Presidential Race 2016

[saevel25]

9 minutes ago, Braivo said:

He goes after men and women equally, he doesn't discriminate. See his latest Joe Scarborough tussle.

It doesn't matter if he goes after women equally as men. Women who watched him lay into Kelly are going to empathize with Kelly because she is a woman and because for the most part she didn't warrant the demeaning attack.

9 minutes ago, Braivo said:

He will win the women voters over before November, at least enough to win handily.

I think it will be tough for him to win women over.

The primary issues driving women are,

He's going to have to seriously work hard on not losing the conservative base and find a way to win over women who hold more democrat aligned positions on Abortion, Birth Control, Economic Equality, Health Care, and The Environment.

Right now there isn't one thing on his website that touches the top 5 things listed above, except healthcare reform.

The issues Trump has hammered so far are Immigration, Taxes, and Foreign Policy. Those are not high on the list of issues women care about.

 

[rehmwa]

8 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

Sorry to wallow in stereotypes, but I read this chart and I pretty much conclude:

1 - women pretty much take EVERYTHING more seriously than men

2 - exceptions are:  Keeping a budget, getting along with the neighbors

 

Based on my limited experience, this isn't a surprise at all.

[saevel25]

2 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

Sorry to wallow in stereotypes, but I read this chart and I pretty much conclude:

1 - women pretty much take EVERYTHING more seriously than men

2 - exceptions are:  Keeping a budget, getting along with the neighbors

Women care about their personal health more than men do. How many times do you see men push illness off until it gets worse then they are forced to go to the doctor?

Abortion has been labeled a women's issue because it deals with their body. Same with Birth Control. Go read up on the history of "the pill", it is fascinating. For the most part any research on "the pill" was deemed illegal because the males in power thought it was a males right to decide when to use protection not a women. It's a strange story how "the pill" was researched in secrecy and how they were able to get human testing on it.

Economic inequality is big. For the most part women do get paid less then men for doing similar jobs. It's a fact in our society.

Healthcare is a family issue, and that will have a strong pull for women.

 

 

[Gunther]

2 hours ago, saevel25 said:

It doesn't matter if he goes after women equally as men. Women who watched him lay into Kelly are going to empathize with Kelly because she is a woman and because for the most part she didn't warrant the demeaning attack.

I think it will be tough for him to win women over.

The primary issues driving women are,

He's going to have to seriously work hard on not losing the conservative base and find a way to win over women who hold more democrat aligned positions on Abortion, Birth Control, Economic Equality, Health Care, and The Environment.

Right now there isn't one thing on his website that touches the top 5 things listed above, except healthcare reform.

The issues Trump has hammered so far are Immigration, Taxes, and Foreign Policy. Those are not high on the list of issues women care about.

 

You're reading this incorrectly.  It's sorted based on the disparity between men and women but their top 5 issues are:

Economy

Healthcare

Terrorism 

Deficit

Inequality

Trump covers those well.

[saevel25]

12 minutes ago, Gunther said:

You're reading this incorrectly.  It's sorted based on the disparity between men and women but their top 5 issues are:

Then he probably needs to do a better job because a poll done in March said,

And few women voters in the poll see Trump as particularly empathetic to their concerns. Asked whether Trump or Clinton "agrees with you on the issues that matter most to you," 57% of female voters choose Clinton, 32% Trump and 11% say neither. Among Republican women, most choose Trump, 73%, but a whopping 17% say neither Trump nor Clinton agrees with them on their top issues. Just 4% of Democratic women say the same on that question.

Only 32% of women said that Trump is empathetic about their concerns. Even though he has plans that might meet their concerns. Maybe it's his overall demeanor that makes it hard for women to believe he's truly caring about the women voters.

Who is to say his stances on those issues are what women want to hear or match their own opinions on it.

Clearly what he's doing isn't working well with women voters since Hillary has a 15 point lead on Trump versus women.

 

[rehmwa]

3 hours ago, saevel25 said:

Women care about their personal health more than men do. How many times do you see men push illness off until it gets worse then they are forced to go to the doctor?

Abortion has been labeled a women's issue because it deals with their body. Same with Birth Control. Go read up on the history of "the pill", it is fascinating. For the most part any research on "the pill" was deemed illegal because the males in power thought it was a males right to decide when to use protection not a women. It's a strange story how "the pill" was researched in secrecy and how they were able to get human testing on it.

Economic inequality is big. For the most part women do get paid less then men for doing similar jobs. It's a fact in our society.

Healthcare is a family issue, and that will have a strong pull for women

Nope, ain't gonna read it - I already said I'm wallowing in the stereotype.

WALLOWING - I said

[Gunther]

1 hour ago, saevel25 said:

Then he probably needs to do a better job because a poll done in March said,

And few women voters in the poll see Trump as particularly empathetic to their concerns. Asked whether Trump or Clinton "agrees with you on the issues that matter most to you," 57% of female voters choose Clinton, 32% Trump and 11% say neither. Among Republican women, most choose Trump, 73%, but a whopping 17% say neither Trump nor Clinton agrees with them on their top issues. Just 4% of Democratic women say the same on that question.

Only 32% of women said that Trump is empathetic about their concerns. Even though he has plans that might meet their concerns. Maybe it's his overall demeanor that makes it hard for women to believe he's truly caring about the women voters.

Who is to say his stances on those issues are what women want to hear or match their own opinions on it.

Clearly what he's doing isn't working well with women voters since Hillary has a 15 point lead on Trump versus women.

 

An historical issue for the GOP, perhaps slightly more this year.  Trump has to cut into it, for sure, but he doesn't need to overcome it entirely to win.  It's about turnout, as it always is.  I remain pretty confident that Hillary inspires very few and so turnout will be low for the Dems.  I do worry about Republicans who can't stomach Trump not showing up, however.  I did it once myself, in '08.  Just couldn't hold my nose hard enough to vote for McCain.  Hopefully Trump can bring some people together and get them behind him.  

[pumaAttack]

2 hours ago, Gunther said:

You're reading this incorrectly.  It's sorted based on the disparity between men and women but their top 5 issues are:

Economy

Healthcare

Terrorism 

Deficit

Inequality

Trump covers those well.

Healthcare, a 14 point gap for woman vs men.

Inequality, a 15 point gap for women vs. men.

 

This is being covered well by Trump?  

13 minutes ago, Gunther said:

An historical issue for the GOP, perhaps slightly more this year.  Trump has to cut into it, for sure, but he doesn't need to overcome it entirely to win.  It's about turnout, as it always is.  I remain pretty confident that Hillary inspires very few and so turnout will be low for the Dems.  I do worry about Republicans who can't stomach Trump not showing up, however.  I did it once myself, in '08.  Just couldn't hold my nose hard enough to vote for McCain.  Hopefully Trump can bring some people together and get them behind him.  

You think that Trump will only bring out his supporters?  I see it working the other way, people will rally behind not having him be President and come out strong to support Hillary.

[Golfingdad]

32 minutes ago, pumaAttack said:

Healthcare, a 14 point gap for woman vs men.

Inequality, a 15 point gap for women vs. men.

That doesn't dispute what @Gunther was saying.

[rehmwa]

36 minutes ago, pumaAttack said:

You think that Trump will only bring out his supporters?  I see it working the other way, people will rally behind not having him be President and come out strong to support Hillary.

I honestly think the campaign for both sides will emphasize "Hey!  I'm not the other guy".  Even worse than any other campaigns in recent history.  And the strawmen arguments and horrible reporting will be EPIC in proportions both way.

Both Hillary and Trump will mobilize huge contingents behind NOT having them for president.  The question will be which one is more motivated.  It's funny, because when you talk to advocates of either candidate, they just are incapable of conceiving that "their candidate" is so un-appetizing to anyone.  Or even better, they just automatically attribute terrible attributes to those one the other side because, "clearly, they must be terrible people to disagree with ME"

[pumaAttack]

56 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

That doesn't dispute what @Gunther was saying.

It shows that the top issues for women have a large discrepancy between what they care about and what men care about.

Edited May 10, 2016 by pumaAttack

[Golfingdad]

13 minutes ago, pumaAttack said:

It shows that the top issues for women have a large discrepancy between what they care about and what men care about.

OK.

[Gunther]

4 hours ago, saevel25 said:

 

2 hours ago, rehmwa said:

  It's funny, because when you talk to advocates of either candidate, they just are incapable of conceiving that "their candidate" is so un-appetizing to anyone.  Or even better, they just automatically attribute terrible attributes to those one the other side because, "clearly, they must be terrible people to disagree with ME"

I haven't experienced this at all this cycle.  I know plenty of Dems who hate Hill and a lot of Republicans who hate Trump.  I, for one, completely understand Trump's unfavorables.  He's a bombastic guy and I know that doesn't appeal to everyone, regardless your affiliation. 

I just happen to believe his platform covers the top 3 issues in the country right now and I know he's not going to cower when it comes to fixing them which is why he has earned my vote.

[saevel25]

If Trump is the end of the GOP. Will the GOP end Trump out of spite!

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/05/republican-convention-stop-donald-trump-curly-haugland-213879

Trump’s old pal Roger Stone has predicted for months that the Republican establishment would try to snatch the nomination from Trump at the convention, even if he won a pledged-delegate majority. Now that Trump’s opposition has dropped out, “the whole scenario is far, far less likely,” Stone says—but, he admits, it could still happen. “The Republican convention can do whatever it wants,” he says. “You can’t bring a lawsuit. There’s no jurisdiction.”

and

Haugland’s many rules committee defeats have earned him a reputation as a loose cannon. He’s undaunted. “The biggest victory is one I’m going to have in a couple months,” he says. “Up ’til now, I’ve basically been laying the groundwork.”

Will the GOP just say, F-IT!, and throw Trump out! Will Cleveland be burnt to the ground! Stay tune for July for more the results! 

 

4 hours ago, Gunther said:

An historical issue for the GOP, perhaps slightly more this year.  Trump has to cut into it, for sure, but he doesn't need to overcome it entirely to win.  It's about turnout, as it always is.  I remain pretty confident that Hillary inspires very few and so turnout will be low for the Dems.  I do worry about Republicans who can't stomach Trump not showing up, however.  I did it once myself, in '08.  Just couldn't hold my nose hard enough to vote for McCain.  Hopefully Trump can bring some people together and get them behind him.  

Seems like many in the Evangelical right wants him to pick a VP candidate who aligns with their views. If he doesn't show his willingness to adhere to the Evangelical conservative issues then he might be left without their support. 

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/evangelicals-to-trump-vp-is-the-key-222987

“If Trump is going to be successful against Hillary, he’s going to need the Tony Perkinses of the world, the Dr. [James] Dobsons, the Bob Vander Plaatses engaging and encouraging their networks,” Vander Plaats said. “Right now, I don’t see a lot of that. I see a lot of people with huge cause for concern. We really don’t know what we’re going to get with Donald Trump.”

“The choice is not him or Hillary,” added Nance, the head of Concerned Women for America, a prominent conservative group focused on bringing “biblical principles” to public policy. “The choice is him or don’t vote. ... That’s really my concern, that people just stay home.”

[RandallT]

7 hours ago, Gunther said:

I do worry about Republicans who can't stomach Trump not showing up, however.  I did it once myself, in '08.  Just couldn't hold my nose hard enough to vote for McCain.  Hopefully Trump can bring some people together and get them behind him.  

I've been thinking about this. Maybe I'm crazy, but I think Trump moves left now for the general election. He might calculate he doesn't need the Republican Party anymore. He might think he's already burned bridges on the right, but there's more discontent on the left and middle.  So.... move left into Clinton territory to make her totally off balance. 

By doing this, he maybe picks up Bernie supporters, independents- maybe more voters lie there than he can regain from the Republican elite or conservative right. I think Trump correctly calculated that the Republican Party basically lost sight of the working class anger while they comforted themselves in their echo chamber. The establishment has no massive army of supporters behind them, although they do control a lot of media. Thus far, they haven't inflicted much damage on Trump, so no reason to think they will in the future.

