Trump could win presidency: Yes or No?

Nov 4 place your bets

  • Trump will win, 100%

    Votes: 42 16.9%
  • Hilary will win, 100%

    Votes: 82 32.9%
  • Trump will win, but I'm worried Hil might triumph

    Votes: 9 3.6%
  • Hilary will win, but I'm scared the chances.

    Votes: 116 46.6%

  • Total voters
    249
"All told, Trump is approaching, or may have already passed, $100 million from donors who have given $200 or less, according to an analysis of available Federal Election Commission filings, the campaign’s public statements and people familiar with his fundraising operation. It is a threshold no other Republican has ever achieved in a single campaign. And Trump has done so less than three months after signing his first email solicitation for donors on June 21 — a staggering speed to collect such a vast sum.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/...ecords-with-small-donors-228338#ixzz4KmWPTC7R
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

They'll be a more complete picture later this week.

Thank you :)

The story's all over the place.... Vanity Fair, Fortune, etc....

But it's not really surprising. When he had those puzzling advances in donations back in Jul/Aug, a lot of that was from small donations. The Times did an article on it. It's news this time because it's the most ever raised by a GOP Presidential candidate. Notwithstanding inflation, that plays to his narrative of appealing to new voters, or at least new donors. To take the negative, it also points out that he is bilking the working classes because he can't get support from the big-money-boyz.

Then I think the Hillary campaign should be very, very worried.

He now has all the finances he needs in place.

He doesn't need a "ground game" as such because of the way he's used social media and the canny way in which he has managed the media to get his message across at no cost to him whatsoever.

IMO the debates are going to be a big win for Trump. Not that he will do well by any objective measure but by turning up and not soiling himself he will comfortable exceed expectations and his Gish-gallop approach to speaking will make it nigh-on impossible for Hillary to determine what he proposes, much less argue against it.

He will come across as spontaneous and "fresh", she will be coached, unappealing and hectoring. It doesn't matter that what he says are complete lies - much of the US electorate simply does not care and those that do will not be voting for Trump - or that none of it makes sense, in the verbal Rorschach test that is a Trump answer, people will find something they like.

The ordinary ways to damage him don't seem to work. If any other candidate in living memory had:

  • Said what he said about Muslims
  • Said what he said about Mexicans
  • insulted a gold star family and then double, treble and quadrupled down
  • Made those comments about the "Mexican" judge
  • Been pwned by the Mexican President
  • Been successfully sued hundreds of times
  • Faced legal action over their business
  • Demonstrated this level of ignorance over the Constitution
  • Flip-flopped so regularly and completely

Then they would have been dead in the water but enough of the US electorate want Trump (because they love him), want anything new (and damn the consequences) or simply want the GOP candidate to win that here is is gaining ground hand over fist on a Democratic Party candidate who seems unable to find a strategy to combat him.

Dark days indeed :(
 
Last edited:
I cannot see them doing it successfully. Trump will act as he pleases, as far as he is concerned the rules do not apply to him..

Yeah, and this year I can see that provoking some moderator to ask uncomfortable questions like, "Since your last answer included 17 deliberate lies why shouldn't we conclude you'll be the most uninformed buffoon we've ever seen in office". Or, more likely, something milder but which Trump will then exagerate in to that.
 
Imagine a category 3 hurricane hitting coastal Virginia and east Pennsylvania on November 8th.

I had been thinking the same thing, but on a smaller scales. Troublesome weather in a couple of large cities might decide who gets a state's electoral votes.
 
What about 12 inches of rain in Philadelphia?

More polls on battleground states:

Florida: Clinton 46% - Trump 41%
Nevada: Trump 42% - Clinton 39%
North Carolina: Trump 44% - Clinton 43%

Utah leaves my list of battleground states: With Johnson losing a bit of support now it's comfortably Trump + 14 as an average.

