• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is there any other person that Trump could have beat?

Anagram said:
Clearly. They lost. But what relevance is there in that in the context of a general election?
Click to expand...

If they couldn't beat Clinton, how were they going to beat Trump, when Clinton lost to Trump?

Not to mention the national rejection of the Liberal agenda.
 
apdst said:
If they couldn't beat Clinton, how were they going to beat Trump, when Clinton lost to Trump?

Not to mention the national rejection of the Liberal agenda.
Click to expand...

Because a Democratic primary has an insanely different voter pool than the general election. And Trump only won by .7% basically. There really wasn't a clear rejection of anything either way.
 
Anagram said:
Because a Democratic primary has an insanely different voter pool than the general election. And Trump only won by .7% basically. There really wasn't a clear rejection of anything either way.
Click to expand...

It was when you look at the whole election cycle.
 
apdst said:
It was when you look at the whole election cycle.
Click to expand...

About a tie for the presidency. About a tie in the House vote with a 1% Republican edge. Dems pick up a couple Senate seats that leaned their way. I don't see anything but that the country's pretty divided.
 
Anagram said:
About a tie for the presidency. About a tie in the House vote with a 1% Republican edge. Dems pick up a couple Senate seats that leaned their way. I don't see anything but that the country's pretty divided.
Click to expand...

The country isn't divided. The hostility from the Left wing makes it appear that way. They lost their asses; they're desperate.
 
radcen said:
Is there any other person that Trump could have beat? Or, did he gut uber lucky drawing Hillary as an opponent?

Other than Hillary... in the general election.

Now, I know some of his Suckers will saunter in and whine about about him being the grand master underdog, or whatever, blah blah blah. You're certainly free to chime in, but technically I'm not asking you.

I love it when the disclaimer is the longest part of a post. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...


Mm, probably some. Algore maybe. Or maybe not.

Not sure about Sanders. He would have mobilized the Dem base more, but his leftishness would also have galvanized the Right against him.




I doubt the Donald would have won against any reasonable, sane-sounding, sorta-centrist-ish candidate in the general election, had there been one.
 
radcen said:
Is there any other person that Trump could have beat? Or, did he gut uber lucky drawing Hillary as an opponent?

Other than Hillary... in the general election.

Now, I know some of his Suckers will saunter in and whine about about him being the grand master underdog, or whatever, blah blah blah. You're certainly free to chime in, but technically I'm not asking you.

I love it when the disclaimer is the longest part of a post. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Almost anyone else could have beat Trump.

Joe Biden
Bernie Sanders

But you have to be careful. The most charismatic candidate usually wins in elections. Hillary never faced a real election. I was going to add Elizabeth Warren but I don't think she has enough charisma but I could be wrong.

Trump is a one term and done president. Even his supporters will abandon him once they are presented with a viable alternative.
 
apdst said:
The country isn't divided. The hostility from the Left wing makes it appear that way. They lost their asses; they're desperate.
Click to expand...

Then how did the Democrats only do ever so slightly worse than the Republicans in 2016? Only a percent either way in anything.
 
Anagram said:
Then how did the Democrats only do ever so slightly worse than the Republicans in 2016? Only a percent either way in anything.
Click to expand...

It certainly wasn't the shutout that was predicted.
 
apdst said:
It certainly wasn't the shutout that was predicted.
Click to expand...

With the caveat that nobody predicted the Dem's would take the House I agree with you. But it was still about a tie. I don't see how that's a wholesale rejection of anything.
 
Anagram said:
With the caveat that nobody predicted the Dem's would take the House I agree with you. But it was still about a tie. I don't see how that's a wholesale rejection of anything.
Click to expand...


Of Hillary. That's pretty much it.
 
Anagram said:
With the caveat that nobody predicted the Dem's would take the House I agree with you. But it was still about a tie. I don't see how that's a wholesale rejection of anything.
Click to expand...

When you look at the big picture, beginning with the 2010 election, it's an apparent rejection of the Liberal agenda.
 
apdst said:
When you look at the big picture, beginning with the 2010 election, it's an apparent rejection of the Liberal agenda.
Click to expand...

Meh. Things go in cycles. Dems won fairly well in 2012. They won 2006 and 2008. Lost big in 2010 and 2014. Tied last year. Won big around the country this year in a small sample size.

I think whenever one side declares the absolute rejection of another, they're wrong. If you listened to liberals, conservatives were dead forever after 2008.
 
Anagram said:
Meh. Things go in cycles. Dems won fairly well in 2012. They won 2006 and 2008. Lost big in 2010 and 2014. Tied last year. Won big around the country this year in a small sample size.

I think whenever one side declares the absolute rejection of another, they're wrong. If you listened to liberals, conservatives were dead forever after 2008.
Click to expand...




Any claims that "the other side is down forever!" should be met by deep skepticism, regardless of who makes the pronouncement.

don't know how many times I've heard it before, and it is never so.
 
Goshin said:
Any claims that "the other side is down forever!" should be met by deep skepticism, regardless of who makes the pronouncement.

don't know how many times I've heard it before, and it is never so.
Click to expand...

In my lifetime I think both the Dems and Reps were supposedly on the ropes and going under for the last time, twice. Each time they came back just fine... though I'm not sure if it's because they got better or the other side took full advantage of the opportunity to show how utterly screwed up they are, too.
 
radcen said:
In my lifetime I think both the Dems and Reps were supposedly on the ropes and going under for the last time, twice. Each time they came back just fine... though I'm not sure if it's because they got better or the other side took full advantage of the opportunity to show how utterly screwed up they are, too.
Click to expand...



Some of both perhaps. Both sides seem to screw up most spectacularly when everything is going their way election-wise.
 
radcen said:
Is there any other person that Trump could have beat? Or, did he gut uber lucky drawing Hillary as an opponent?

Other than Hillary... in the general election.

Now, I know some of his Suckers will saunter in and whine about about him being the grand master underdog, or whatever, blah blah blah. You're certainly free to chime in, but technically I'm not asking you.

I love it when the disclaimer is the longest part of a post. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...
I can't reach any other conclusion. If hillary or trump had faced a mediocre but fairly likable opponent they would have lost handily. Trump barely squeezed out a win over the most attacked and least liked presidential candidate ever even with the momentum that comes with the other side having the Whitehouse for 8 years. With all that he barely won.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk
 
I think he could have possibly beaten Sanders, despite what the polls said. It would have been very close though.

If Obama would have ran for a third term though, he would have wiped the floor with Trump, IMO.
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
Any given Democrat, because like it, or not, President Trump tuned in on a lot of folks who were tired of the Liberal agenda.
Click to expand...

Is that why Trump did WORSE with Republicans than Romney? Because they were tired of the "Liberal Agenda"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom