US Presidential election 2016

Warbler said:
A disection of the demographic suggests that Trump is indeed breaking out of his straight jacket
His base is broadening,
Click to expand...
Indeed. Nevada was significant not onl yin themargin of victory but the demographics. Who could have foreseen Trump, a few short months ago, garnering the highest latino vote, the highest religious vote etc etc.
His appeal is demonstrably beyond the "white grievance vote"; it has a cross-over look about it into other blocs previously thought unlikely.
He will definitely give Hilary a hard run if as likely he wins the GOP nomination. She's vulnerable on so many issues, and Donald will undoubtedly take some liberal Dem voters who just detest her. Sanders would stand a better chance against him imho.
 
I still think Trump is likely to lose Texas, and I suspect he'll probably get squeezed by Rubio in Virginia too. Other than that, I think he'll get a clean sweep on Tuesday (assuming he does nothing stupid this evening).

Trump isn't actually that bright, he's pretty inarticulate too, but in a multi player debate format he can get away with this type of mud slinging simplistic language and lack of depth, as its never explored in the 30 secs candidates are allowed. He palpably struggled when he's been exposed to more probing one on one interviews that try to drill beyond the superficial sentiment and explore detail. I suspect Cruz will win tonight, but Trump wins provided nothing drastic happens

So if these are the results for Tuesday, then losing Texas narrowly to Cruz needn't be a bad thing, and if he can carry Oklahoma next door, he pretty well neutralises the whole dynamic. I'm probably of the view its good thing, albeit there's nothing that makes me think Trump's a particularly good strategist. At the moment he's playing king of the castle and just knocking down anyone who tries to get in. To my mind his whole approach to Bush was clouded by personal hate for the candidate and his family, and he was unable to separate this from what was the smarter play. In other words, he exhibited a similay neurosis to Bush's brother! A similar thing exists with Cruz, even though he's better off keeping Cruz in the contest after the southern states have been played

If he wins Texas however, there might be a chance Cruz calls it off. Winning is more of pyschological blow than anything though. The state is proportional with a 20% threshold, and winner takes all above 50%. Provided they stay around the mid 30's each, the Trump/ Cruz delegate count will look similar, and there's a possibility still that Rubio ends up scorched with nowt. That's enough for Trump. He's probably seen off Cruz at this point. It only leaves Rubio. If Rubio hasn't won a single state by Wednesday morning he's really not looking good. Rubio and Cruz are effectively locked in a game of The Prisoners Dilemma.

Rubio is basically all in on Florida on March 15th. If he fails there its probably all over. California is unlikely to rescue him. Trump is polling well enough in the north east for us to consider this home territory. I'm increasingly thinking his constant referencing of car manufacturing jobs being lost to Mexcio will deliver him Michigan ahead of Kasich, and by extension he can probably expect to pick Pennsylvania. Trumps victories here will more than negate CA

I wouldn't go so far as to say the nomination is in the bag, but he could be well over half the way by Tuesday, and could finish it on March 15th

You detect he's already starting to take aim at Hillary Clinton. The Rolling Stone article picked out what I think will be crucial right towards the end. The blue collar democrat in states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, and Iowa, Trump has also nominated Michigan and New York, but I suspect he's pushing his luck there. I think Trump will reach about 10% of these types to whom his aggressive brand of nationalism and 'lets put America first' appeals. It's the same type of Labour voters who Farage can reach

There can be little doub that we're going through a stage now where his base is broadening. Anyone who is still denial of this isn't look at how he topped out the segments in Nevada, and how he's started to open up leads across the spectrum in states as diverse as Georgia to Massacheusetts. The ceiling is rising folks. America loves a winner, and people are getting on the Trump juggernaut, and he in turn is managing to convince them that by doing so, they're becoming winners, and everyone who isn't is 'a loser'
 
Last edited:
The Trump vote is almost certainly a 'politics' protest vote. He hasn't got any policies to speak of, but his impassioned speeches are hitting raw nerve with the electorate.

