The Establishments war on Donald Trump
See other The Establishments war on Donald Trump Articles
Title: After Trump Loses, What's Next For The GOP?
Source:
Impact Tap
URL Source: http://theimpacttap.com/2016/10/26/ ... at-comes-next-for-republicans/
Published: Oct 27, 2016
Author: Patrick Glennon
Post Date: 2016-10-27 09:29:40 by Willie Green
Keywords: None
Views: 18805
Comments: 105
It is very uncontroversial to say that Donald Trump is – well – controversial. The Republican nominee for president has burned bridges with a number of communities: he mocked a reporter with a disability; he attacked the Muslim Gold Star parents of a fallen solider, alienating veterans and veterans’ families as well as Muslim-Americans; his attacks on women are too many to enumerate here, but a couple of highlights include the “grope” video describing how he sexually assaults women as well as his insinuation that moderator Megyn Kelly was perhaps menstruating during a Republican primary debate last year; he has also continuously suggested that black Americans live in some sort of post-apocalyptic hellscape. Much to the chagrin of the majority of the United States electorate, none of these incidents seemed to dent Trump’s popularity among his support base, which helped reenforce the narrative of a viable Trump campaign by turning out in droves to his speaking events. But as we edge closer to the end of this historically bizarre (and exceedingly long) election cycle, it appears a near-certainty that Trump will fall to Clinton on November 8. While Republican senate candidates are faring a little better than their toxic presidential nominee, the fact remains that the “Trump effect” has impacted their poll numbers. The result? Democrats are now the cautious favorite to retake the senate, dividing congress and sapping Republicans of the ability to completely stonewall a Clinton administration. A quick look at the polling map lends some interesting insight into just how divisive Trump has been. Even if they still fall in Trump’s electoral basket come election day, Arizona, Texas, and Georgia have drifted very close to the toss-up column. This is a huge alarm for Republicans, who – following defeat to Barack Obama – drafted a plan to appeal to demographics pushed away by the Republican party’s rhetoric and policy, including millennials and Latin Americans. Even before Trump’s scorched earth campaign, Republicans were worrying about demographic changes that indicate that traditionally safe conservative states – such as those mentioned above – could become more competitive as soon as the year 2020. This cycle did the party no favors; the political transition underway in conservative states may accelerate as Trump’s strategy of catering to white nationalist voters has alienated large swaths of the population Republicans were eager to mollify. Republicans’ task of broadening their appeal will only be further complicated by a post-election Trump, who – analysts are suggesting – could use his formidable base and powerful media allies to target GOP leadership for failing to adequately support the pugnacious nominee. This “Republican civil war” could end in a number of ways. Perhaps it will end with a more 21st century party in-tune with contemporary social norms, women’s rights, and climate change. Or, the party could dissolve entirely. We’ll have to wait and see.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-6) not displayed.
.
.
.
#7. To: Vicomte13 (#4)
This top forecaster agrees with you. He is accurate but the outlier opinion this go around. It’s not over yet: Donald Trump will win, says top forecaster https://inews.co.uk/essentials/news/world/not-yet-donald-trump-will-win-says- top-forecaster/
Everybody who has lost his job to China or to Mexican immigration is going to vote for Trump. That is why Trump is going to win. The Republicans will vote for him, and everybody screwed by free trade and open borders will vote for him. And that is all that it will take to flip over the Rust Belt states. Trump will take Michigan.
PA will be close as Romney lost by 5% in 2012 and latest polling has Trump down by 3%.
A better question is: " After Trump Wins, What's Next For Willie & Hondo? " Probably suicide ! Si vis pacem, para bellum Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God. There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."Theodore Roosevelt-1907. I am concerned for the security of our great nation; not so much because of any threat from without, but because of the insidious forces working from within." -- General Douglas MacArthur
Cut Willies head off.
"Brexit? Even that comparison doesn’t really work. The final polls showed a toss-up between the United Kingdom leaving the European Union or remaining in it, and “leave” eventually won by 4 points. If the polls were biased against Trump by that much in this election, he’d still lose, by a margin approximating the one by which Mitt Romney lost to President Obama four years ago." - fivethirtyeight.com A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Now you know that wouldn't do any good the regime would just hire someone else to take his place, gotta keep up the positive propaganda ya know.
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
Either the polls will have been right all along, and you'll get to crow at those of us who said otherwise, or those of us who think that there's a huge set of traditional non-voters and blue collar voters who will come out for Trump this time, and that the polltakers are biased. If it's the latter and we turn out to be right, we'll be sure to remind you of it.
Every single one of dozens of organizations is knowingly diminishing its brand value with bad forecasts? No sale. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Ok crush his nuts first.
If Hillary wins and we get four more years of malignant subversive counterculturism, what's next for the nation?
What would a guy who thinks Joe Paterno is a saint know about politics?
" After Trump Wins, What's Next For Willie & Hondo? " Continue to fight the Hillary stooge, Transgender Trump. We'll have even more loser Leftards to babysit. Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
Talking in a high squeaky voice doesn't exactly come over when you're typing so they will just buy him a fake set and tell him to keep posting for .25 cents per post.
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
Not all of them. But it's good that there is no sale. Because if Trump wins, my ability to see through the fog will have been very strongly established.
100 years of Democrat rule. If she wins, she controls the Supreme Court, and then Congress is rendered an afterthought.
Since mid-September, only one pollster has ever shown a Trump lead. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Your predictions are pretty silly sometimes.
You are misinformed Tooconservative.
I don't make many predictions. I do comment a lot, and say what the long-term effects will be. But long-term is hard to show in the here and now. Anyway, Trump will win because more than half of the country has been made poor, and they want it to stop. Trump's the only one who has spoken straight to them, and offers policies that THEY want. So he will get the surge from them and win.
The "poor" are who Trump should fear most. Today's poor would rather live like smelly scumbags and DEPEND on government then work hard for something more. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
If Trump were a standard Republican, that would be true. But it isn't, He - unlike standard Republicans - understands that most of the poor are made poor by the lack of jobs, and that this comes from so-called "free" trade shutting down factories, and from uncontrolled immigration undercutting the wage of the American worker. Rebalance the trade rules and stop the illegal immigration, and American manufacturing will have to reopen to provide the jobs here, and illegals will not be able to hold the jobs Americans should have. Poverty will go down, employment will go up. That is Trump's approach, and it is not Republican. Republicans love "free" trade, because those savings on offshoring labor go to the top as profits, instead of the workers as wages. The government then has to deal with the unemployed poor. Trump is aiming at forcing American employers to use Americans to make goods sold in the American market. That s not traditional Republicanism. It is economic nationalism, and it is the reason that Trump won the nomination and will win the election. Once he does, it is the reason that the Republican Party power structure will change, as the party moves downscale and becomes a middle class party instead of a party of the rich. The rich will not like this, and the Bushes and Romneys will scream about it. But they will have lost control of the party to Trump and the broad middle class whose needs Trump's policies will address. Class warfare will be out in the GOP, and moving to primarily represent the interests of the middle and working class will be in. Instead of handing over their excess profits in redistributive taxes, the top 1% will be handing them over in the form of wages and benefits. And that is much better for everybody, including the very rich, because the temptation to see their own countrymen as mere commodities that can be cast aside for foreigners will have had its wings clipped. Americans should be looking out for Americans. Rich Americans should be employing Americans, not Chinese and Mexicans. We have to look after our own first. The rich have forgotten that and tried to fly away into a "global economy". Trump is here to yank them back down to earth and remind them where they came from, and who they have to look out for besides just themselves.
You are misinformed Please educate me - what are the other recent polls that have shown a Trump lead? (My sources are Realclearpolitics and Fivethirtyeight ... what are yours?) A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Polls are not always correct:
"The legend of Reagan’s epic comeback is largely the result of anomalous Gallup polling, which even showed a Carter advantage over the final month of the campaign. But if RealClearPolitics or Pollster.com had existed in 1980, the conventional wisdom would have been a little different. In fact, Reagan held a lead from mid-September onward and had a two or three point lead heading into the debates. Private polling conducted for the Reagan and Carter campaigns showed the same thing." - libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=45380
A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Please educate me - what are the other recent polls that have shown a Trump lead? (My sources are Realclearpolitics and Fivethirtyeight ... what are yours?) thehill.com/blogs/ballot-...s/301834-poll-trump-up-1- on-clinton-nationally hotair.com/archives/2016/...nal-poll-trump-ahead-one- point-4140/ www.westernjournalism.com...trump-moves-past-clinton- to-claim-the-lead/ There are a few there are more.
hotair.com/archives/2016/...nal-poll-trump-ahead-one- point-4140 Those are two stories on the same poll. But your larger point is correct: looking at RCP's more-than-2-candidate polls, and sorting 538 by date as I originally failed to do :-[ , there have been a handful of pollsters who at some point have shown Trump with a narrow lead. I continue to not buy that with those few exceptions, every one of dozens of organizations is knowingly diminishing its brand value with bad forecasts. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. When has push-polling and misrepresenting poll results ever hurt their brand?
But Gallop would never hurt their "brand."
One or a few pollsters might - but dozens? A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. When have pollsters ever released the results of push-polls as real results ... or, indeed, released them at all? Misrepresenting accurate results wouldn't affect their reps as providers of accurate results. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Who would hold them accountable for pushing their/your pro-Hillary agenda through polling results? When have they ever been held accountable? Your "brand' argument is self-serving nonsense.
"Pollsters vastly underestimated a Republican wave in the 2014 midterms, and last month had an epic fail in the Michigan Democratic primary, with the poll average predicting Hillary Clinton would crush Bernie Sanders by 21 points. When Sanders upset Clinton by 1.5 percent, polling aggregator Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight.com — who had given the Vermont senator just a 1 percent chance of winning — deemed it 'among the greatest polling errors in primary history.'" --The problem with polls Put some ice on it.
Those who purchase, or heed, their results - by ceasing to do so. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Leads with a general underestimation of a Rat victory, and does not say the errors were committed knowingly as is the topic of discussion. Put some ice on it. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. You mean like they did after Michigan? Epic fail.
"Pollsters vastly underestimated a Republican wave in the 2014 midterms, and last month had an epic fail in the Michigan Democratic primary, with the poll average predicting Hillary Clinton would crush Bernie Sanders by 21 points. When Sanders upset Clinton by 1.5 percent, polling aggregator Nate Silver of FiveThirtyEight.com — who had given the Vermont senator just a 1 percent chance of winning — deemed it 'among the greatest polling errors in primary history.'" Liar. You were spewing "brand" nonsense.
Straws. Camels. Apparently you're the pussy Trump wants to grab. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. Liar. You were spewing "brand" nonsense. Me, post #15: "Every single one of dozens of organizations is knowingly diminishing its brand value with bad forecasts? No sale." The liar is, as always, you. A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them. You argued that bad forecasts would damage their brand, therefore they wouldn't deliberately produce such results. I can understand why would want to flee your premise, to the point of pretending is wasn't your actual argument. I've already demolished your brand premise, showing massive large scale bad polling results. Your premise demolished, you crawled back then to your invalid conclusion. The logic abilities of a tpaine. Let's review: "Pollsters vastly underestimated a Republican wave in the 2014 midterms, and last month had an epic fail in the Michigan Democratic primary, with the poll average predicting Hillary Clinton would crush Bernie Sanders by 21 points." You haven't shown that those massive bad results damaged any of those pollsters brands. When you take a break from sniffing Hillary's cunt, would you like to at least try to address your "brand" premise that crashed and burned so spectacularly?
Comments (48 - 105) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestTrump is going to win. American Brexit. Wait and see.
#8. To: redleghunter (#7)
This top forecaster agrees with you. He is accurate but the outlier opinion this go around.
#9. To: Vicomte13 (#8)
#10. To: Willie Green, all (#0)
" After Trump Loses, What's Next For The GOP? "
#11. To: Willie Green (#0)
#12. To: Vicomte13 (#4)
Trump is going to win. American Brexit.
#13. To: A K A Stone (#11)
#14. To: ConservingFreedom (#12)
#15. To: Vicomte13 (#14)
the polltakers are biased.
#16. To: CZ82 (#13)
#17. To: Willie Green (#0)
After Trump Loses, What's Next For The GOP?
#18. To: Willie Green (#5)
#19. To: Stoner, Hillary shill, NWO stooge, Chuck Schumer, very pro choice, *Neo-Lib Chickenhawk Wars* (#10)
A better question is:
Castle(C), Stein(G), Johnson(L)
#20. To: rlk (#17)
If Hillary wins and we get four more years of malignant subversive counterculturism, what's next for the nation?
#21. To: A K A Stone (#16)
#22. To: ConservingFreedom (#15)
Every single one of dozens of organizations is knowingly diminishing its brand value with bad forecasts? No sale.
#23. To: rlk (#17)
If Hillary wins and we get four more years of malignant subversive counterculturism, what's next for the nation?
#24. To: Vicomte13 (#22)
Not all of them.
#25. To: Vicomte13 (#4)
But if he loses, the GOP is effectively finished and we'll have Democrat rule for the next century.
#26. To: ConservingFreedom (#24)
Since mid-September, only one pollster has ever shown a Trump lead.
#27. To: A K A Stone (#25)
Your predictions are pretty silly sometimes.
#28. To: Vicomte13 (#27)
Anyway, Trump will win because more than half of the country has been made poor, and they want it to stop.
#29. To: GrandIsland (#28)
(Edited)
The "poor" are who Trump should fear most. Today's poor would rather live like smelly scumbags and DEPEND on government then work hard for something more.
#30. To: A K A Stone (#26)
"Since mid-September, only one pollster has ever shown a Trump lead."
#31. To: A K A Stone, GrandIsland (#26)
Since mid-September, only one pollster has ever shown a Trump lead.
You are misinformed Tooconservative.
ROTFL ...
#32. To: Gatlin (#31)
#33. To: ConservingFreedom (#30)
Since mid-September, only one pollster has ever shown a Trump lead." You are misinformed
#34. To: A K A Stone (#33)
thehill.com/blogs/ballot-...s/301834-poll-trump-up-1- on-clinton-nationally
#35. To: ConservingFreedom (#34)
every one of dozens of organizations is knowingly diminishing its brand value with bad forecasts.
#36. To: Gatlin (#31)
#37. To: Roscoe (#36)
Gallop would never hurt their "brand."
#38. To: Roscoe (#35)
When has push-polling
and misrepresenting poll results ever hurt their brand?
#39. To: ConservingFreedom (#37)
#40. To: ConservingFreedom (#37)
dozens?
#41. To: Roscoe (#39)
Who would hold them accountable for pushing their/your pro-Hillary agenda through polling results?
#42. To: Roscoe (#40)
The problem with polls
#43. To: ConservingFreedom (#41)
Those who purchase, or heed, their results - by ceasing to do so.
#44. To: ConservingFreedom (#42)
does not say the errors were committed knowingly as is the topic of discussion.
#45. To: Roscoe (#43)
You mean like they did after Michigan?
#46. To: Roscoe (#44)
'does not say the errors were committed knowingly as is the topic of discussion.'
#47. To: ConservingFreedom (#46)
(Edited)
"Every single one of dozens of organizations is knowingly diminishing its brand value with bad forecasts? No sale."
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]