he headlines about Donald Trump hitting new highs in national polls are tremendously deceptive, as they only measure his support among self-declared Republican primary voters, a small subset of the nation as a whole.
For example, in the recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, Trump was the first choice of 27 percent of the Republican voters who responded. Given the weighted samples in this poll (38 percent identify as Republican or leaning Republican) this translates into Trump capturing the support of about 11 percent of American voters in total.
In the same poll, 37 percent of Democratic voters supported Democratic contender Bernie Sanders. Given the weighted samples (43 percent identify as Democrat or leaning Democrat) that translates into roughly 16 percent of all American voters.
Additionally, in a recent Quinnipiac poll, Sanders beat Trump in a head-to-head matchup — by an even larger margin than Hillary Clinton did.
Media is cooking Trump slowly but surely into the narrative, even though he's burning them too every step of the way. If faced off against Clinton, he will win.
With the exceptions of Truman, LBJ, Ford and George H.W all four Vice-Presidents who ascended because their presidents died, resigned, or completed their two terms. We have had Democrats and Republicans switch off every election cycle since Herbert Hoover.
The press knows this and caters to the more likely candidate to win the nomination. I want Bernie to win, but he's not garnering enough press coverage to gain attention.
Well, since we're still in the early stage of the elections and we haven't had any caucuses yet I do suppose insanity from any side is to be expected. Trump is playing that card well.
Though as an interesting side-note Trump fell out of first in Iowa and Ted Cruz is leading there (http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/14/politics/donald-trump-polls-new-hampshire-iowa/)
But this polls aren't nearly as important as the final one to pick the true candidate and then the president. So we're still playing guessing games with numbers.
The other thing too is that I believe Hillary is supposed to be the true-successor to Obama. And on that there's no real purpose to cover a field who is supposed to have a political heir to the Democrat-controlled White House.
The media ignores sanders because they are told to. He exists to keep the moderate left happy and make sure they stay on the democrat's side, but it's clear he is going to dip out and tell his followers to vote for hillary when it's time for serious election campaigning. He also gets to act as a fall guy as he continues to make impossible promises to garner support, with him leaving the race towards the end, the democrats can keep his voters but not be held accountable to his promises.
How do we know this? Because hillary dipped out of the 2008 election under the pretense that it would be her turn next.
Gonna flip a coin honestly
There are no "good" choices this time around. Every last one is literal shit of the highest degree
That being said if Trump won the amount of lulz would be unprecedented so if America is to burn I would have it burn in the most hilarious fashion possible
>No one on capitol hill takes him seriously
Maybe in the beginning, but now they're becoming concerned. They're starting to rely on the GOP to make sure that he won't win.
>even if he does win he will still have 0 respect
Dead wrong. Trump will force respect, and the fact that he won't be controlled by anyone will scare everyone in congress shitless.
If the media truly is ignoring Bernie's prominence; then it would illustrate clearly the deception baked in to the democrats platform. The establishment is fully behind Hillary and is pulling all the strings in the media. The dems are doing whatever they can to fly under the radar to prevent an insurgent candidate from gaining any traction. Much less debates and the ones they do have are on the weekend.
The media attacks Bernie 'softly' by saying that he has a following but it won't be significant in the long run, or that his grass roots will fall behind Hillary in the end.
Bernie supporters will be on suicide watch after the early primaries, when dems realize they need the Clinton name to have any chance against Trump, which of course, won't matter.
Just like black lives
The media is fucking terrified of the coming Trumpenreich. The Teflon Don is basically invincible, Sanders does nothing but push the Overton window a tiny bit. He's a weak bitch, that's why no one cares about him
>and the fact that he won't be controlled by anyone
Do people seriously believe this? Is this just unfamiliarity with how politics works or do people really think Trump's going to be some kind of Messiah who will change the way politics work? The sheer lack of self-awareness is shocking. Trump is pandering even more than Sanders, he's just doing it for a different audience with the side effect that he doesn't need to spend a penny on advertisement if he doesn't want to because the media gives him unlimited free press already from all the O U T R A G E O U S shit he does on TV.
Hillary is literally the worst candidate for president that I can think of from the last 3-4 decades.
Anyone with a pulse would make a better commander in chief than her.
Ryan just got done selling out his entire party on the latest spending bill. How the shit do you equate him with Rand in any meaningful way?
Also, am I the only one that doesn't understand Bernie voters in any way? He's basically got the same platform as Trump, only he takes an institutional approach while Trump takes a free market approach. You'd think there would be an obvious overlap.
Actually no, I can't think of a single person in the history of the United States who's a worst candidate for president than Hillary Clinton.
Has anyone else ever been caught publicly in lie after lie after lie after lie, with a total and obvious disregard for not only their base, but the American people like Hillary Clinton?
Plus, she's a woman.
I'd pick even that fat sack Chris Christie over her.
>Hillary is literally the worst candidate for president that I can think of from the last 3-4 decades.
Lol. Worse than GWB? Carter? Goldwater? Yeah, ok...
>Ryan just got done selling out his entire party on the latest spending bill. How the shit do you equate him with Rand in any meaningful way?
They understand the importance of compromise in running an efficient, functional legislature. They're statesmen first. I won't go as far as to say they're above all the petty bullshit that goes on in Washington, but they're one of the few politicians that seem to care about more than polls or lobbyist interests. I don't even agree with their politics, but I respect them.
>Has anyone else ever been caught publicly in lie after lie after lie after lie, with a total and obvious disregard for not only their base, but the American people like Hillary Clinton?
She's a career politician. Why does this surprise anyone? That's part of the job. Literally everyone in politics is a liar by trade. What matters at the end of the day is whether those lies result in productive policy or not.
Yes, worse than all those people combined, and you can't just handwave her incessant lying away because she's a career politician, what the fuck is wrong with you?
Almost every single day she's telling some new, bold faced lie, and getting caught, and nobody seems to care because she lies so often and so outrageously that it's just another day that ends in Y with her. She would make both LBJ and Nixon blush at this rate.
How could you ever in your life vote for someone like that, especially if you support a guy like Sanders, who, if anything, at least comes across as a little honest.
Hang your head in shame, you monstrously stupid person.
Also, our government wasn't built to accommodate compromise or any sense of functionality, it was built so that basically nothing could ever get done, as the founders hated government, and devised endless ways to cockblock anyone from pushing their garbage legislation through and keeping it in place. The fact that anyone in their right minds thinks that "making government work", or "compromise", is in any way better than absolutely nothing happened is just insane, especially with how horribly corrupt our currently establishment is.
What's worse is that I don't think the bill that passed could have been any worse with Democrats running both houses, and no doubt the Republican base, which was already tying together some nooses for their party bosses, will only further rebel and push in someone Like Trump or Cruz, most likely Trump thanks to this bill, to ruin everyone's day, so that little bit of "compromise" that claimed victory over the spending battle most very likely just cost them the war, so do enjoy the next 8-9 years of political chaos and turmoil as a result.
Yes, worse than all those people combined, and you can't just handwave her incessant lying away because she's a career politician
But I can because it's literally a non issue for me. All I care about is her platform, which I'm lukewarm about. I don't expect much from her beyond being competent.
>what the fuck is wrong with you?
I just see the game for what it is. Everyone in politics is a fucking liar, whether you like them or not.
>How could you ever in your life vote for someone like that, especially if you support a guy like Sanders, who, if anything, at least comes across as a little honest.
Because she's the only other viable candidate with an agreeable platform. That's literally it. There's absolutely no one on the GOP that you can say is any better with a straight face. You'd have to be delusional.
>Also, our government wasn't built to accommodate compromise or any sense of functionality, it was built so that basically nothing could ever get done
This is a myth that's been taken to extremes thanks to partisan gamesmanship. Congress is so divided right now that it's actually on the verge of becoming a threat to national security. We were a hair away from defaulting on our debt at one point. That's insanity.
>What's worse is that I don't think the bill that passed could have been any worse with Democrats running both houses, and no doubt the Republican base, which was already tying together some nooses for their party bosses, will only further rebel and push in someone Like Trump or Cruz, most likely Trump thanks to this bill, to ruin everyone's day, so that little bit of "compromise" that claimed victory over the spending battle most very likely just cost them the war, so do enjoy the next 8-9 years of political chaos and turmoil as a result.
It's really only a problem for the GOP... who hold the majority in both houses. The chaos in that party has inadvertently leveled more power to the Dems. So, things are sort of leveled out at the moment.
>"Someone lying to my face day in and day out is a non-issue to me"
- Hillary 2016 voters
Thanks, I'll treasure this one. I'm sure her platform won't change in the slightest once she weasels her way into office either, because he's the paragon of honesty that will commit to her proposals. Oh wait, the opposite of that.
>The chaos in that party has inadvertently leveled more power to the Dems
Actually, it's the opposite of this. Thanks to the domino effect of the Republican base casting off their establishment, the likely result will be a massive shakeup of the future of the Republican platform, and if a guy like Trump makes it in, who in reality is a moderate that voices protectionist policies for middle and lower America, then they stand a healthy chance at cannibalizing the Democrat base, as the Dem establishment basically gave up any pretenses of care for their traditional blue collar voters in favor of minority rights, and since said minorities have only done WORSE under Democrat policies, they stand to lose even that as well.
I'm not a Democrat, so I don't care, but if you've got a boner for the party then you should be absolutely horrified at the prospect of Trump being sent in to challenge Hillary after what's happened the past few weeks, because he can realistically crush her with her own base so badly that both parties would fracture, and Republicans will absorb the lion's share of the fragments for the foreseeable future.
The party of change will be the party of victory, and Hillary Clinton is the antithesis of change.
>he actually thinks anyone else in Washington lies any more or less than Hillary does
She's just been in the game so long that she's made a shit ton of enemies.
I'm not even a Hillary supporter. I'm just making the argument that she's the next best candidate after Bernie by default of having more than two brain cells to rub together.
You don't have to pick a politician poison this time around, that's kind of the point here.
Pointing to Hillary as another smelly piece of shit on the manure pile doesn't work when you have Donald Trump flying over the open sewage of politics in his clean white helicopter calling a piece of shit a piece of shit, so the defense of "B-but everyone in politics is shit!", doesn't work when you can now choose someone that isn't a part of the shitty political system.
So, really, if you can rub two brain cells together, you can see that you now have the wonderful option of not voting for a heaping sack of leaking, wet garbage, and just vote for the garbageman who's promised to take out the trash.
Bernie isn't going to win the Dem nomination though. That's the problem.
Hillary would mop the floor with Trump. Literally no one in Hillary's base overlaps with Trump's. Trump is actually just doing an extreme version of Romney's doomed campaign. He's reaching out to a voter base that's not relevant anymore thanks to demographics.
The fact is that, barring a colossal fuckup, Hillary (or anyone facing off against Trump) would drown him in votes from women, youth and minorities just like Obama managed to pull off in 2012 despite mediocre approval ratings.
>Literally no one in Hillary's base overlaps with Trump's
Anon please, don't speak if you know not what you speak of.
The entire foundation of the Democrat voting base are blue collar workers, who have been getting completely screwed by the policies of the last 50 years, as well as blacks who've fared the same, and Trump's policies are directed towards those people 100%.
It's fine if you want to remain in ignorance until it's too late to deny reality, which has worked wonderfully for Trump, just as we've been doing these last 6 months, but at least try and define the actual human beings that get these parties elected and who represents their interests this time around.
Having a platform that consists of "I'm a woman!", and "Stay the course", when the country is falling into a sinkhole it can possibly never escape from, isn't going to bode well for Hillary, especially when Trump has 40ish years of failure, lies, and skeletons to happily pick through for the next 10 months to destroy Hillary from the ground up.
