The New American Politics thread

[ernie]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Lewandowski was allegedly fired because the Trump kids said so, and he was escorted out of Trump Plaza. Then one of Trump's state directors took a shot at Lewandowski after he was fired, and the state director has promptly resigned as well. He sure does hire the best people after all...

Yep. Lewandowski didn't get along with Ivanka's husband who wants a bigger role in the campaign. Now Lewandowski is a jerk but so is everyone else in the campaign it seems. The apples don't fall from the tree it seems.

Trump starts the summer off with a mere $1.3 mil in the bank compared to $42 mil for Clinton. He won't self fund the campaign. Heck even when he said he was completely self funded 30% was coming from donations.

Will donors eventually give to gain influence? I think they will but as pointed out it will be for the Congress and Senate races. That is where they will have the influence. Trump I don't think can be influenced. He's, well, insane or just a massive egomaniac that he won't listen to anybody. Well except his daughter it seems.

[Senator Clay Davis]

The $42 million versus $1.3 million doesn't even show how bad it is for Trump. Ted Cruz and Ben Carson both currently have more cash on hand than Trump does. Bernie was effectively out of it all May and he raised 5 times as much money as Trump. And remember May was an entire month where Trump had won the nomination process and was the presumptive nominee (that loser Romney raised $27 million in May 2012...) . To only raise $3 million....goodness. And when you factor in PACs, Hillary actually has more than $95 million and Trump has less than $3 million. It's not even about money for ads, Trump isn't going to be able to fund a fully functional staff which is a nightmare since Trump brings states that are supposed to be safe into play. He has to spend money defending Arizona and Georgia, states a GOP candidate ignored in the past because they were gimmes.

[Fuzz]

6 months later in an interview with Trump...

Donald, What happened?

What can I say? I ran out of money. You can't win these things without money. And the Party wouldn't help me. They hated how good I was. I would have won, you know. Everybody loves me. I just didn't have the money.

[ernie]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

The $42 million versus $1.3 million doesn't even show how bad it is for Trump. Ted Cruz and Ben Carson both currently have more cash on hand than Trump does. Bernie was effectively out of it all May and he raised 5 times as much money as Trump. And remember May was an entire month where Trump had won the nomination process and was the presumptive nominee (that loser Romney raised $27 million in May 2012...) . To only raise $3 million....goodness. And when you factor in PACs, Hillary actually has more than $95 million and Trump has less than $3 million. It's not even about money for ads, Trump isn't going to be able to fund a fully functional staff which is a nightmare since Trump brings states that are supposed to be safe into play. He has to spend money defending Arizona and Georgia, states a GOP candidate ignored in the past because they were gimmes.

And it's even worse if you look at the details of the linked article...at a time you would expect ramping up significantly to hit the general election campaign the Trump campaign actually cut back on spending significantly in May (30ish% drop from April). 65 people on payroll for the campaign compared to Clinton's nearly 700. Good luck bringing that many people in and getting to work lock step with one another in a short amount of time.

But hey at least the money he's spending and taking from donations is being put right back into his companies. This way he gets to minimize the loss on his personal spend and suppliment what he does lose with that sweet donation money. He's doing what everyone who isn't blind expected...propping up his own brand and nothing more.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Sad!

[Drak]

Trump: Make America Hate Again!

[photon]

Some more info on Trump's campaign money fun, he likes to spend his campaign money on his own companies.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/20-...ays-2016-06-21

There was also talk about the # of people Trump has, Clinton has more people in some states than Trump has in his whole organization.

On the Lewandowski firing, he was a "Let Trump be Trump" proponent while Manafort isn't so maybe this signals the "pivot" to being a more traditional campaign? Be interesting to see.

[the_only_turek_fan]

Originally Posted by peter12

So there will be a convention dark horse, and the GOP will still go down to a Goldwater-like defeat.

HRC is tied or leading in Georgia of all places. I believe Bill carried it in 1992 for sure, not sure about 1996.

If HRC carries the 2004 John Kerry states, takes OH, FLA, and starts peeling away states like Georgia, yeah it could be an ugly night for the GOP.

[Caged Great]

One disastrous number came out in the polling data today.

Hillary leads Trump in Florida by 8, 47 to 39.


If Hillary wins all the states that have gone to the Democrats since 2000 and wins Florida, she will have 271 votes in the electoral college.

That being the ballgame.

[GGG]

So I think if I'm Hillary my biggest fear is Trump dropping out before the convention. Until he is locked in on the ballot her facing anyone else is probably the greatest threat to her campaign.

[photon]

I was listening to one podcast and they had a guy on that had an interesting take.

He was talking about how these days they have great data about what actually does work in terms of getting votes, so campaigns can tailor their actions to their target audience much better.

He said Trump's biggest problem is that he views the election as being about getting people to like him. In the primaries this works because a large percentage of voters there can be swayed one way or another.

In the general election though it's a different story. Only a small percentage of the voters are available to bring over to your side, while the vast majority typically already are red or blue, and won't change. So the focus in the general election has become more about changing the behaviour of the people, getting the ones that already support you out to vote.

So you could put a "Vote Clinton" door hanger on every door in a city, but you might be encouraging someone who will vote Trump to go out and vote too. So instead, only put door hangers on doors where you know the voter would vote Clinton.

One example they gave is Obama's campaign buying ads on buses on specific routes that went by areas they knew were democratic, but not on routes that weren't.

But Trump still sees it as just getting people to like him.

I found it interesting.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Considering how cash poor Trump is, there's suggestions he could easily be bought off to drop out, and even he said he'd have to consider it. If the 20 biggest donors in the GOP each chipped in say $5 million each, I think Trump would very seriously consider taking the money. If you get to say 20 donors at $10 million each he's a guarantee to drop out then. And what's $10 million to guys worth high 9 or 10 figures? I'm sure they'd do it if Trump were guaranteed to leave.

From the donors perspective, they're likely to burn through that money on a losing Trump campaign no mattter what. So why not roll the dice you can bribe him to leave? If nothing else it severely limits the potential down ticket bloodbath. Plus Hillary is still very unpopular. Buy Trump off, put Rubio or Kasich in instead and they have a chance to win the White House. Swapping Trump for Ted Cruz is actually a downgrade on winning the Presidency but he probably helps downticket more than the other two.

[the_only_turek_fan]

What a wasted opportunity. The Dems are about to nominate their worst candidate since McGovern in 1972, and the GOP is going to lose in a landslide.

That is two winnable elections in a row.

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by the_only_turek_fan

What a wasted opportunity. The Dems are about to nominate their worst candidate since McGovern in 1972, and the GOP is going to lose in a landslide.

That is two winnable elections in a row.

Well every election is theoretically winnable but c'mon now. Mittens was the best they could muster against Obama's second term and a Mormon never had any chance of winning in America.

They then spent so much time grooming Rubio to literally be "their Obama" only to let him be eaten alive by a monster of their own creation. These elections were never winnable, the Republicans only deluded themselves into thinking so. If they can manage to remove the tumour that is radical Christian fundamentalism from their ranks, stop trying to drive narrative via racist subtext, and move to a more centrist platform they may have a chance next time.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by the_only_turek_fan

What a wasted opportunity. The Dems are about to nominate their worst candidate since McGovern in 1972, and the GOP is going to lose in a landslide.

That is two winnable elections in a row.

McGovern was a tremendous candidate who would've beaten Nixon if Nixon hadn't needlessly prolonged the vietnam war through the election cycle only to announce a withdrawal prior to the election.

Nixon killed hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, of people in order to beat a more popular political rival.

One of the darkest moments in American history to be sure. Widely forgotten.

[photon]

This is weird

http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-36582770

According to the court papers, Mr Sandford said he had never fired a gun before but went to a range in Las Vegas on 17 June to learn how to shoot.

At Saturday's rally at the Treasure Island Casino, he allegedly tried to grab the officer's weapon because it was in an unlocked position and therefore, he said, the easiest way to get a gun to shoot Mr Trump.

Court documents say Mr Sandford acknowledged he knew he would only be able to fire one or two rounds, and expected to be killed during an attempt on Mr Trump's life.

He told police if he had not tried to kill Mr Trump at this rally he would have tried again at a rally in Phoenix, for which he had already booked tickets, the papers say.

He told investigators he had been in the US for one and a half years and drove to Las Vegas from California specifically to kill Mr Trump, the court papers say.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

McGovern was a tremendous candidate who would've beaten Nixon if Nixon hadn't needlessly prolonged the vietnam war through the election cycle only to announce a withdrawal prior to the election.

Nixon killed hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, of people in order to beat a more popular political rival.

One of the darkest moments in American history to be sure. Widely forgotten.

I disagree. Middle America was already turning away in distaste from the excesses of the counterculture movement. By campaigning with Hollwyood flakes like Warren Beatty and allowing himself to be so strongly associated with the hippies and student radicals, McGovern showed himself to be out of step with the majority of voters.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I disagree. Middle America was already turning away in distaste from the excesses of the counterculture movement. By campaigning with Hollwyood flakes like Warren Beatty and allowing himself to be so strongly associated with the hippies and student radicals, McGovern showed himself to be out of step with the majority of voters.

Yes, exactly.

Nixon's pandering to bigots (southern strategy, slowing down desegregation etc), promising to withdraw from Vietnam prior to the 72 election (and then escalating the war further) and breaking into the DNC to leak confidential medical information to news media to be used against his opponents all helped Nixon, the second or third worst president in American history, defeat his opponent.

Like I said, it's a very dark part of American history.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Yes, exactly.

Nixon's pandering to bigots (southern strategy, slowing down desegregation etc), promising to withdraw from Vietnam prior to the 72 election (and then escalating the war further) and breaking into the DNC to leak confidential medical information to news media to be used against his opponents all helped Nixon, the second or third worst president in American history, defeat his opponent.

Like I said, it's a very dark part of American history.

Haha, care to share?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by peter12

Haha, care to share?

Andrew Jackson, George W Bush and Ronald Reagan are all contenders for the top 5 with Nixon. It's probably pick your poison from there.