The US economy is screwed up and has been for a long time, and the ordinary citizen is being hit hard. He almost doesn't have to say a thing because the masses are sick of the system and what it's brought them, so it's easy to see his appeal not being a politician.

I reckon he'll almost certainly win the ticket now and face Hilary. When he does she'll wipe the floor with him and he'll be exposed as a lightweight second hand car salesman. Evens for her is a crazy price despite her skeletons. He's got very many more. She should be long odds-on.
 
Warbler said:
I still think Trump is likely to lose Texas, and I suspect he'll probably get squeezed by Rubio in Virginia too. Other than that, I think he'll get a clean sweep on Tuesday (assuming he does nothing stupid this evening).

Trump isn't actually that bright, he's pretty inarticulate too, but in a multi player debate format he can get away with this type of mud slinging simplistic language and lack of depth, as its never explored in the 30 secs candidates are allowed. He palpably struggled when he's been exposed to more probing one on one interviews that try to drill beyond the superficial sentiment and explore detail. I suspect Cruz will win tonight, but Trump wins provided nothing drastic happens

So if these are the results for Tuesday, then losing Texas narrowly to Cruz needn't be a bad thing, and if he can carry Oklahoma next door, he pretty well neutralises the whole dynamic. I'm probably of the view its good thing, albeit there's nothing that makes me think Trump's a particularly good strategist. At the moment he's playing king of the castle and just knocking down anyone who tries to get in. To my mind his whole approach to Bush was clouded by personal hate for the candidate and his family, and he was unable to separate this from what was the smarter play. In other words, he exhibited a similay neurosis to Bush's brother! A similar thing exists with Cruz, even though he's better off keeping Cruz in the contest after the southern states have been played

If he wins Texas however, there might be a chance Cruz calls it off. Winning is more of pyschological blow than anything though. The state is proportional with a 20% threshold, and winner takes all above 50%. Provided they stay around the mid 30's each, the Trump/ Cruz delegate count will look similar, and there's a possibility still that Rubio ends up scorched with nowt. That's enough for Trump. He's probably seen off Cruz at this point. It only leaves Rubio. If Rubio hasn't won a single state by Wednesday morning he's really not looking good. Rubio and Cruz are effectively locked in a game of The Prisoners Dilemma.

Rubio is basically all in on Florida on March 15th. If he fails there its probably all over. California is unlikely to rescue him. Trump is polling well enough in the north east for us to consider this home territory. I'm increasingly thinking his constant referencing of car manufacturing jobs being lost to Mexcio will deliver him Michigan ahead of Kasich, and by extension he can probably expect to pick Pennsylvania. Trumps victories here will more than negate CA

I wouldn't go so far as to say the nomination is in the bag, but he could be well over half the way by Tuesday, and could finish it on March 15th

You detect he's already starting to take aim at Hillary Clinton. The Rolling Stone article picked out what I think will be crucial right towards the end. The blue collar democrat in states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, and Iowa, Trump has also nominated Michigan and New York, but I suspect he's pushing his luck there. I think Trump will reach about 10% of these types to whom his aggressive brand of nationalism and 'lets put America first' appeals. It's the same type of Labour voters who Farage can reach

There can be little doub that we're going through a stage now where his base is broadening. Anyone who is still denial of this isn't look at how he topped out the segments in Nevada, and how he's started to open up leads across the spectrum in states as diverse as Georgia to Massacheusetts. The ceiling is rising folks. America loves a winner, and people are getting on the Trump juggernaut, and he in turn is managing to convince them that by doing so, they're becoming winners, and everyone who isn't is 'a loser'
Click to expand...

Warbler,

A small point. Does intelligence matter? The US elected 'Dubaya' twice and his father was no rocket sciencest either.
 
Maruco said:
The Trump vote is almost certainly a 'politics' protest vote. He hasn't got any policies to speak of, but his impassioned speeches are hitting raw nerve with the electorate.

The US economy is screwed up and has been for a long time, and the ordinary citizen is being hit hard. He almost doesn't have to say a thing because the masses are sick of the system and what it's brought them, so it's easy to see his appeal not being a politician.

I reckon he'll almost certainly win the ticket now and face Hilary. When he does she'll wipe the floor with him and he'll be exposed as a lightweight second hand car salesman. Evens for her is a crazy price despite her skeletons. He's got very many more. She should be long odds-on.
Click to expand...

I agreed with the Hilary bet for ages but this is no normal election. She represents the political nepotism that people are sick of. I can see a way he wins and wins big.
 
George H was a more than capable President in many regards, and he wasn't a stupid man. George W by contrast was a retard who had his university place purchased for him, educated beyond his intelligence

The wider issue however is an unknown. Will America go for a candidate with experience and demonstrable depth over someone who surrounds himself with the material trappings of success but otherwise hasn't got a great deal of substance to him? I don't know. I'm not as confident as many of the Trump knockers though to discount him.

Trump is basically a protectionist who is going to set off trade wars all over the world so far as I can see. American's might like the idea of him cracking down on firms who hire Mexican workers, applying 45% tariffs to Chinese goods, or taxing corporations who slip over the border etc in the name of protecting their jobs, but its going to spark retaliation and see inflation rise in the US, middle America will start to realise they have less money going round

Trumps got a populist and simple message, and its falling on a receptive electorate who perhaps critically, want to believe it, or at least want to believe there's a new way
 
SlimChance said:
I agreed with the Hilary bet for ages but this is no normal election. She represents the political nepotism that people are sick of. I can see a way he wins and wins big.
Click to expand...

I've been saying that a Trump majority of 50+ is a smart bet to take for some time. That doesn't mean I'm predicting it, what it means is there is a plauisble scenrio where this pans out, and if she's odds on, a large majority for the other runner should be a price
 
Try this little tool

http://www.270towin.com/maps/2016-election-toss-up-states

I've given the western states with hispanic populations to Hillary (Colorado and Nevada) I'm inclined to give her Virginia too thinking there's enough overspill from government into the surrounding area from DC, even though its a marginal call, and if Trump is to win, he should take it. Anyway, we'd now have HRC 245 and GOP 191

I expect North Carolina to stay Republican, and so we have HRC 245 and GOP 206

Now model the rust belt of Pennsylvania and Ohio for Trump and we get him to 244. I would think he stands a good chance in Iowa too. She's never been popular there, and he didn't burn his bridges in the primary (as he's prone to doing when he doesn't get his way) and has since proven he can get evangelical voters, so he'd now take the lead on 250 plays 245

This leaves Florida, Wisconsin and New Hampshire. Florida is absolutely critical for her, but if we're betting for a price we have to award it him, as we do New Hampshire (we've already her cut her Virginia). This now means he's won by 38, with a margin 283 to 245. Even if we allow Wisconsin to stay Democrat he's now won the race 283 to 255 and a 28 majority

Now I'm picking up from Michigan democrats that Trump's claims to be gaining traction there aren't as far fetched as you might think. That would give him 60. Even if Florida stays with the Democrats, it still wouldn't be enough (by a fraction).

The more plausible scenario on today's data is that she can hold onto Michigan, and that he can wrestle Virginia from her. That gives him a win of 296 against 242 and a 54 majority. I'd quite like to have NH onside though if we're setting the spread at 50, so a Trump majority of 45+ would be the bet I reckon as NH would make it 46

The upshot of this really revolves around how you think the messages will be received and how that might alter the vote in the months to come, not what the polls are saying now. If Trumps brand of job protectionism really gains traction in the industrial north he could pick up Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio and Pennsylvania, in which case he's going to hammer her, enough for you to consider another saver on 100+ with Florida deciding if its 106 or 48 majority
 
Last edited:
Warbler said:
I've been saying that a Trump majority of 50+ is a smart bet to take for some time. That doesn't mean I'm predicting it, what it means is there is a plauisble scenrio where this pans out, and if she's odds on, a large majority for the other runner should be a price
Click to expand...

