2015-2016 Republican Primary Season - Trump Courts the Conservatives

[albionmoonlight]

49% is probably a bit much. But I'm old enough to remember when everyone assured us that 30% was Trump's ceiling. Even if you think that the numbers are a bit off, the trend seems pretty unmistakable.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

This poll is also showing a deeply divided Republican Party. 35% of registered Republicans said they would "definitely not" back Trump. 13% said they would "probably not" support him. That's closer to my read than the article I posted a day or two ago that claims Trump would beat HRC.

Then again, 33% of Ds definitely(20)+probably(13) won't support Hilary either.

Still going to come down to turn out.


Another pretty big takeaway in the splits might be this one about Trump
He's 46% overall
"Republican" 49%
"Lean Republican" 43%

In other words, he is the choice of self-indentifying Rs.
The disconnect between members/voters of the party & "party leadership" is a very real thing. If he wins, goodness gracious the mid-terms might be an internal bloodbath.

[JPhillips]

What does Rubio need tomorrow to give him a realistic shot? Would a collection of 2nds and 3rds be enough? Does he need a win? Multiple wins?

I'll admit I'm struggling to see a scenario where he's anything but weaker after tomorrow.

[bronconick]

Rubio needs a miracle

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Then again, 33% of Ds definitely(20)+probably(13) won't support Hilary either.

Still going to come down to turn out.

Well, yeah. I think in the final analysis, this election will come down to how distasteful the people on the left who are turned off by HRC find Trump, and how distasteful the people on the right who are turned off by Trump find HRC. Both groups seem like they'll be big enough to make the difference.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Well, yeah. I think in the final analysis, this election will come down to how distasteful the people on the left who are turned off by HRC find Trump, and how distasteful the people on the right who are turned off by Trump find HRC. Both groups seem like they'll be big enough to make the difference.

Or both groups simply stay home.

I mean, honestly, if _ I _ ended up skipping a presidential vote -- after being "that guy" who showed up without fail for random runoffs miles down the ballot for nearly three decades -- is it really that hard to picture others finally just sitting stuff out?

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

What does Rubio need tomorrow to give him a realistic shot? Would a collection of 2nds and 3rds be enough? Does he need a win? Multiple wins?

I'll admit I'm struggling to see a scenario where he's anything but weaker after tomorrow.

I think it's not about him, but about Cruz.

If Cruz can't beat Trump by a healthy margin in Texas and Arkansas (the two states where he has leads, the former his home state), the narrative will be that he's done, which helps Rubio. Of course, it possibly helps Trump even more.

Of course, if Trump runs the table, it's over. Sure, it might still be close in terms of delegates (because of proportional awards), but once Trump picks up Florida & Ohio on 15 March (winner-take-all both, leading both currently), it's really over.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

I think it's not about him, but about Cruz.

If Cruz can't beat Trump by a healthy margin in Texas and Arkansas (the two states where he has leads, the former his home state), the narrative will be that he's done, which helps Rubio. Of course, it possibly helps Trump even more.

That it would help Trump does seem to be what the CNN poll suggests. Trump's gains there appear to be coming significantly from Cruz losses. (unless of course you think Rubio took from Cruz while Trump climbed from all the dropouts)

[albionmoonlight]

I trust Nate Silver more than I should for all things election related until he proves to me otherwise. He was a big Trump skeptic for a long time. And he's now come around.

Anyway, Trump will probably be the GOP nominee and possibly become President. No joke. If you care either way about this, you should vote.

— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) February 29, 2016

[JonInMiddleGA]

Honestly, how much that pains Silver -- who has been such a blatant anti-Trump shill throughout the past several weeks -- is one of the more enjoyable parts of this today.

[Butter]

So, is there any scenario under which Trump wins enough delegates to win the nomination, but something happens at the convention to nominate someone else? Whether it's delegate flipping, GOP leadership scheming, whatever it is? Just wondering, since Trump is literally such a left field happening that I still can't believe it is actually not just a strong possibility but a likelihood at this point.

[AENeuman]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Well, yeah. I think in the final analysis, this election will come down to how distasteful the people on the left who are turned off by HRC find Trump,

This is me. And honestly, Bernie being out would be victory enough.

My support for Trump would be very similar to my support of legalization of pot. Putting the conservative philosophy and approach out in the open will control the previous approach of obstruction and fear mongering. I think our checks and balance system will largely render Trump impotent. This will either be a good thing because a) he will do little, which is generally the best approach for any president, b) compromise, and go back to his previously long held moderate positions.

Cruz and HRC I see as much more effective in achieving their agenda, thus not likely getting my support.