Here are two articles that got me thinking this (exit poll on Sanders supporter say 44% willing to support Trump AND Trump going against Republicans on taxes has thrown Clinton off balance):

1. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/over-four-in-10-sanders-voters-in-west-virginia-would-vote-for-trump/

Quote

In November, Donald Trump would be the choice of 44 percent of West Virginia Democratic primary voters who supported Bernie Sanders Tuesday, CBS News early exit polling found.

2. https://www.commentarymagazine.com/politics-ideas/campaigns-elections/trump-paralyzed-hilarys-campaign/

Quote

On Monday, Hillary Clinton advisors Jake Sullivan and Gene Sperling telegraphed the former first lady’s pivot away from the zombie Democratic Primary and toward the general election. In a conference call with reporters, the two Clinton loyalists announced their intention to target Donald Trump’s tax plan. The two advisors revealed their focus would be on attacking Trump’s plan to push for “tax cuts for the hyper-wealthy [while] leaving most behind,” reported The Atlantic’s Steve Clemons. “We frankly think that Mr. Trump’s economic plans have not received the scrutiny they’ve deserved,” Sullivan said. He assured reporters on the call that Team Clinton will be pounding the drum over Trump’s “eye-poppingly massive” tax cuts for the rich “every day between now and the election.”

This boilerplate Democratic campaign strategy would be fine — perhaps even compelling – if deployed against a vanilla Republican candidate. Trump is, however, no Republican cast in the same mold as George W. Bush, John McCain, or Mitt Romney. In fact, as Team Clinton was revealing its intention to attack Trump for his proposal to ease the tax burden on the rich, the news cycle was already dominated by Trump’s decision to buck Republican orthodoxy on taxes in an interview with NBC’s Chuck Todd.

In that “Meet the Press” interview, Trump signaled his willingness to surrender his opening bid in the coming fight over tax code reform (well before negotiations had even begun) by insisting that his cuts on the highest marginal rates will likely be pared back by congressional Democrats. “I have a feeling we pay some more,” Trump said of his fellows in the top tax bracket. “I am willing to pay more, and you know what, wealthy are willing to pay more. We’ve had a very good run.”

Despite Trump warning the Clintons for weeks that he intends to borrow heavily from self-described socialist Senator Bernie Sanders’ playbook, Team Clinton was unable, or unwilling, to preemptively reform their message and tailor it to Trump’s populist progressivism. Nor could they adapt and respond to a news cycle dominated by Trump’s remarks on taxes and the stunning departure they represent from typical Republican economic philosophy. If Democrats fear that Clinton’s team has ossified and grown complacent, this episode should confirm those suspicions.

 

 

Might be crazy, but Trump can detach himself from all that "inside the Beltway" stuff, and call his own shots. Move to the left on various issues- and keep Clinton totally guessing and paralyzed as to how to attack him. 

By doing this, Trump looks nimble, independent, strong. He thinks for himself and bucks the status quo, stands up to powers that control Washington, which people like. 

Clinton, meanwhile is the ultimate consensus candidate. Everything poll-tested, approved in committee- and she comes off that way clearly. Her image is set in stone. She's in agreement with the DC elite, most media, most academia. She can't be as nimble, since she prides herself on consistency and balks at being told she has changed her mind on anything (see gay marriage). She'll be unable to adapt to Trump's craziness and unpredictability, and she might look old school establishment in comparison. This election is likely not about being part of the establishment, so Trump wins.

Crazy? Perhaps.

 

[Chilli Dipper]

Trump going way to the left of Clinton to court disaffected Sanders supporters would be the sort of thing that would cause Republican elites to yank the nomination out from under him at the Convention. Trump can't win if he isn't on the ballot as the candidate of a major party.

Beyond that, it's a strategy that works maybe one time out of ten, and the other nine times leads to voters on both sides believing he can't be trusted. Maybe this is the one time where the conditions are right, but in that case, there are less risky campaign tactics that would lead to the same outcome.

