• 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!

Does Trump have a realistic path to victory?

Does Trump have a realistic path to victory?

  • Total voters
    4
Kreton

Kreton

Doesn't know
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 11, 2011
Messages
13,350
Reaction score
6,591
Location
Across the street from the family across the stree
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If you say yes, say the path. If you say no, say why not.

Got distracted and then it wouldn't let me add the poll and then it apparently posted. Mod move this somewhere appropriate without a poll please. Sorry.
 
Last edited:
Kreton said:
If you say yes, say the path. If you say no, say why not.
Click to expand...

I would say no, not without some sort of external event that truly shakes up the race. Something like a huge leaked email bombshell.
 
Kreton said:
If you say yes, say the path. If you say no, say why not.

Got distracted and then it wouldn't let me add the poll and then it apparently posted. Mod move this somewhere appropriate without a poll please. Sorry.
Click to expand...

Yes.
Primary turn out was much higher for GOP than DNC.
Whether that turns out to be actual voter turn out, is another story.

I could be totally wrong, but I do think he can still win.

Edit add:
The fact that they're still hammering the **** out of Trump, should be a clue, in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Kreton said:
If you say yes, say the path. If you say no, say why not.
Click to expand...

yes
low demo turnout
the support for tRump (the opposition to hillary), while thin, is also deep
the support for hillary (the opposition to tRump) is broad, but very shallow
just look at the contrast in turnout at their public appearances

we saw a fall-off of voter turnout between 2008 and 2012, especially in the black community, when reality set in and the support of Obama had waned
multiply that indifference by a couple of orders of magnitude and that is what hillary faces
add to that the widespread opinion that she already has it won; the result being low turnout because there will be a perception that each vote is no longer required

the situation that causes me to vote for hillary rather than a third party is the prospect that tRump, with his heritage foundation approved list of prospective supreme court nominees, could prevail and adversely impact our nation for generations to come
 
Sure, if there is a significantly larger silent minority than polling would indicate, or if millenial/minority/female electorate turnout is poor, or if a bombshell of a wikileak occurs, or if Hillary has a seizure at tonight's Debate, or if or if or if....

Basically, if the left sits pretty on election day because they assume they have it in the bag.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Yes.
Primary turn out was much higher for GOP than DNC.
Whether that turns out to be actual voter turn out, is another story.

I could be totally wrong, but I do think he can still win.

Edit add:
The fact that they're still hammering the **** out of Trump, should be a clue, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

No it wasn't. They each had roughly 30,000,000 votes.

But primary turnout is really only reflective of the competitiveness of the primary and means nothing for the general election, which is why in the last 6 elections without an incumbent running the party with higher primary turnout ended up winning 3.
 
justabubba said:
yes
low demo turnout
the support for tRump (the opposition to hillary), while thin, is also deep
the support for hillary (the opposition to tRump) is broad, but very shallow
just look at the contrast in turnout at their public appearances

we saw a fall-off of voter turnout between 2008 and 2012, especially in the black community, when reality set in and the support of Obama had waned
multiply that indifference by a couple of orders of magnitude and that is what hillary faces
Click to expand...

Very well said.

If voting were mandatory and the election based solely on a numerical count, the game would be over for Trump. But consider the "stay home" option and the concept that winning electoral votes in certain states, not the numerical totals per se are key and things get more complicated.

Then factor in the fact that the egalitarian internet has made everybody an expert / "expert" on everything. Armed with this knowledge/ "knowledge", people of any political ideology are less likely to heed their elders. These elders can be senior politicians, pastors, or union presidents. Getting information / "information" 24/7, they are also more prone to change their minds at the last minute.
 
Last edited:
Anagram said:
No it wasn't. They each had roughly 30,000,000 votes.

But primary turnout is really only reflective of the competitiveness of the primary, which is why in the last 6 elections without an incumbent running the party with higher primary turnout ended up winning 3.
Click to expand...

I was pretty sure that I saw the GOP with larger voter turn out across the board.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Yes.
Primary turn out was much higher for GOP than DNC.
Whether that turns out to be actual voter turn out, is another story.

I could be totally wrong, but I do think he can still win.

Edit add:
The fact that they're still hammering the **** out of Trump, should be a clue, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

They are hammering the crap out of Trump because they are trying to push up the margin that Hillary wins by and thus increase the odds of the Democrats taking back the Senate. The demographics of this country are such that a Republican cannot win the presidency without winning at least 40% of the Hispanic vote. Trump therefore destroyed his chances of winning the general election the day he announced in the Summer of 2015.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
They are hammering the crap out of Trump because they are trying to push up the margin that Hillary wins by and thus increase the odds of the Democrats taking back the Senate. The demographics of this country are such that a Republican cannot win the presidency without winning at least 40% of the Hispanic vote. Trump therefore destroyed his chances of winning the general election the day he announced in the Summer of 2015.
Click to expand...

Hispanic turn out is ehhh.
I can't remember where I read that, but it's not something to count on.
 
Anagram said:
No it wasn't. They each had roughly 30,000,000 votes.

But primary turnout is really only reflective of the competitiveness of the primary and means nothing for the general election, which is why in the last 6 elections without an incumbent running the party with higher primary turnout ended up winning 3.
Click to expand...

Checked it, you were right.
GOP edged them out by about 200k people.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
They are hammering the crap out of Trump because they are trying to push up the margin that Hillary wins by and thus increase the odds of the Democrats taking back the Senate. The demographics of this country are such that a Republican cannot win the presidency without winning at least 40% of the Hispanic vote. Trump therefore destroyed his chances of winning the general election the day he announced in the Summer of 2015.
Click to expand...

Here's one.
Hispanic turnout is generally lower.

There Are More White Voters Than People Think. That’s Good News for Trump. - The New York Times
 
Kreton said:
If you say yes, say the path. If you say no, say why not.

Got distracted and then it wouldn't let me add the poll and then it apparently posted. Mod move this somewhere appropriate without a poll please. Sorry.
Click to expand...

Sure, though they require alot more than the Clinton paths. Clinton wins unless something surprising happens. Trump can win if polling is significantly off(Really unlikely but possible, maybe the online methods used skew things), Trump voters are significantly more motivated to get out and vote, something huge happens between now and the election, undecided voters go almost exclusively to Trump, or some combination of those.

Any one saying the election is over is fooling themselves. Any one saying Trump has a good chance to win is also fooling themselves. The fat lady has not sung yet, but she is warming up.
 
Cryptic said:
Very well said.

If voting were mandatory and the election based solely on a numerical count, the game would be over for Trump. But consider the "stay home" option and the concept that winning electoral votes in certain states, not the numerical totals per se are key and things get more complicated.

Then factor in the fact that the egalitarian internet has made everybody an expert / "expert" on everything. Armed with this knowledge/ "knowledge", people of any political ideology are less likely to heed their elders. These elders can be senior politicians, pastors, or union presidents. Getting information / "information" 24/7 they are also more prone to change their minds at the last minute.
Click to expand...

there is one more factor that i failed to address
polling data versus actual voting activity

capturing polling data is easy. someone answers the phone and answers a question, 'hillary or tRump'
how easy was that to share one's personal opinion about the candidate they preferred
almost no effort is required to do that

in contrast, voting is difficult
carving out time to vote ... being able to leave work early or arrive late, who will watch the kids, choosing between making it to day care on time or voting, etc
getting a ride and finding parking at the poll destination
standing in line ... something most of us avoid like the plague - especially if our reason for being in line is not very strong
and as mentioned before, if the prospective voter is of the belief that their favorite candidate has already won the election, that provides a very convenient justification to decide against dealing with the above in order to cast an actual ballot
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Yes.
Primary turn out was much higher for GOP than DNC.
Whether that turns out to be actual voter turn out, is another story.
Click to expand...

Both not accurate, and primary turnout has not historically been indicative of much.
I could be totally wrong, but I do think he can still win.
Click to expand...

That is true.

Edit add:
The fact that they're still hammering the **** out of Trump, should be a clue, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

They are actually being mostly quiet right now, with just her surrogates keeping her name out there. However, they are buying a ****ton of advertising. They would be negligent to not pound Trump at least with advertising, since you never know what event might happen these last 3 weeks. In addition, there is the hope that a larger Clinton win helps downballot candidates.
 
Redress said:
Both not accurate, and primary turnout has not historically been indicative of much.


That is true.



They are actually being mostly quiet right now, with just her surrogates keeping her name out there. However, they are buying a ****ton of advertising. They would be negligent to not pound Trump at least with advertising, since you never know what event might happen these last 3 weeks. In addition, there is the hope that a larger Clinton win helps downballot candidates.
Click to expand...

I think there is more crazy in store for us, regardless of who wins.
I don't think the win, will be clean, regardless of who wins.

The saltiness of either side may erupt to crazy.
 
Kreton said:
If you say yes, say the path. If you say no, say why not.

Got distracted and then it wouldn't let me add the poll and then it apparently posted. Mod move this somewhere appropriate without a poll please. Sorry.
Click to expand...

I say no. Trump doesn't have much of a chance at this point.

Maybe somehow he'll end up making a miracle comback, but I highly doubt that will happen.
 
Probably not, but this election is nothing like any other for that matter. You can't really use other more traditional presidential elections that have happened this century or the beginning of the last as an accurate metric. A good example of this is Trump himself...
 
No. Mr. Trump is handicapped by his impulsiveness, his failure to take advice, and his alienation of the media. He chose to go after the wrong voters. He would have done well if he had run as a moderate, slightly to the left of Secretary Clinton.
 
Kreton said:
If you say yes, say the path. If you say no, say why not.

Got distracted and then it wouldn't let me add the poll and then it apparently posted. Mod move this somewhere appropriate without a poll please. Sorry.
Click to expand...

No. Chances are Trump will do worst than Romney did in 2012 and maybe even worst than McCain especially in the electoral college. Trump as of today is polling 39% in a four candidate field. Remember Romney garnered 47% and McCain 46% of the popular vote. Those hated RINO's by the Trumpers, the ones they sent their statement to during the primaries seem assured to top Trump's total percentage by at least 5 points or a bit more.

You have to go back to 1992 when George H.W. Bush received 37% of the total vote to get a vote total lower than what Trump is drawing now. But Bush the elder has Ross Perot in the race in 92, he was well financed and known. Not like Johnson and Stein, two candidates and political parties who never cracked one percent of the total vote. In fact no one has ever paid attention to the Libertarian or Green Party candidate until this year. If it weren't for the nomination of Trump, Johnson and Stein would be below one percent where they belong, not getting 10% of the total vote together. To be fair, Hillary Clinton has as much to do with those two third party candidates good showing with no money, no name recognition, no media attention, no TV ads, no nothing except last names not Clinton or Trump.

In the electoral college, just counting states where one candidate or the other has at least a five point lead or more, Clinton leads 272-113. 270 needed to win. When states like Alaska, Arizona, Georgia and even Indiana are rated tossups, Trump is indeed in trouble. Clinton even leads in Arizona and is behind by just 4 points in Texas.

Trump's unfavorable rating is back over 60%, Clinton's is down to 55% and considering folks tend not to vote for those they dislike, I don't see Trump getting too much more than 40% of the total vote.
 
Perotista said:
No. Chances are Trump will do worst than Romney did in 2012 and maybe even worst than McCain especially in the electoral college. Trump as of today is polling 39% in a four candidate field. Remember Romney garnered 47% and McCain 46% of the popular vote. Those hated RINO's by the Trumpers, the ones they sent their statement to during the primaries seem assured to top Trump's total percentage by at least 5 points or a bit more.

You have to go back to 1992 when George H.W. Bush received 37% of the total vote to get a vote total lower than what Trump is drawing now. But Bush the elder has Ross Perot in the race in 92, he was well financed and known. Not like Johnson and Stein, two candidates and political parties who never cracked one percent of the total vote. In fact no one has ever paid attention to the Libertarian or Green Party candidate until this year. If it weren't for the nomination of Trump, Johnson and Stein would be below one percent where they belong, not getting 10% of the total vote together. To be fair, Hillary Clinton has as much to do with those two third party candidates good showing with no money, no name recognition, no media attention, no TV ads, no nothing except last names not Clinton or Trump.

In the electoral college, just counting states where one candidate or the other has at least a five point lead or more, Clinton leads 272-113. 270 needed to win. When states like Alaska, Arizona, Georgia and even Indiana are rated tossups, Trump is indeed in trouble. Clinton even leads in Arizona and is behind by just 4 points in Texas.

Trump's unfavorable rating is back over 60%, Clinton's is down to 55% and considering folks tend not to vote for those they dislike, I don't see Trump getting too much more than 40% of the total vote.
Click to expand...

Looking at the electoral map and polling if the election were held today it would be over. (and people are already filling out ballots) However there is another debate tonight, and 13 days of campaigning and smearing. Do you think there is any chance things could change?
 
Kreton said:
If you say yes, say the path. If you say no, say why not.

Got distracted and then it wouldn't let me add the poll and then it apparently posted. Mod move this somewhere appropriate without a poll please. Sorry.
Click to expand...

"Realistic?" Well, sure, of course. Something would have to make four swing states that are currently pro-Clinton to suddenly go pro-Trump.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom