally leaned pretty republican and are less sensitive to immigration issues than other hispanics. Cubans after all get automatic citizenship as soon as they land here. Mexicans not so much. Across non cuban hispanics the GOP has abysmal approval rates- which is odd since GWB won a big chunk of that demographic in 2000. They took all that goodwill and pissed on it to placate racists.

Oh, I understand why Hispanic (and really any minority) voters aren't fans of Republicans, but I was curious if there is anything about Hillary specifically that makes her appealing, as opposed to just being the democrat candidate and therefore automatically a better choice than virtually any Republican.

it's mostly this, really.

 

[Moofers]

Made a summary of the debate - 2.5 hours edited down to about 22 minutes: https://youtu.be/H34EzVSQwFw

Thank you. This is exactly what I was looking for today.

What a bunch of clowns. It kills me to sit and hear Ted Cruz say Washington is so corrupt when he's exactly the kind of problem he's talking about. "There are more words in the IRS code than in the bible!"

DERRRRR!!!!!!!

Fucking asshole. That kind of shit drives me wild.

 

[Modest Mauser]

Is there a link to the full debate?

 

[Into]

Oh, I understand why Hispanic (and really any minority) voters aren't fans of Republicans, but I was curious if there is anything about Hillary specifically that makes her appealing, as opposed to just being the democrat candidate and therefore automatically a better choice than virtually any Republican.

There isent anything special about her for minorities, which is why i think democrats are slightly nervous that the Hispanic and especially black vote wont turn up in any great numbers, in addition to young voters who tend to support the left but rarely show up. After electing Obama twice, i think many of these people have gotten their wish and saw no tangible change or improvement in their lives. What makes Hillary more likely than Barack to help them? Why is she even a equal to Obama, let alone better? How is Hillary a step up from him? I just do not see it.

Its going to take some massive slip up and controversy coming from a republican candidate to get those groups really fired up for Hillary. Women will however turn up, they are a majority, and that is her main strength.

I enjoyed the debate. Trump might be the most charismatic and bombastic of the bunch but Cruz is the master of that stage. Regardless if you agree or disagree with him, he takes that platform and commands it perfectly.

 

[Ovid]

Oh, I understand why Hispanic (and really any minority) voters aren't fans of Republicans, but I was curious if there is anything about Hillary specifically that makes her appealing, as opposed to just being the democrat candidate and therefore automatically a better choice than virtually any Republican.

Hillary is the closest thing to presidential we have out of ALL the candidates.

She has the best resume and the most experience.

I'm tired of establishment candidates but I believe she's the best political representative we have right now.

 

[JinjoUnchained]

Knock knock?
Who's there?
The interrupting cow?
The interrupting cow wh...
ZERO BASED BUDGETING!!!!!!!

 

[Moofers]

Hillary is the closest thing to presidential we have out of ALL the candidates.

She has the best resume and the most experience.

I'm tired of establishment candidates but I believe she's the best political representative we have right now.

She's business as usual. She has changed her stance or dragged her feet on important issues like Keystone XL, Trans Pacific Partnership, and Marraige Equality.

Bernie Sanders has been working in the system as an independent for decades. He's not known for sticking his finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing. He's been on the moral high ground. He has introduced many bills and proposals that would help the environment, the middle class, the working poor, veterans, and the elderly. He was fighting for Net Neutrality years ago when other candidates didn't even know what it was. He has not taken any money from millionaires, billionaires, or Super PACs for his campaign.

I believe HE'S the best political representative we have right now.

 

[Dude Abides]

Is there a specific reason Hillary is very popular among hispanic voters? It's not shocking or anything, it's just a specific candidate/demographic relationship that I am fairly ignorant about.

Hillary has a long and deep history with Latino activists and leaders. Latinos preferred her over Obama 2-1 in 2008.

 

[Pop-O-Matic]

How long before Jeb pulls out of the race? He's a complete and utter disaster.

I got a bad feeling we're going to see Jeb at the kids' table before he drops...

 

[djplaeskool]

There isent anything special about her for minorities, which is why i think democrats are slightly nervous that the Hispanic and especially black vote wont turn up in any great numbers, in addition to young voters who tend to support the left but rarely show up. After electing Obama twice, i think many of these people have gotten their wish and saw no tangible change or improvement in their lives. What makes Hillary more likely than Barack to help them? Why is she even a equal to Obama, let alone better? How is Hillary a step up from him? I just do not see it.

Hillary has a history of working with and supporting Hispanic communities, leaders, and activists going back to the 90s. They'll show up for her, big time.

 

[Davey Cakes]

She's business as usual. She has changed her stance or dragged her feet on important issues like Keystone XL, Trans Pacific Partnership, and Marraige Equality.

Bernie Sanders has been working in the system as an independent for decades. He's not known for sticking his finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing. He's been on the moral high ground. He has introduced many bills and proposals that would help the environment, the middle class, the working poor, veterans, and the elderly. He was fighting for Net Neutrality years ago when other candidates didn't even know what it was. He has not taken any money from millionaires, billionaires, or Super PACs for his campaign.

I believe HE'S the best political representative we have right now.

I agree, which is why I'm a Bernie supporter even though I align with him and Hillary very closely.

Bernie represents what I want out of a political leader. Someone who's taken progressive stances, with initiative, and has stood his ground.

His ideology and policies align with mine, sure, but his earnestness is a true selling point.

It's a shame that people not only find him unelectable, but that they fear the mere idea of socialism so much that they would rather vote in a Republican than a person who probably represents their REAL interests as opposed to their IDEAL interests.

 

[HylianTom]

Hillary has a history of working with and supporting Hispanic communities, leaders, and activists going back to the 90s. They'll show up for her, big time.

I'm betting that Hispanic turnout will be pretty close to or maybe even a bit higher than 2012, both due to voters wanting to punish the GOP and due to Hillary drawing them out to the polls. They'll be both pushed and pulled.

Meanwhile, I'm betting that Obama will target key districts in key states to drive up African American turnout. AA turnout doesn't need to be up nationwide - just in a very specific set of locations where margins make the difference in state-by-state vote tallies. He'd pay frequent visits to Cleveland, Denver, Richmond, Detroit, etc.

...

On Jeb, I'm wondering where his polling floor is. If it's high enough (mid-single digits?), he might not ever have to worry about facing Bobby Jindal. He might have a small sliver of built-in loyalty from GOP voters that'll prevent him from going that low.

 

[Joe Shlabotnik]

I got a bad feeling we're going to see Jeb at the kids' table before he drops...

He'll drop out if it doesn't look like he's making a debate cut.

 

[Manmademan]

Knock knock?
Who's there?
The interrupting cow?
The interrupting cow wh...
ZERO BASED BUDGETING!!!!!!!

this is actually pretty funny, though possibly sexist

He'll drop out if it doesn't look like he's making a debate cut.

Jeb!'s funding is heavily, heavily dependent on a relatively small number of wealthy donors and bundlers. moreso than anyone else in the race by a lot. If his support goes any lower they'll simply move to Rubio and end his campaign for him.

He's not set up to try and run a campaign on small donations or personal wealth.

 

[Revolver]

I got a bad feeling we're going to see Jeb at the kids' table before he drops...

I think he'll quit before that happens. I just can't get over how awful his campaign has been.

 

[JinjoUnchained]

this is actually pretty funny, though possibly sexist

Thanks, to be clear the joke had nothing to do with physical appearance, but merely taking the exact wording of an old joke and switching out the punchline. I don't think it would it would work if you switched it to "interrupting debater" or "interrupting much maligned former CEO".

 

[gutter_trash]

How long before Jeb pulls out of the race? He's a complete and utter disaster.

he is gonna go all the way and try to outspend his opponents overtime thinking that time is on his side

*question, why does Jeb turn his head left and right constantly when he speaks? he is like a horizontal bobble head

 

[Crimson_Fate]

So you want more liberal judges and you seem somewhat reasonable here so you think a Republican can dismantle ACA via executive order? It would still have to go through Congress, and the courts have already ruled that ACA was constitutional.

Executive Orders are always smaller changes to how laws are implemented, something as embedded as ACA can't be signed away by the President when he enters office.

The only thing the President can do day one is most anything dealing with the military.

This administration has already demonstrated that it can legally delay implementation of rules or wave fines for the ACA so a republican president will have no problems telling business that they do not need to comply and the there will be no fines or prosecution for not signing up .

The pool will then contain nothing but high risk groups and the rates will skyrocket and it will implode on its own so there is plenty that can be done.

 

[PlayALLtheGames]

Trump on deporting 11 million people: "WE HAVE NO CHOICE. WE HAVE NO CHOICE."

Yeah, we do.

 

[Agent_Carnage]

Same old..Same old false rhetoric.

Raising Min Wage to a living wage loses job,We need big bad Military,Need to cut spending,Obama is boogyman in the closet...

I wish they say new crap but this is the only shit they can say.

 

[Whom_Gods_Annoy]

Same shit we've heard a million times over. Global jihadists, world is better when America's army is huge, raising minimum wage closes businesses, etc.

All the while trying to convince people that the country is worse off than it was in 2008.

And Fiorina's chest-thumping about foreign policy, what the fuck was that? I don't think any world leaders would take that stupid bitch seriously.

Classy.

 

[Apathy]

I haven't read through the thread, but wanted to ask if they're was a place to watch the whole debate in its entirety?

 

[Manmademan]

I haven't read through the thread, but wanted to ask if they're was a place to watch the whole debate in its entirety?

Sure. Fox Business, yesterday at 9.

 

[PlayALLtheGames]

Classy.

She deserves nothing less. I did not care about her until I heard her speak last night on what she'd do militarily if she were President; escalating tensions for no reason, sending more Americans to die in the Middle East, and all in the name of looking tough. My description was perfect.

 

[Kibbles]

Thank you. This is exactly what I was looking for today.

What a bunch of clowns. It kills me to sit and hear Ted Cruz say Washington is so corrupt when he's exactly the kind of problem he's talking about. "There are more words in the IRS code than in the bible!"

DERRRRR!!!!!!!

Fucking asshole. That kind of shit drives me wild.

"And not one of them is as good" lol dude sounded like Colbert.

 

[Makai]

wrong.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2015/10/26/jeb-bush-outspent-gop-rivals-chief-among-them-donald-trump/MTsDstkXYgYcXaq29MLQAN/story.html#comments

My article is more recent than yours BTW. and breaks down campaign spending specifically by early voting states- minus television advertising.

Trump is spending far, far more money on infrastructure and ground game than everyone else.

Ben too. #RealCandidate

 

[Veritigo_X]

I like how Carson always seems overjoyed when people laugh at his jokes. I've noticed it before, but it really stood out at this debate.

 

[Whom_Gods_Annoy]

She deserves nothing less. I did not care about her until I heard her speak last night on what she'd do militarily if she were President; escalating tensions for no reason, sending more Americans to die in the Middle East, and all in the name of looking tough. My description was perfect.

Beside the point. Nobody liked it when someone called Hillary that in the Bernie v Clinton thread that went to shit, still uncalled for and demeans your argument now.

 

[Hexa]

Your early articles indicate that trump spent 1.9 million of his own money in the spring quarter before leaning more on donations in the most recent quarter. but I admit we simply don't know the extent to which he is self funding, only that he has the ability to do so.

As for the early state strategy, that article glosses over that Trump is doing the same thing elsewhere in states like Florida and Virginia. He's the only candidate that has gone through the (extremely frustrating) process of getting himself on the VA ballot so far- or at least that was the case a week or two back.

As i mentioned to another poster, momentum is absolutely a thing in the primaries. winning several in a row can not only make you inevitable, it can knock out fundraising and volunteering for everyone else that doesn't. Since the 1970s there have only been two candidates that managed to win their nomination without taking Iowa or New Hampshire, and none within the last twenty years.

Trump pretty much has new hampshire, barring something crazy happening. if he takes Iowa along with it, it's lights out for the rest of the field.

He spent $1.9 mil of his own money, but he got $3.9 mil from small donations. He definitely would spend a lot of his own money if necessary, as hes seemed perfectly fine with burning money for fame and brand promotion before for smaller things, so he definitely would for something like becoming President, or even just the Republican nominee. I don't think he's really had to yet though. Considering he's Trump though, I half think he may just run his campaign on debt as much as possible, and then have the campaign declare bankruptcy after its all over. xD
The source you gave is based on the last FEC filing as was my source, which is the last major credible source of information on how finances are going. If you have any better info from other sources that would be awesome as we won't be getting another FEC until Jan 31st I believe.
So it does seem like he may be spending more than he was before, but I don't think we have hard enough numbers to state that he's outspending all the other campaigns when the last definitive data we have suggested the opposite.
Also, I absolutely acknowledge that Iowa and New Hampshire as well as Nevada and South Carolina are super important. Focusing heavily on them and then riding that wave to an absolute victory at super Tuesday is a strong strategy. It's just one that hasn't been done before to the extent Trump seems to be based on his earlier numbers. Its pretty much a moneyball approach to the primary which I was remarking fits Trump perfectly.

 

[Revolver]

It looks like last night's debate was the lowest rated one yet. Though it was a big number for FBN it appears the ratings are trending downwards for the debates.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/tv-ratings-gop-debate-round-839187