[Arles]

After looking at all the projections models and numbers - I just don't see anyway that an upset derails the impending Trump vs Clinton general. I don't know the psychology of all this, but I would think that some republican primary voters (esp in states with open primaries) may have a change of heart down the road if Trump keeps on being Trump throughout the year. They may be voting for Trump now (with lower stakes), but have some buyer's remorse when it comes to the general and the actual specter of a Trump presidency looms. Then again, their other option would be Hillary (who doesn't have the greatest likability numbers for non-Dems).

If you fast forward 10 months, I could buy either narrative:

1. Turnout reached record numbers as Trump's popularity brought out tons of unsatisfied Republican/Independents with the McCain/Romney prior tickets. Combine that with Democrats coming out in droves to stop a Trump presidency and the voter count in this election rivaled 2008.

2. This was one of the lower turnout elections as many independents didn't like either candidate, Trump showed a lot of his "prior colors" and couldn't get the religious right to rally behind him, many democrats were crestfallen that Bernie didn't make it and a big chunk didn't really buy Trump having a shot in the general election, while also not being that wild about Hillary.

It will be interesting to see how all this plays out.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by AENeuman

My support for Trump would be very similar to my support of legalization of pot. Putting the conservative philosophy and approach out in the open will control the previous approach of obstruction and fear mongering. I think our checks and balance system will largely render Trump impotent. This will either be a good thing because a) he will do little, which is generally the best approach for any president, b) compromise, and go back to his previously long held moderate positions.

Cruz and HRC I see as much more effective in achieving their agenda, thus not likely getting my support.

I think Trump might be the most successful at "getting things done" compared to Cruz and Rubio. He strikes me as much more of a pragmatist than an ideologue - and those people tend to get more done. I don't think Trump would bat an eye to sign a pro-choice bill, pro-gay marriage bill, gun control bill, but I also see him being more organized fiscally (his team, not him specifically) and using the bully pulpit on that one. I think Cruz would use up all his chips on fights involving the supreme court (would work) and social issues (that would ultimately fall short). Trump, on the other hand, would have a pretty short attention span on that stuff, view some of it as "silly" and then gravitate towards his "passion" in the fiscal/foreign policy arenas. Rubio would be too green to get a lot done, but I don't think that would be a bad thing.

In the end, I think Clinton would be a lot like Bill and battle the republicans publicly on 2-3 big issues - while signing/compromising on a bunch of less publicized bills. If I were a social conservative, I would be pushing pretty hard for Cruz. I think much of the right will be pretty frustrated with the first 4 years of a Trump presidency. It's also why I wouldn't mind Trump on some level because of how much of a pragmatist I think he'd be - but I really can't see myself stomaching 4 years of that asshat bloviating to us.

[AlexB]

Originally Posted by AENeuman

I think our checks and balance system will largely render Trump impotent.

My worry with Trump as president is that he is so much a loose cannon who fires back when he feels under attack (which in itself is not a bad trait to have) with sexist, racist, and generally derogative comments (which defintely is a bad trait) that he could easily provoke Russia, China, hell even North Korea into doing something stupid before the firefighting diplomacy can rectify whatever offence he's caused.

Checks and balances might not legislate for that

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

So, is there any scenario under which Trump wins enough delegates to win the nomination, but something happens at the convention to nominate someone else? Whether it's delegate flipping, GOP leadership scheming, whatever it is? Just wondering, since Trump is literally such a left field happening that I still can't believe it is actually not just a strong possibility but a likelihood at this point.

Well, there's this analysis from 2012 which seems to indicate that 75% of the delegates are required to vote as pledged for the first convention vote, at least.

So, it's certainly possible that Trump could win a majority of bound delegates, but have unbound delegates vote en masse against him and not get the nomination.

In fact, that's arguably the point of unbound delegates (i.e. to keep a completely unsuitable candidate off the ballot).

The problem is the electoral cost of over-ruling essentially a majority of your primary voters (speaking as a political party), to say nothing of the impact of having a pissed-off "winner" influencing the general election (and when it's a candidate with the level of media mastery as Trump...).

This is why a GOP brokered convention is such catnip to Democrats - there's essentially no win in it for the GOP.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Arles

If you fast forward 10 months, I could buy either narrative:

1. Turnout reached record numbers as Trump's popularity brought out tons of unsatisfied Republican/Independents with the McCain/Romney prior tickets. Combine that with Democrats coming out in droves to stop a Trump presidency and the voter count in this election rivaled 2008.

I don't really see a low turnout model in a Trump/Clinton race. I could see a low GOP turnout if, post-conventions, the polls indicate that it's not a contest and Clinton has a 10+ point lead (and I suppose the opposite is true), which demoralizes GOP voters and keeps them home.

The reality, though, is that the polls indicate these are two polarizing candidates.

The angry Trump supporters are going to come out
The GOP electorate that hates Clinton are going to come out
The social conservatives terrified of a continuation of the Obama agenda are going to come out
Democrats terrified of Trump are going to come out
Democrats terrified of a dismantling of the Obama agenda are going to come out
Democrats who want to see the first woman president are going to come out

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

If Cruz can't beat Trump by a healthy margin in Texas and Arkansas (the two states where he has leads, the former his home state), the narrative will be that he's done, which helps Rubio. Of course, it possibly helps Trump even more.

If I'm Trump, I just might *want* Cruz to win Texas. It increases the odds that there are at least three candidates still in the race after tomorrow.

[Ben E Lou]

Dola...

Hadn't really thought about this, but what if Rubio gets really crushed tomorrow and Cruz emerges as a strong #2. Is the establishment forced to throw its support to Cruz?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Dola...

Hadn't really thought about this, but what if Rubio gets really crushed tomorrow and Cruz emerges as a strong #2. Is the establishment forced to throw its support to Cruz?

FWIW, it seems to be trending in the other direction lately, so I don't honestly think this is going to be a scenario in play.

And, no, I don't see Trump wanting anything good for Cruz in the next couple of primary rounds. He looks like the beneficiary of a Cruz exit, at least as much if not more than Rubio.

[flere-imsaho]

If you're Paul Ryan or Mitch McConnell, do you want to work with Donald Trump or Ted Cruz? It's that simple.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

If you're Paul Ryan or Mitch McConnell, do you want to work with Donald Trump or Ted Cruz? It's that simple.

They hate Cruz so much, I think they'd rather Trump get the nomination and lose than Cruz get the nomination and win.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Today's CNN poll: Trump 49, Cruz 15, Rubio 16, Carson 10, Kasich 6

Who would have guessed that Ben Carson had a firmer support floor than Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Bobby Jindal, Scott Walker, Lindsey Graham, etc....

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

They hate Cruz so much, I think they'd rather Trump get the nomination and lose than Cruz get the nomination and win.

That's where I'm going.

If I'm Paul Ryan and Cruz gets elected, I'm spending 12 months fending off a 2-pronged attack from the Freedom Caucus and the Oval Office before I resign a broken man.

If I'm Paul Ryan and Trump or Clinton get elected, I've at least got someone else at who to point the Freedom Caucus' vitriol.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

That's where I'm going.

If I'm Paul Ryan and Cruz gets elected, I'm spending 12 months fending off a 2-pronged attack from the Freedom Caucus and the Oval Office before I resign a broken man.

If I'm Paul Ryan and Trump or Clinton get elected, I've at least got someone else at who to point the Freedom Caucus' vitriol.

Also, they can distance themselves from Trump much easier than they can from Cruz.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I'd say if Trump or Cruz reach the WH both Ryan & McConnell have to step aside.

It's one of the upsides of either becoming President.

[lighthousekeeper]

I almost get the sense some people think Trump can beat HRC in November. I'd love to know what electoral map you think would make that happen.

(Also, PM me if you'd like to wager some real $$)

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

I almost get the sense some people think Trump can beat HRC in November. I'd love to know what electoral map you think would make that happen.

(Also, PM me if you'd like to wager some real $$)

Disaffected Ds, combined with a relative number of independents that come to their senses, combined with increased numbers of Rs who regain their bearings.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

I almost get the sense some people think Trump can beat HRC in November. I'd love to know what electoral map you think would make that happen.

(Also, PM me if you'd like to wager some real $$)

Consolidated white working class flips the Midwest, basically.

Spoiler

Click the map to create your own at 270toWin.com

Spoilered to keep the thread from getting overrun with images.

[NobodyHere]

I don't see Republicans taking Michigan, especially with Trump as a candidate and Snyder is proving to be an incredible douchebag.

[cuervo72]

PA? Eh, I dunno.

[molson]

Trump has polled well head-to-head against Clinton Florida too, including +2 last week (though I'm not sure how much those head-to-head polls tell us when the nominations aren't set).

[larrymcg421]

Trump would be the first Republican since 1972 to win Minnesota.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by NobodyHere

I don't see Republicans taking Michigan

Originally Posted by cuervo72

PA? Eh, I dunno.

Oh, yeah, it's a different map than we are used to. But this is turning out to be a different election than we are used to.

I'm not saying that I expect this map to happen, but if you were to ask me to take a stab at "If Trump wins, how does it look?" then this is what I see.

But, again, look at my posts earlier in this thread to see what I know. Very little, it turns out. (My PredictIt balance would tell the same story)

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

I almost get the sense some people think Trump can beat HRC in November. I'd love to know what electoral map you think would make that happen.

(Also, PM me if you'd like to wager some real $$)

One August terrorist attack could put Trump in the White House.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Disaffected Ds, combined with a relative number of independents that come to their senses, combined with increased numbers of Rs who regain their bearings.

I'm all for R's regaining their bearings, but their is still a large swath of "happy" center-right Republicans that think Trump is full of shit and ultimately more damaging than helpful. Maybe we (the happy lot) are stuck in the mud, but Trumps continued rise in popularity doesn't sway me from this awful feeling that he's pulling off some weird internal bet that he can win the ultimate "Salesman of the Year" trophy. Nothing about this dude makes any sense to what I'm used too...as a "happy" center-right dude. Happy probably isn't the right word, probably more like content...

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Trump would be the first Republican since 1972 to win Minnesota.

Which is a nice tie-in to the modern day trivia question: "Which dumbass state picked Mondale over Reagan?"

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Which is a nice tie-in to the modern day trivia question: "Which dumbass state picked Mondale over Reagan?"

When I was in 4th grade, our elementary school did a mock election.
I was one of only 6 students who voted for Mondale. The final result was something like 400-6.

[Scarecrow]

My take on the potential 2016 Presidential Election Map

Spoiler

Click the map to create your own at 270toWin.com

[lighthousekeeper]

Originally Posted by Scarecrow

My take on the potential 2016 Presidential Election Map

Spoiler

Click the map to create your own at 270toWin.com

Can we all just agree to redraw our state boundaries so that Florida doesn't always end up being the state who decides our President?

[Solecismic]

The media is definitely loving this. Rubio found out he gets 24/7 coverage if he speculates on Trump's penis size.

This is definitely a bizarre election. When voters are angry, they seem to want someone who shares that anger, not a policy statement.

The best thing for Trump is for Cruz to stay in because it will help with the WTAs in two weeks. So a close loss in Texas is ideal.

The next debate is going to be different. Thursday in Detroit with Megyn Kelly and Fox News. Fox has no reason to keep it from being a free-for-all cage match. And Trump can't sit this one out - he's the reason these debates are getting more and more intolerable. Now he has to stand there and take it for two hours.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

Can we all just agree to redraw our state boundaries so that Florida doesn't always end up being the state who decides our President?

I'd be okay with that....less standing in line with BLM and You are all sinners activists.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Solecismic

The media is definitely loving this. Rubio found out he gets 24/7 coverage if he speculates on Trump's penis size.

This is definitely a bizarre election. When voters are angry, they seem to want someone who shares that anger, not a policy statement.

The best thing for Trump is for Cruz to stay in because it will help with the WTAs in two weeks. So a close loss in Texas is ideal.

The next debate is going to be different. Thursday in Detroit with Megyn Kelly and Fox News. Fox has no reason to keep it from being a free-for-all cage match. And Trump can't sit this one out - he's the reason these debates are getting more and more intolerable. Now he has to stand there and take it for two hours.

He can't hide from the truth forever, not sure if Rubio has it in him to beat him up, though. It will be ugly one way or the other though.

[Solecismic]

Originally Posted by Dutch

He can't hide from the truth forever, not sure if Rubio has it in him to beat him up, though. It will be ugly one way or the other though.

Rubio is loving every minute of this. He gets to relive high school, only nobody kicks the crap out of him if tells the bully exactly what he's thinking.

Rubio's happy, Trump's happy, the media is deliriously happy, Hillary's happy. The only unhappy people are Republicans who think the issues are important.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Dutch

I'm all for R's regaining their bearings, but their is still a large swath of "happy" center-right Republicans that think Trump is full of shit and ultimately more damaging than helpful. Maybe we (the happy lot) are stuck in the mud, but Trumps continued rise in popularity doesn't sway me from this awful feeling that he's pulling off some weird internal bet that he can win the ultimate "Salesman of the Year" trophy. Nothing about this dude makes any sense to what I'm used too...as a "happy" center-right dude. Happy probably isn't the right word, probably more like content...

I should have replaced the word Republicans with the word Conservatives. Knew it while typing it, didn't feeling like changing it at the time.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by Dutch

I'd be okay with that....less standing in line with BLM and You are all sinners activists.

What do you have against the Bureau for Land Management?

[wustin]

This has been a good week so far

Donald Trump Supporter: Stop With The Racist Stuff | MSNBC - YouTube

[albionmoonlight]

Rubio Campaign Hires New Candidate In Top-Level Staff Shakeup - The Onion - America's Finest News Source

Potential game-changer.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

What do you have against the Bureau for Land Management?

Fuck...busted.

[dave731]

Originally Posted by wustin

This has been a good week so far

Donald Trump Supporter: Stop With The Racist Stuff | MSNBC - YouTube

Wow...just wow