Please use your brain.
>who in reality is a moderate that voices protectionist policies for middle and lower America
Lolololol...no. He wants to cut taxes on high income earners even more while AT THE SAME TIME increasing spending on the military and and border control. He's also not a fan of social safety net programs or the minimum wage. That plus his other misfounded ideas about repealing NAFTA and forcing a trade war with China while the dollar is stronger is just a colossal economic disaster waiting to happen.
And that's not even touching on the lunacy of his foreign policy.
>Thanks to the domino effect of the Republican base casting off their establishment, the likely result will be a massive shakeup of the future of the Republican platform
No. If Trump has forced the establishment to adjust, it's trending even further right. I don't know how the GOP will continue as a single party the way things are going. There's a massive rift between fiscal and social conservatives that I don't believe can be easily resolved.
Trump's tax policy proposes single people earning less than $25,000, and joint filers earning less than $50,000 pay ZERO (0) taxes.
>Increase spending on the military
No, he wants to repurpose the existing military budget to benefit domestic and veteran affairs, and get out of the middle east. I'm not going to address border security because that's the most basic function of a government and if you're somehow against this then you're likely 12 years old or Mexican.
Why do you people even mash your fingers on the keyboard if you don't know what you're talking about.
Yes anon, blue collar workers are still the single largest group in the Democrat base, and if you lose that 30-40% then you lose the election.
You can bank off this minority coalition all you want, but it's not made of anything aside from racial grievances and pandering that don't mean anything when people don't have jobs.
Also, I know exactly 2 women out of maybe 100 that don't put on a nasty face when I talk about Hillary.
It's over, enjoy the slow ride to revelation as reality sinks in over the next year.
Americans haven't voted according to their economic interests in decades. Otherwise, the South would still be solid Democrat. Americans have very little sense of class unity, and what was left of it went out the window with the decline of unions.
What holds both parties' bases together is mostly social issues, not economics. That's why Trump is screaming about "building a wall" and "instituting the death penalty for cop killers."
The only candidate to really double down on economics and healthcare in the primaries is Bernie, and he's having a lot of trouble making inroads with minorities because of this, but it's also why he has strong support among over educated millennials.
Trump's tax policy is all over the damn place. His policy on his official site
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/tax-reform are admittedly ok, but he has a long track record of saying all kinds of wacky stuff that makes me hesitate to take him seriously
At best, it's unrealistically lofty. At worst, it's disastrous tripe.
>No, he wants to repurpose the existing military budget to benefit domestic and veteran affairs, and get out of the middle east
Again, admirable at face value, but wonky and unrealistic at face value. Also, how does he plan to get us out of the sandbox while "killing ISIS families" like he promised?
I don't have a problem with border control. But "build a wall" and mass deportations are not feasible or productive solutions to illegal immigration.
>What holds both parties' bases together is mostly social issues, not economics
This is the outlook that will guarantee a loss in 2016 when you have the most credible economic candidate going in guns blazing with economic issues on full blast.
You can make fun about the wall all you want, but the thing that's killing wages and lower/middle class jobs in this country is immigration, so the people with a brain that actually care about the future of any of the non-elite classes will gravitate to that platform because it's near guaranteed effective, so why take a position that isn't as effective as a wall if you want to fix it?
Trump's tax policy is exactly what it is.
As far as the desert shitholes are concerned, he's been very vocal about letting Russia and the other toilets in that region take care of it. Why should we bother when we can make friends that will? Oh no the Russians, ooh scary! Who cares, let them blow ISIS to bits and take responsibility for that shitty region. Maybe Israel will do it's own dirty work for once too.
And yes, the absolute end of border security that is a wall along with enforced deportation is literally the most effective answer to illegal immigration. As it is congress passed a bill to build a border fence, but then defunded it later on, not even making it into the $1.1 TRILLION omnibus bill.
>credible on economics
>this is what people actually believe
Do you have any idea how many business Trump has bankrupted and swindled? He wouldn't anywhere today without his daddy's money and an army of lawyers.