Maine enters my list of battleground states:

Maine CD2: Trump +11
Maine CD1: Clinton +11
Maine: Tie

So its 4 delegates that were clearly going 3 for Clinton and 1 for Trump now may wind up going the other way around.
 
States to watch close:

Georgia: Trump + 4
Arizona: Trump + 1.6
Ohio: Trump + 1.2
Nevada: Trump + 0.5
North Carolina: Tie
Florida: Tie
Colorado: Clinton + 3.7

Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Virginia going Clinton
Texas going Trump

New Hampshire and Maine going probably Clinton
Iowa going probably Trump
 
Trump will take a business-like approach to wasteful conflicts like Syria.

He will leave Russia and the Syrian government (regime to some) to knockout all anti-government forces (terrorists to Trump, freedom fighters to Hillary). Maybe add some massive bombing of known ISIS positions and then get out.

Obama and Hillary. Their record.

The US places sanctions on Russia and makes them out to be the bad guys.

Then the world gets upset about Aleppo (for those who what Aleppo is).

So Kerry sucks up to Russia, and finally gets a ceasefire. What a lose-lose situation for the US. The US hope is that aid can get into Aleppo, and they can take the credit.

I did not need a crystal ball to see that no aid would arrive. The Russian are gaming the US. The US looks weak and out of control.

The US bombs the Syrian army during a ceasefire - what were they thinking?

The rebels now are frustrated because the US cannot stop the fighting.

The aid convoy starts getting off-loaded in a rebel held area. Some would consider that re-supplying the enemy. No wonder it got bombed. And the accusations fly.
 
Obama and Hillary. Their record.

The leaders of free, first-world countries in Europe, UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand all wish to see Hillary win.

The leaders of not even slightly free dictatorships of China, Russia and North Korea all wish to see Trump win.

Their records speaks for themselves - even the despicable scum who run those countries can see that Trump is guaranteed to be a destabilising factor for both internal and external American strengths, which neatly plays into their hands.

I'm well and truly on record as being no fan-boy for USA, but I have to confess I'd rather see China & Russia respectfully of USA than openly dismissive.

Putin is just salivating and I'd lay very short odds you will see Ukraine disappear in the first year of a Trump presidency.
 
Daily informative with the latest polls in battleground states:

Nevada: Trump 43%, Clinton 40%
Ohio: Trump 42%, Clinton 37%
Wisconsin: Clinton 41%, Trump 38%
New Hampshire: Clinton 47%, Trump 38%
North Carolina: Trump 45%, Clinton 40% / Trump 45%, Clinton 43%

Clinton bouncing back in general polls. Now around 2% ahead.
 
The leaders of not even slightly free dictatorships of China, Russia and North Korea all wish to see Trump win.
Have the Chinese let their inscrutability slip? As for the North Koreans, they're too weird to be read at all. They're like a population that's been been ruled for 70 years by three generations of Trumps - inside a wall.

I'm sure the Russians would love Trump, though. Putin can point to him as a reason why democracy needs managing. Give people their head and you end up with someone like that - or Yeltsin, remember what a national embarrassment he was? And so on.

Where Putin would go with it is unknown, but he already has a lot on his foreign policy plate on two widely-separated fronts. I expect a period of consolidation for Putin.
 
Putin is in power and there is no chance he will be replaced any time soon. Putin wishes to see his country do well. Good relations are a key, but national security cannot be sacrificed.

The US was willing to risk a nuclear war to stop Cuban missiles, yet missiles and unrest on the border areas of Russia (fomented by Nato and the US) are something Putin (and the Russian leadership) should just tamely acquiesce to?

Hillary never misses a chance to stick it to Russia. She is belligerent. Check her record. WW3 - vote Hillary. (Like Maggie Thatcher and the Falklands). I am in Southern Africa, and will be relatively unaffected - except for family in North America.
 
Check her record. WW3 - vote Hillary. (Like Maggie Thatcher and the Falklands).

Really?

Also, The term WW3 is sometimes used to indicate a nuclear exchange, is that how you are using the term?
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom