Posted on 08/20/2016 11:02:10 AM PDT by GrandJediMasterYoda
Yes, the only people that seem to want him are the voters
Google the author. He's an entertainment critic. I would have been as likely to post this as a Donny Dumbass tirade.
Uh,uh-—he’s saying that SHE will win but other Dem candidates would have been more respected and trusted.
She is unliked and dishonest-—but will win,according to him.
,
He’s talking about Hillary winning.
.
RE : Post #19 ~
“... arguments are not evidence (data). It’s true that Trump seems to get far more people than Hillary at his campaign events. It’s true that he’s pretty close in the polls, even after a month of intense Trump bashing. It’s true that he’s slowly closing the gap in the polls. We can make all sorts of arguments that this shows that he will win in November. But these arguments are simply theories interpreting a combination of evidence (polls) and anecdotes that may or may not reflect if people will actually vote, and if so, how.”
Good post, scouter - but it seems to me that your are focused on the possible negative outcome of this Election. Trump will skillfully Fillet the Butcher of Benghazi, by the Grace of God; and by the Great Patriotic American Voters who have only one wish : To Save Our Great Republic, and Make America Great Again!
Go Trump, GO!
Yes I’m agreeing with what you are saying, it doesn’t look good for Trump as he is fighting a constant MASSIVE uphill battle, against the Main stream biased media, the criminals in our government who don’t want someone messing up their criminal enterprises, to the low info morons in this country who seem to be living in fantasy land. That is a LOT to overcome and I think the only way he can overcome it is to start using some extraordinary means to do it, something that wakes people up. What means, I don’t know, but he better come up with it fast. If he is neck and neck with her he is going to lose through voter fraud alone, he cannot be in this position right now. Above all else Hillary CANNOT win. If she wins this country and the rest of the world are in tremendous trouble.
Nixon wasn't exactly beloved either.
For all the talk about how lousy recent Republican candidates have been, any one of them could have beaten George McGovern.
You've got to get out more if you think that Kyle Smith is a "libtard" -- or that Trump will win by a landslide.
Projections of voter fraud?
Any election that has a Democrat in the field of candidates will have vote fraud. The only question is to what extent.
“Kyle Smith (born 1966) is an American critic, novelist and essayist. He is a staff film critic[1] for the New York Post.”
A Clintonite in his fairy tale got to the point, where you know he is a Leftist:
“Get ready for the winner-by-default president. Hillary Clinton’s selling point, and the one that’s probably good enough for America right now, is that She isn’t He. But so is every other person (but one). How many of them could also have beaten Donald Trump? Not only Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren but Al Gore, John Kerry, Walter Mondale and Alec Baldwin must be shaking their heads and wondering why they didn’t run. (Thought bubble over Baldwin’s head: I could have been the stable, even-tempered voice of reason in this race.)”
It’s his interpretation of the fearful American people who think Trump would cut their programs.
but she'll only win because of a few states and perhaps won't even get the popular vote....
Hey, if you get paid to write stuff you write stuff. It really doesn't need to make any sense these days.
Yes I agree with you. But remember Hillary has media on her side so she has the “home field advantage”.
FDR could have swung that. Probably TR, too. Maybe Eisenhower. Bill Clinton could have tried when Dole ran against him, but it probably wouldn't have worked.
There is much chatter in DC these days about the meaningless, journalist-invented concept of “a mandate,” a voodoo belief that a president elected by a wide margin can do whatever he or she wants.
Voters don’t think that way, though: As soon as Barack Obama started doing unpopular stuff, they remembered they were still allowed to have opinions and opposed his policies, then immediately began installing Republican roadblocks to the Obama agenda starting with the election of Scott Brown to replace Ted Kennedy just one year into the new president’s term.
True, but the media are really going to push the "mandate" thing, and the country may be too demoralized to know how to react.
Voters can change their minds quickly, but in Clinton’s case it won’t even be clear what they think in the first place. A double-digit win, a “Hillary Clinton mandate,” would mean what, exactly? What does she stand for? Her early Flower Power radicalism, best expressed by her trippy Wellesley commencement speech in which she said politics was about opening up “ecstatic and penetrating modes of living”? Her wonky moderate turn in the last six years of the (first) Clinton administration? Her support for the Iraq War and for Wall Street as senator? The sharp turn left she made this summer, after primary season, solely to secure the endorsement of Bernie Sanders? Even Hillary must go to sleep at night wondering, “Wait a sec, which me am I this time?” You can’t vote decisively for a blur.
That is true, but politicians who are as chameleon-like as that usually find it easy to snap into one of their roles and play it to the hilt. When the wheel finally stops spinning they pick up and go on like nothing's happened. I don't think Hillary really spends much time on introspection, self-questioning or identity crises.
It’s how you define the word “We”..
To all of you who are from NYC; are people there really that detached from the rest of the US to hold that sort of opinion?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.