Indeed you have but your prediction all of a sudden looks like it's really on.
 
Bookies don't give away double figured certainties, so there's always a leap of faith required, but the secret really is to ignore the polling as it is now, and try to foresee what it could look like down the road

Take the 2012 result

All of the marginal states broke unerringly for Obama. It was a dream result really. His majority flattered him
He won it on the back of Latinos, Hispanics and Blacks
Hillary is popular with these demographics too, but its difficult to think she can improve on Obama. The best she can do is replicate him

However, Obama beat McCain and Romney. They had very little traction with what the American's delightfully call 'low information' voters. Hillary has two weaknesses that the Trumpster can reach who the likes of Romney couldn't

1: Young people (she's seen an establishment figure now, not the defender of the underdog)
2: Blue collar, white democrats

There's plenty of young democrats who've already abandoned Hillary in favour of Bernie. If you scour social media you'll see 10-15% of these threatening to vote for Trump if Hillary takes Bernie down. That's all it'll take

Similarly with the blue collar working class democrat whose jobs are under threat. These are the car plants of Michigan relocating in Mexico, the steel works of Pennsylvania who suffer from Chinese dumping, or the coal mines who will fall victim to Hillary's green energy etc. Sure these issues aren't new, but the likes of McCain and Romney never had the reach into these areas that Trump has. His simplistic language only needs to resonate with 10% again and these states become vulnerable
 
Trump at 44% now in Florida, the state Rubio has nominated as the one he'll win in a WTA contest

If he fails, its all over.

Another thing to remember is that Trump is heavily under budget, and once he has the nomination will get the GOP machinery behind for the first time (well those who can bring themselves to campaign for him anyway!). Things are starting to change a bit though. He recieved his first two official endorsements yesterday, and the rumour mill is currently swirling around to suggest Chris Christie is going to endorse him soon. As the ceiling rises and candidates with career aspirations start to see him winning, they'll start to crawl onto his ticket
 
Warbler said:
Bookies don't give away double figured certainties, so there's always a leap of faith required, but the secret really is to ignore the polling as it is now, and try to foresee what it could look like down the road

Take the 2012 result

All of the marginal states broke unerringly for Obama. It was a dream result really. His majority flattered him
He won it on the back of Latinos, Hispanics and Blacks
Hillary is popular with these demographics too, but its difficult to think she can improve on Obama. The best she can do is replicate him

However, Obama beat McCain and Romney. They had very little traction with what the American's delightfully call 'low information' voters. Hillary has two weaknesses that the Trumpster can reach who the likes of Romney couldn't

1: Young people (she's seen an establishment figure now, not the defender of the underdog)
2: Blue collar, white democrats

There's plenty of young democrats who've already abandoned Hillary in favour of Bernie. If you scour social media you'll see 10-15% of these threatening to vote for Trump if Hillary takes Bernie down. That's all it'll take

Similarly with the blue collar working class democrat whose jobs are under threat. These are the car plants of Michigan relocating in Mexico, the steel works of Pennsylvania who suffer from Chinese dumping, or the coal mines who will fall victim to Hillary's green energy etc. Sure these issues aren't new, but the likes of McCain and Romney never had the reach into these areas that Trump has. His simplistic language only needs to resonate with 10% again and these states become vulnerable
Click to expand...

I took advantage last time around backing Obama at 10/11 on a college handicap. The spread was well below the Intrade spread on his margin of victory at the time. I was basically getting a complete freeroll on Florida.
 
Not wishing to crab the mad professor, or the esteemed periodical that has published his work, but without knowing how he's built his model, there has to be a huge question mark over it. I can only assume that in order to build Trump and Hillary into it, it has to be based on early primary results, otherwise he hasn't got any data to go off

Incidentally, the Trump has gone through the 40% ceiling in another state now, Vermont. It kind of reinforces my hypothesis that he's building New England as a fortress and can probably carry New York with it, (possibly New Jersey too).