>thinks a literal wall is an actual answer to illegal immigration, much less something that's affordable
>thinks illegal immigrants are the biggest reason middle class wages have been stagnant for the last 30 years, even when adjusted for inflation
>actually thinks Trump supporters even understand any of this and they're not just following dogwhistle cues that pander to their racist delusions
>somehow this isn't a major "social" issue
Tip top lel.
As for "forced deportation"... how the hell do you expect to track down millions of people, detain them and ship them home? The cost alone makes it totally unfeasible. That's not even considering the logistics of such a task or the political will. Total conservative wet dream, just like repealing Obamacare or the Russians invading.
>letting Russia handle the sandbox
Even if they could (spoiler: they can't). That would run counter to a major cornerstone of post-WWII American foreign interests and responsibilities. Basically, it's dumb and never going to happen unless our global hegemony dissolves.
>Israel doing anything
Never going to happen, sorry. Wouldn't even be a good idea if they did. A two state solution definitely needs to happen eventually though. I'll give you that.
>credibly on anything
>this is what people actually believe
Do you have any idea how many people has killed and/or lied to? She wouldn't be anywhere today without her husband's influence and army of brainwashed supporters.
Don't make this a pissing contest when you have the picture of public corruption and lies in your corner.
>The cost alone makes it totally unfeasible
I am of not understanding this, especially when keeping them here costs us hundreds of billions of dollars every year.
Why not just eat the one time cost of deportation and media crocodile tears and then benefit for the rest of forever?
You don't even need to do anything too special. Just deport the criminals, and make the rest of the illegals impossible to employ thanks to e-verify or whatever. They'll fuck off by themselves, and the ones that don't will have trumped up charges thrown at them so we can deport them without a hassle. Who cares, they're not Americans, piss off back to China, Mexico and the Latin America hellholes forever.
I also don't give a single shit about the middle east, and would be very happy if they collapsed into endless warfare to brutalize each other for centuries to come.
Also also, what's your position here? Are we supposed to keep spending trillions of dollars in foreign wars to retain our post WW2 global superpower status at the expense of our own domestic interests and budget? How many mountains of taxes and treasure do we need to piss down the hole overseas that could actually be used here at home?
Fuck the world, I don't give a shit about anyone outside our borders. Let them go figure out their own mess so we can reestablish the endless structural failures at home.
Also also also, I'm not indicating that immigration is the SOLE issue of lower domestic wages, but if you look at the Trump platform it addresses everything that's killing wages, not just immigration. It's a package deal, and I would assume that Democrats of all people would be 2000% on board, but I guess our pet Muslims and illegals are more important than the American worker, so #YOLO fuck this country, we gotta save the world.
I said from the beginning, I don't support her and I think she's a liar. But I don't think that makes her unique. If you seriously think Trump has more qualifications to be president than someone who's been crafting high level government policy for over 20 years and was living in the white house before even doing that, then you're daft.
Illegal immigrants save companies billions of dollars every year. Why do you think there's only token opposition from the government for being here in the first place?
You're also being asinine in you assessment of immigrants being a drain on society. If you really think they don't pay taxes or just collect welfare checks all day, then we don't have anything to talk about.
A realistic approach to immigration is going to have involve some degree of amnesty for those who are here already, but most of the heavy lifting is going to have to come from Mexico's end. The economic situation there, the cartels and government corruption are just not conducive factors for investment and job growth.
Immigrants are a direct drain on society, who take in more than they receive in taxes, and are responsible for our shitty new healthcare laws, yes, this is my position.
Illegals flooding in pay sales tax, super duper, and then we have to cover their healthcare when they stroll into the ER, delivering their babies, educating their children, maintaining the public infrastructure they use, aka all of it, and enduring the drugs and crime they bring that otherwise would not exist if they couldn't come in freely. So yes, they cost the taxpayer and citizenry massively in terms of treasure, security, and lives, not to mention their impact on employment, especially with 90+ MILLION people not working, but it's okay because they gave up, so it's only 5% unemployment :^^^^^^))
A realistic approach to immigration is to kick them to the curb and shut the gate, because the country is up shit's creek with no sign of recovery for anyone making less than 250k a year, which is basically everybody.
