EPTI think you've created this idea that people are lying to themselves and you. It's a fiction. This election has very few undecideds. If Trump's "nigger" tape comes out I expect very few defections from Trump, his supporters have made peace with the fact that he's a racist already, in the same way that they accept his sexism, xenophobia and general buffoonery. For those on the other side like myself, I've accepted that in a two horse race all that matters is which horse you prefer. And none of these Clinton scandals come even close to narrowing that margin. The lines have been drawn and it'll take an act of God to cause most people to cross them.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 5846
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
KwarK
United States42005 Posts
I think you've created this idea that people are lying to themselves and you. It's a fiction. This election has very few undecideds. If Trump's "nigger" tape comes out I expect very few defections from Trump, his supporters have made peace with the fact that he's a racist already, in the same way that they accept his sexism, xenophobia and general buffoonery. For those on the other side like myself, I've accepted that in a two horse race all that matters is which horse you prefer. And none of these Clinton scandals come even close to narrowing that margin. The lines have been drawn and it'll take an act of God to cause most people to cross them. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
this includes a portion of voters checking the clinton box in the polls. they are undecided in that their commitment isn't firm and can be swayed. in a usual bipolar election, polls this late do not show much volatility. the difference in volatility this time around is explained by fracture on both sides from the extremes. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
| ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
biology]major
United States2253 Posts
On November 01 2016 23:17 LegalLord wrote: Trump's chances are normalizing after that Access Hollywood tape and after losing three debates by the greatest combined loss margin of any candidate ever. I'm genuinely impressed by that. This election will be one for the history cubes. The guy has no media support, no establishment support, relatively no ground game, spending probably half what HRC is spending, with no super surrogates on his side and it's still close. This is the clearest indication at how awful HRC is to me, so many resources and if she loses, has nothing to show for it. IIRC she has spent more than any politician in US history. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On November 01 2016 23:28 biology]major wrote: The guy has no media support, no establishment support, relatively no ground game, spending probably half what HRC is spending, with no super surrogates on his side and it's still close. This is the clearest indication at how awful HRC is to me, so many resources and if she loses, has nothing to show for it. IIRC she has spent more than any politician in US history. No media support? That's the epitome of wanting to have your cake and eat it too. Trump's existence as a politician is predicated on wall to wall media coverage. | ||
|
biology]major
United States2253 Posts
On November 01 2016 23:29 Doodsmack wrote: No media support? That's the epitome of wanting to have your cake and eat it too. Trump's existence as a politician is predicated on wall to wall media coverage. I'm speaking about the general, no doubt the media helped him during the primaries. | ||
|
zeo
Serbia6268 Posts
On November 01 2016 23:27 Doodsmack wrote: The idea that smart and high/medium-info people are willing to vote for Donald is just amazing to me. His problems of temperament and lack of knowledge are so much more fundamental than Hillary's corruption - and he's not even willing to prepare for the job. Oh and he's corrupt too, so he doesn't even have an edge on that issue. It is telling to me that Peter Thiel's argument rests on the notion that Donald doesn't mean all that he says. I sincerely hope for my own integrity that if Donald was the dem nominee, I wouldn't vote for him. I'm sure voting for the felon and one of the most corrupt politicians in American history is the smart thing to do. Blind zealotry can't make her the better candidate, just like how the Obama administration can't save her from criminal prosecution indefinitely. The swamp and muck goes too deep with her. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On November 01 2016 23:31 biology]major wrote: I'm speaking about the general, no doubt the media helped him during the primaries. Well his strategy certainly hasn't changed since the primaries. He still gets the coverage which is what makes up for his lack of an organization. The media is profit driven before it is politically biased, and Donald brings in the money. | ||
|
KwarK
United States42005 Posts
On November 01 2016 23:31 biology]major wrote: I'm speaking about the general, no doubt the media helped him during the primaries. Still, I think the media has certainly its share of the blame in presenting them as comparably bad. For example nothing in Hillary's long list of supposed scandals is anything like as bad as Trump's history of shady real estate practices including deliberately discriminating against "colored" applicants. A good number of the Clinton scandals don't even exist beyond the delusions of the alt-right. But it's an eyeballs game. For most of the presidential race it wasn't especially close and that presents a huge problem to the media machine who need to be able to report on how the weather today may impact the election in this "must read" article. They can't just circle jerk about how obviously unfit Trump is for a year, people will lose interest. So instead we have "Trump sexually assaults women and Russian leaks suggest Hillary deleted emails, how will this impact the polls?". | ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
On November 01 2016 23:27 Doodsmack wrote: The idea that smart and high/medium-info people are willing to vote for Donald is just amazing to me. His problems of temperament and lack of knowledge are so much more fundamental than Hillary's corruption - and he's not even willing to prepare for the job. Oh and he's corrupt too, so he doesn't even have an edge on that issue. It is telling to me that Peter Thiel's argument rests on the notion that Donald doesn't mean all that he says. I sincerely hope for my own integrity that if Donald was the dem nominee, I wouldn't vote for him. An Italian analyst said: 'there is no one worse than Trump - no one but Hillary.' | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On November 01 2016 23:36 zeo wrote: I'm sure voting for the felon and one of the most corrupt politicians in American history is the smart thing to do. Blind zealotry can't make her the better candidate, just like how the Obama administration can't save her from criminal prosecution indefinitely. The swamp and muck goes too deep with her. Donald is no angel when it comes to corruption. He has a strong vested interest in the status quo - certainly a stronger one than Hillary does, financially speaking. And he lacks basic knowledge, preparedness and temperament. We can't even begin to talk about corruption until we've covered those issues, they're more fundamental. | ||
|
KwarK
United States42005 Posts
| ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
On November 01 2016 23:28 biology]major wrote: The guy has no media support, no establishment support, relatively no ground game, spending probably half what HRC is spending, with no super surrogates on his side and it's still close. This is the clearest indication at how awful HRC is to me, so many resources and if she loses, has nothing to show for it. IIRC she has spent more than any politician in US history. Don't forget the fact that the electorate is much more ignorant, anti science, and anti critical thinking than many of us ever thought. A Trump Presidency is one huge step towards Idiocracy. | ||
|
biology]major
United States2253 Posts
On November 01 2016 23:38 KwarK wrote: Still, I think the media has certainly its share of the blame in presenting them as comparably bad. For example nothing in Hillary's long list of supposed scandals is anything like as bad as Trump's history of shady real estate practices including deliberately discriminating against "colored" applicants. A good number of the Clinton scandals don't even exist beyond the delusions of the alt-right. But it's an eyeballs game. For most of the presidential race it wasn't especially close and that presents a huge problem to the media machine who need to be able to report on how the weather today may impact the election in this "must read" article. They can't just circle jerk about how obviously unfit Trump is for a year, people will lose interest. So instead we have "Trump sexually assaults women and Russian leaks suggest Hillary deleted emails, how will this impact the polls?". Wikileaks has been a major factor too in occupying media time, I kinda left that one out but if it weren't for wikileaks slow drip of constant new information trump would also have no chance. The battle of the bads. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
| ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On November 01 2016 23:38 SoSexy wrote: An Italian analyst said: 'there is no one worse than Trump - no one but Hillary.' Well hey if Berlusconi can win then Hillary can  . | ||
|
SoSexy
Italy3725 Posts
On November 01 2016 23:48 Doodsmack wrote: Well hey if Berlusconi can win then Hillary can .Totally non sequitur. I wonder why do I even still post in this thread... | ||
|
zeo
Serbia6268 Posts
On November 01 2016 23:40 KwarK wrote: Don't engage zeo unless you're willing to outbid his Kremlin paymasters. No need to be so nervous around me Kwark. On November 01 2016 23:39 Doodsmack wrote: Donald is no angel when it comes to corruption. He has a strong vested interest in the status quo - certainly a stronger one than Hillary does, financially speaking. And he lacks basic knowledge, preparedness and temperament. We can't even begin to talk about corruption until we've covered those issues, they're more fundamental. Except trump never sold out American interests to foreign powers. Throwing around buzzword rhetoric does nothing to help Clinton either. 'Trump lacks basic knowledge so vote for the person that thinks you can wipe a hard-drive with a cloth'. I'm not even sure 'preparedness' is a word but even so Clinton probably already has a certificate from a study group you can join to 'prepare' someone to become president. /s | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On November 01 2016 23:16 oneofthem wrote: the undecided are mostly the bernie voters. whether they stay home or vote third party. this includes a portion of voters checking the clinton box in the polls. they are undecided in that their commitment isn't firm and can be swayed. in a usual bipolar election, polls this late do not show much volatility. the difference in volatility this time around is explained by fracture on both sides from the extremes. Nonsense. They're mostly disgusted with both major party candidates with no particular bias towards Bernie. WaPo had a good peek into motivations. Many people cannot understand how a voter can still be undecided two weeks before this election. What more information do you need to make up your mind? | ||
| ||
