Posted on 10/12/2016 12:33:51 AM PDT by Az Joe
Trump voters will crawl 2 miles over broken glass to vote.
Hillary voters will stay home if they see a cloud.
This will not be an easy fight, and the campaign to get out the vote has to be really big on our side. As it stands, we have had an electoral college demographic disadvantage for the last 10 years, which grows with every four years as national culture becomes more Liberal (a simple litmus test - most of the stuff currently on television would not have been televised when Bill Clinton was in office. Culture has changed that much).
The only way Trump will win is if every eligible Republican and Conservative is committed to going to vote, and dragging like-minded people along to do the same. I don't care whether they are pro-Trump or simply anti-Hillary, they all need to come out and vote for Trump. That's the only way. Anything else is hope and wishful thinking, because I think Hillary (and her supportive infrastructure) is a formidable and cannot be taken lightly.
I’m with you.
Probably more like 30 years though.
“Hillary voters will stay home if they see a cloud.”
But the party bosses will physically pick them up and bus them to the nearest precinct - multiple times if necessary.
Or better yet they will fill out the absentee ballots for them.
Voter fraud in this election is going to be of historic proportions.
“...Voter fraud in this election is going to be of historic proportions...”
But, but, Whoopi Goldberg says that threats to investigate vote fraud is just a return to the 1950s and is the new voter “intimidation”.
We had better send some fraudsters to prison this time or our elections will be far worse than those in Honduras.
... and its been a long time comin' . I have known of people involved in rounding up bums and hauling them to the polls, and considering themselves paragons of virtue for doing it. But it occurred to me, why bother with the ceremony? All you need is the names. That's where we're at now, IMHO.
Nobody I know and nobody I talk to says they will vote for Hillary but just about everybody concedes that she will win.
What am I missing?
The only way Trump wins is if all the people who like what he has to say, or don't like what Hillary has to say, come out and vote. That's the only way. There is a path to victory as Hillary, even though she is formidable, has critical disadvantages. She is not trustworthy, there are some Sander's people who are still sore, and the African American community does not support her as much as she'd want. It is possible for Trump to win, but voters have to go and do their part because he also has several disadvantages (for example, the unhelpful comments from people like Ryan and McCain, and the chance that another tape may come out). This will have to be the peoples' election, and they will need to show with their votes that the media cannot shut them up.
Anything else is wishful thinking
As a FReeper, you are politically aware. You this probably discuss politics. It will likely be with like minded people. Thus, the chances of you being in the midst of Hillary supporters are slim.
People said the same about Obama in 2008, and how they knew no one who liked him. Closed loop systems. For Trump to win everyone who can vote will need to vote like he is 20 points behind. Fight to the voting booth dragging those who would rather not go, and vote.
Understood. I believe that Trump’s floor, whatever that is (40%—42%?) is rock solid, at least in comparison to Hillary’s floor, whatever that is.
Hillary MAY suffer significant enough “leakage” of her support to Stein and/or Johnson to drop below Trump.
I am not hopeful about GOTV and Trump will have to overcome this somehow, in another way.
Was reading about 1980. It is true that Gallup had Carter up 8 (47-39) at about this point in the campaign, but most of the polls had it within the margin of error, and Reagan even had a slight lead in a few. Election Day shocked with Reagan’s 10 point landslide win over Carter.
No one saw that coming, or even came close to seeing it coming. It was completely missed, except perhaps in hindsight. It was 35 years ago and maybe the science of polling is much, much better now but I don’t think it was in the stone age then.
So I don’t know. Trump is facing the most formidable collection of forces ever assembled against one candidate: His own party, the media, the Clinton machine
If you don’t mind....
http://swampland.time.com/2012/10/31/remembering-1980-are-the-polls-missing-something/
“For weeks before the presidential election, the gurus of public opinion polling were nearly unanimous in their findings. In survey after survey, they agreed that the coming choice between President Jimmy Carter and Challenger Ronald Reagan was “too close to call.” A few points at most, they said, separated the two major contenders.
But when the votes were counted, the former California Governor had defeated Carter by a margin of 51% to 41% in the popular vote–a rout for a U.S. presidential race. In the electoral college, the Reagan victory was a 10-to-1 avalanche that left the President holding only six states and the District of Columbia.
After being so right for so long about presidential elections–the pollsters’ findings had closely agreed with the voting results for most of the past 30 years–how could the surveys have been so wrong? The question is far more than technical. The spreading use of polls by the press and television has an important, if unmeasurable, effect on how voters perceive the candidates and the campaign, creating a kind of synergistic effect: the more a candidate rises in the polls, the more voters seem to take him seriously.
With such responsibilities thrust on them, the pollsters have a lot to answer for, and they know it.
Their problems with the Carter-Reagan race have touched off the most skeptical examination of public opinion polling since 1948, when the surveyors made Thomas Dewey a sure winner over Harry Truman. In response, the experts have been explaining, qualifying, clarifying–and rationalizing. Simultaneously, they are privately embroiled in as much backbiting, mudslinging and mutual criticism as the tight-knit little profession has ever known.
The public and private pollsters are criticizing their competition’s judgment, methodology, reliability and even honesty.
At the heart of the controversy is the fact that no published survey detected the Reagan landslide before it actually happened.
Three weeks before the election, for example, TIME’S polling firm, Yankelovich, Skelly and White, produced a survey of 1,632 registered voters showing the race almost dead even, as did a private survey by Caddell. Two weeks later, a survey by CBS News and the New York Times showed about the same situation.”
“Voter fraud in this election is going to be of historic proportions.”
Yea, who’s gonna prosecute it?
Hillary can win if the MSM can persuade enough despondent Trump voters to stay home.
Hillary’s first lead in Dornsife since August is a shot across the bow.
Even though its essentially tied, its a warning that we must take nothing for granted and not be complacent.
The Uniparty will do everything it can between now and the election to secure a win for Hillary and that includes all means fair and foul alike.
In the current climate, it will be a miracle if Trump actually wins.
A near miracle-like happening at least.
So you’re saying that yes, she’s going to win?
Like attracts like. Birds of a feather flock together. (In DUs case) fools never differ. Etc etc etc.
More importantly, I've seen many good FReepers delude themselves in the past two elections. For this one, Hillary is deeply flawed and is vulnerable, but she is still very formidable. She enjoys a demographic advantage. She has the support of the media. Ironically, she also has the support of part of the GOP based on how they are attacking Trump.
So, to answer your question. No, I do not know who is going to win. Soothsaying is not part of my repertoire. However, I do know that in any election people are best served by voting like their candidate is 20 points behind. Dragging all like minded people to vote.
That is not weakness or bed wetting. That is simple prudence in the face of the most formidable Dem candidate (not the person, but the machinery) after Obama (who was not the empty suit many made him to be - some saw a weak effeminate man who was a social organizer; I saw a man come from literally nowhere, no real experience, nothing, and become the most powerful man in the world. In my job in private equity I'd also met some early backers of 'Barry' as they called him from Chicago, and all of them said he was a monster).
I am a realist. Sure, an optimist, but a realist all the same. Hope and wishful thinking are not methods I subscribe to, and I pray that those eligible to vote come out and vote like their future depends on it. It does
The same people who go after Hillary for lying.
>>I WILL NOT crawl 2 miles over broken glass! I’ll take the truck.
It’s a figure of speech.
Pauline Kael and the election of Nixon.
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.