[RandallT]

15 minutes ago, Chilli Dipper said:

Trump going way to the left of Clinton to court disaffected Sanders supporters would be the sort of thing that would cause Republican elites to yank the nomination out from under him at the Convention. Trump can't win if he isn't on the ballot as the candidate of a major party.

Beyond that, it's a strategy that works maybe one time out of ten, and the other nine times leads to voters on both sides believing he can't be trusted. Maybe this is the one time where the conditions are right, but in that case, there are less risky campaign tactics that would lead to the same outcome.

I'm not talking of going anywhere near Clinton! Heck no. Didn't mean to suggest that. Just move toward her territory for specific hot button issues, when he feels like dropping a bomb into the campaign. Just enough so that he keeps the "Republican" label, without a revolt from the party elites to kick him out.

So just on a few issues he can drift left. Taxes, easily.  He's done that. Check. Anything populist- social issues. Housing stuff perhaps. Social security. Trump could easily drift left on welfare or inner city help for the poor. Doing so blocks a line of attack that Clinton might be prepping, maybe gains supporters, while not alienating too many Republicans that aren't already in the #nevertrump camp.

Van Jones of CNN is even saying Trump could conceivably steal away some African Americans, and that would be disastrous for Clinton because she needs that support. To solidify that, I could see Trump picking a key issue for that demographic, and then getting tons of free media on the issue, and some of that filtering down to voters- some of whom switch their choice. Trump is pretty cut-throat, and he'd do anything necessary to get just enough of people to shift their vote from Clinton. 

By the way, I think the 40% number of Bernie supporters in WV who would support Trump over Clinton at that link is way high (due to independents there in WV likely), but I think some number of Sanders supporters just want an outsider, and many feel the way about Clinton that #nevertrump folks feel about Trump. 

Trump shifting too far left on a lot of issues is probably not gonna happen, but it was a crazy thought today based on those articles I saw. Just wanted to clarify I don't think he'd go LEFT OF CLINTON! Nor would he drop the "Republican" label and shift enough to get kicked out. 

[saevel25]

8 hours ago, RandallT said:

I've been thinking about this. Maybe I'm crazy, but I think Trump moves left now for the general election. He might calculate he doesn't need the Republican Party anymore. He might think he's already burned bridges on the right, but there's more discontent on the left and middle.  So.... move left into Clinton territory to make her totally off balance.

That article I posted above, a good number of evangelicals just might not vote. They are more inline to be conscious objectors in the voting process. If Trump doesn't declare he's anti-abortion then my Uncle will not vote.

In 2012 evangelicals made up 27% of the entire voting electorate. 78% of them voted for Romney. Let's say Trump would get 78% of them if he nominates a VP who has the social conservative stances. If he doesn't, does that 27% drop to something like 20%. He'll lose 5.5% of his voting base. I don't think he can survive that.

As for the Sanders voters, can he ignite Sander's base like Sanders did? Even if they say they will support Trump, do they actually turn out to vote? Is it Sanders who is pulling this group of people to vote more than they would have been historically?

8 hours ago, RandallT said:

Might be crazy, but Trump can detach himself from all that "inside the Beltway" stuff, and call his own shots. Move to the left on various issues- and keep Clinton totally guessing and paralyzed as to how to attack him.

Though he's been immune so far, history has shown that flip-flopping has not been a very good strategy for conservatives or any politician. Romney got nailed to the wall for it. If there is anyone who might be able to pull it off it's Trump.

8 hours ago, RandallT said:

She'll be unable to adapt to Trump's craziness and unpredictability, and she might look old school establishment in comparison. This election is likely not about being part of the establishment, so Trump wins.

She might not be able to. She might handle him well. I think the strategy of Sanders staying in is helping her because she has to continue to focus on Sanders and not get caught up in pre General Election spats with Trump.

7 hours ago, RandallT said:

I'm not talking of going anywhere near Clinton! Heck no.

If he goes Bernie Sanders left then he's going more left than Hillary.