There is some polling data coming through that would contradict my rust belt theory though for states like Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Places like Minnesota and Wisconsin aren't really rust belt, but he's not exactly performing as well as expected there either. It could be the Kasich effect in the first two. I'll add Michigan to the list and take a closer look later, as right now I'm slightly at a loss to explain why he isn't enjoying the sorts of leads in what you would have thought was his next strongest demographics that he is in the south

Mildly amused incidentally to see a few American's on Reddit trying to find someone (anyone) to take on Donald Trump in a debate. The person who they eventually alighted on? Gordon Ramsey!!!

You might find this amusing too

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLydb7K6zmY
 
Last edited:
Seems to be something of a gay scandal breaking around Marco Rubio. Oh dear Marco, if you're going to taunt the Trump for "pissing his pants" better make sure your own house is in order.

No idea if this has got legs or not? but remember that Rubio is projecting the ultra clean conservative image. True or not, pictures of you cavorting around topless with lots of young men in foam baths really won't play out well, and that's provided there's nothing in this suggestion that he has a caution for soliciting. I have seen the photos, and they do appear to offer him plausible denial, but there is another clip of an old interview where he admitted to attending a foam party once but that it ruined his boots

Watch this space - could be nothing, could be massive - we just don't know

http://i.imgur.com/KWbznXW.png
http://i.imgur.com/L67YtRS.png
https://youtube.com/watch?v=5YCEmDZPnbU&t=35s
http://radaronline.com/celebrity-news/marco-rubio-past-gay-clubs-parties-arrest/

The only thing I've seen being claimed to have been confirmed is that his college room mate of 3 years was a gay porn film director who served three years for prostitution
 
Last edited:
And in other news, Chris Christie, has just endorsed the Donald

TBH, after last nights performance from Cruz and Rubio, the Donald actually looks like the voice of reason
 
Last edited:
Warbler said:
And in other news, Chris Christie, has just endorsed the Donald
Click to expand...
He'll be more welcoming of Christie's endorsement than that from David Duke (ex-Grand Wizard of the KKK) a couple of days ago ........................... (or Vladimir Putin's one last month). :D
 
Warbler said:
Seems to be something of a gay scandal breaking around Marco Rubio.
Click to expand...
The sex shenanigans coming to light make this Presidential race more entertaining than any episode of the West Wing ! :)

As well of course, there is the elephant-in-the-room regarding Hilary's sexual history than nobody is mentioning yet. Bernie is too much of a decent man to bring it up, but surely somebody will.
I refer to the Webb Hubbell matter .................
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/huge-scandal-chelsea-isnt-bill-clintons-daughter/
 
I've no idea if the Rubio gay thing has legs or not. It could just easily be a dirty trick.

Bascially someone trawls interviews he's done looking for an opening in an answer he's given and then sets about finding stills from some gay magazine/ google, that has a picture of someone who they might be able to pass off as Marco Rubio ten years ago

Some SuperPAC (sounds like a Cruz tactic in truth) then launches it into the socialmediasphere and even if its subsequently debunked, the damage is done, especially if you're campaigning as a conservative with super Tuesday states like Arkansas, Georgia and Oklahoma in play, come to think of it, rural Minnesota wouldn't take this sort of a disclosure too well (lumberjacks!!!)
 
Warbler said:
I've no idea if the Rubio gay thing has legs or not. It could just easily be a dirty trick.
Click to expand...
It's a bit deeper than that; a bit more evidential than just baseless dirt-dishing by an opponent.
There are historical indicators that would persuade a person to believe it.
 
Well the whole thing is getting more and more comical. Heads aren't so much spinnin' as starting to explode

Thursday's debate was a farce. The media have been desperately trying to spin it as a victory for Rubio, but I haven't come across a single poll yet that backs this up. Indeed, I've even seen one that gave it to Trump on 64%, far in excess of anything he's ever achieved.

So far as I can establish Rubio and Cruz tried to tag team him. For the first hour it worked quite well. Trump's lack of detail in any of his policies was laid quite bare (he's not actually very clever). So too was his numerous bankruptcies and chequered business history. Rubio pointed out that without his Daddy's money he'd be selling watches in Manhattan. Then between them they kind of lost the plot as they veered ever more into the extremes of right wing lunacy and tried to outbid each other for a market palce that has already been cornered.

They actually started to make Trump look sane. Basically Cruz and Rubio began colouring in the map of the middle east by trying to out bomb each other. I'll see your Iraq, and raise you Syria. I'll see your Syria and raise you Palestine. Trump tried pointing out that peace and some kind of deal, (however difficult and fraught) should be the objective, but the two war hawks were gone by now. Rubio finally concluded that Palestinians basically only have children in order to train them to kill Israelis and this therefore justified bombing Palestine (and he we were told before this, was moderate!). Trumps line is that America doesn't get involved and abandons any silly idea that it is able to nation build in these countries and impose democracy on them. Basically he's an isolationist who believes in aggressive counter attack largely in support of American interests only. It almost reached a farce when Trump said he didn't want socialised medicene but wasn't prepared to let people die on the streets. This struck a nerve with Ted Cruz. He clearly was prepared to let people die on the streets if they're too poor to afford it

So fast forward a few days and what do we have now?

Well the poll for Virginia that offered Rubio some hope has evaporated. Trump now holds 38 to Rubio's 13 on the most recent. Minnesota hasn't been polled since that rogue poll that gave Rubio a lead on a small sample (taken during Rubios only visit to the state up until that time). The most recent Florida poll has Trump on 45 and Rubio on 25, and even more devastating, Trump beats him in this key WTA state on a one on one match up too. Rubio when asked where he might expect to first to win? nominated Florida. His supposed ceiling has also gone in Michigan now (41%)

Now heads are spinnin'

It would appear that Rubio has been telling his donors that he's changing strategy and that he's now aiming to try and deny Trump at a brokered convention !!!

This will probably guarantee an independent run by Trump and hand Clinton the White House (not even sure Trump would need to run myself if they tried pulling this stunt, such would be the outcry)

It gets better though

Republican party managers have allegedly engaged a consultancy firm to investigate the viability of running a rebel independent conservative against Trump!!! You couldn't make this up could you? Having lost control of their own party to Trump, the establishment are setting up a rebel outside of it, to bring Trump down (it doesn't seem to have occurred to them that he's attracting new voters!)

In another crazy twist, Republican senate leader Mitch McConnell is considering launching attack ads against Trump to create space between Republican senators and Trump, even if that means handing it to Hillary. Don't under estimate the importance of the senate to the GOP establishment (this is what pays them)

The award for the most batshit crazy strategy I've seen so far though is the possibilty of flooding the field with candidates (including Bloomberg) in the hope that no one can reach 270 college votes. There seems to be some idea that it then goes to the speaker to ask congress to appoint a President, and with the Republicans holding the house they could appoint Jeb Bush!

Even I gave up at this point! but the picture that is emerging is a Republican party that was in complete and utter denial is just starting to face up and panic

We should see a whole raft of polls in the next 24 hrs ahead of ST, but whereas Rubio had hopes in Virginia and Minnesota, these now seem to have disintegrated. Cruz should still win Texas, but it ain't guaranteed.

Trump could swarm this on Tuesday now

Expect to hear the phrase 'brokered convention', it's their only hope.
 
Last edited:
Warbler said:
Thursday's debate was a farce.
Click to expand...
As well as the aspects of it which you highlight, what particularly zapped me was the bizarre performance of Ben Carson .......... his talking about "fruit salad" and about some obscure film about his "wonderful hands" during the very limited time available to him.
Left me wondering if he had been inhaling from the bong; if he was just having a wind-up; or if he is suffering from the early onset of Altzheimers.
 
And you guys seriously think one of them will end up in office. Hillary will muller every one of them one on one. I repeat again evens is a steal.
 
Back
Top