And yes, I real life seriously think Trump is more qualified than any single person running to be President. Hillary has done NOTHING but capitulate to whoever pays her the most while pandering to her base with lip service for votes based on garbage that doesn't even exist like "the war on women".
If Donald Trump can manage a real estate, media, and now political empire that spans billions of dollars, tens of thousands of employees, and millions of supporters, then he's doing everything right. PLUS, being President comes down to decision making and delegation, and since Trump isn't paid off by Goldman Sachs or Time Warner, he can staff his agencies with talented people that he doesn't owe favors to delete to, as well as make clear decisions as is reflected in his decades of personal success.
Please don't tell me the liar incarnate that is Hillary Clinton has any sort of credibility to be President of anything outside a dog pound.
>Immigrants are a direct drain on society, who take in more than they receive in taxes, and are responsible for our shitty new healthcare laws, yes, this is my position.
Except, you're wrong. First quote summarizes it neatly, but feel free to read more.
From a Congressional report:
>As part of a larger study on migration, the Center for Comparative Immigration Studies at the University of California at San Diego conducted a survey of unauthorized
immigrants and found that, in 2006, 75 percent
had taxes withheld from their paychecks, filed taxreturns, or both.27
If anyone is leaching off society, it's business interests promoting corporate welfare, pushing down middle class wages and lowering tax rates for "job creators" while funneling money offshore and doing everything they can to kill even minimal federal healthcare reform. The US government is basically an insurance company with an army these days. Illegals are a issue, but they're not as big of a problem as many want you to believe. It's just a classic smokescreen.
>Another negative impact is on government expenditures. Since undocumented workers generally don't pay income taxes but do use schools and other government services, they are seen as a drain on government spending.
>There are places in the United States where illegal immigration has big effects (both positive and negative). But economists generally believe that when averaged over the whole economy, the effect is a small net positive. Harvard's George Borjas says the average American's wealth is increased by less than 1 percent because of illegal immigration.
Oy vey, thank goodness I'm 1% wealthier thanks to Paco and his 59 cousins running drugs over the border.
Libfag bs aside trump has some respectable moderate ideas but his mind is twisted by to many fucking bonsly hair treatments. Bernies ideas would only ever work on the state level, and Hillary is going through menopause. Every choice this year is top tier shit, voters job next year is damage control. I'm going with Bernie unless his running mate is pure shit.
>implying he might win the nomination
Do you realize he won't win the nomination? Fucking Cruz is doing the most Machiavellian political movement right now. He supports Trump and avoids being ravaged by him, and at the same time he is working the big numbers of delegates. He cares little about the caucuses and is focusing on the states with the most delegates so he overwhelms his opponents. Trump is a chump and has no chance.
>Trump is actually just doing an extreme version of Romney's doomed campaign. He's reaching out to a voter base that's not relevant anymore thanks to demographics.
It seems like there's a popular belief, particularly in the GOP, that our values ought to align with the values typical of white, middle-class, religious men. That such values are central to the American experience, and therefore have a permanent place in our government
Meanwhile, the percentage of people who directly belong to that demographic has decreased, along with its influence on society. Occasions arise where a majority no longer exists, and those core values must be compromised going forward. That presents a dissonance: values that were thought to be inalienable are suddenly endangered.
The only recourse is to seek out a champion who can convince others that those values are worth preserving.
Whether that champion is noble or quixotic depends on how fundamentally strong you believe those core values to be.
Sanders, partly because I support a higher portion of his policies than other candidates (not 100%, mind you, but more than all the other candidates), and partly because I can actually predict what he's going to do. Trump follows whatever will whip up the most outrage, Clinton says whatever the analysts say is the safest thing to say politically and does whatever will push her political career, and everyone else is just simply too dull to even comment on.