What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Official Donald Trump for President thread (8 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Saints, I like your analysis, except- 

On the Democratic side, nobody beats Hillary- not Booker, or Biden, or anyone. Simple reason- she had the best name recognition among African-Americans and they believed she was due. The trust and email issues would have made no difference. 

And once Hillary was the Democratoc nominee she would have defeated anybody on the Republican side. I suspect that deep down conservatives senses this which was part of the reason they went with Trump. Barring a catastrophe, Hillary Clinton was always going to be our next President. 
What? Did you not watch the fight the GOP had over trump? The Never Trump? The outright blasting of Trump by Cruz, still now we are seeing Republicans run away from Trump.

 
Going into this election, the two most famous people in terms of name recognition who chose to run for President were Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Nobody else was even close. It's not a coincidence that these are our nominees. 

In terms of Trump, no celebrity without political experience has ever chosen to seriously run before. But what if one had? Suppose Walter Cronkite had run in 1972? Or Joe Montana in 1996? Or Bruce Springsteen?  With name and face recognition greater than all politicians, who knows? 

 
What? Did you not watch the fight the GOP had over trump? The Never Trump? The outright blasting of Trump by Cruz, still now we are seeing Republicans run away from Trump.
Yeah, this. Plus  :lmao:  @ actual conservatives having anything to do with Trump. Trump is the result of a grass roots insurgency by a bunch of angry bigots scared because the world is changing.

 
GTFO. I know you love her man, but she's a hugely flawed candidate. Many (D)s would have beat her, and anyone reasonable nominated by the Republicans would have been a close call.
My opinion of her doesn't matter. I am trying to point out 2 facts: 

1. Name and face recognition trumps all other factors. 

3. On the Democratic side, when blacks vote as a group, it's over. 

 
What? Did you not watch the fight the GOP had over trump? The Never Trump? The outright blasting of Trump by Cruz, still now we are seeing Republicans run away from Trump.
I watched it all. Trump was terrible from the beginning, and none of those guys could stop him. 

Cruz was an established politician who shared most of Trump's views. And he didn't really come close to stopping Trump, because of name and face recognition. 

 
I watched it all. Trump was terrible from the beginning, and none of those guys could stop him. 

Cruz was an established politician who shared most of Trump's views. And he didn't really come close to stopping Trump, because of name and face recognition. 
Because of name and face recognition?

I think it has more to do with this being the death rattle of the Tea Party, and everyone in the GOP agreeing that they cannot stand Ted Cruz.

I mean, finding Cruz repulsive is one thing everyone can get on board with.

 
My opinion of her doesn't matter. I am trying to point out 2 facts: 

1. Name and face recognition trumps all other factors. 

3. On the Democratic side, when blacks vote as a group, it's over. 
Well, black voters certainly did prefer Hillary to Bernie Sanders. I don't think it's particularly obvious that they would have overwhelmingly preferred her to other options. And no, name recognition doesn't trump all other factors. No one outside of die hard Democrats and political junkies knew who Obama was when he started off running against Hillary in 2008. And beat her.

 
Because of name and face recognition?

I think it has more to do with this being the death rattle of the Tea Party, and everyone in the GOP agreeing that they cannot stand Ted Cruz.

I mean, finding Cruz repulsive is one thing everyone can get on board with.
I am betting that if you polled the people who attend Trump rallies, not now but one year ago, they would have told you they loved Ted Cruz. 

 
My opinion of her doesn't matter. I am trying to point out 2 facts:

1. Name and face recognition trumps all other factors.

3. On the Democratic side, when blacks vote as a group, it's over.
1. Everyone recognizes both Clinton and Trump and everyone hates either Clinton or Trump. Recognition isn't intrinsically good.

3. (wait, where is 2?) Black people would have almost unanimously voted for whoever the Dems nominated.

 
Well, black voters certainly did prefer Hillary to Bernie Sanders. I don't think it's particularly obvious that they would have overwhelmingly preferred her to other options. And no, name recognition doesn't trump all other factors. No one outside of die hard Democrats and political junkies knew who Obama was when he started off running against Hillary in 2008. And beat her.
I should have written that name recognition trumps most factors- but incredible charisma can trump all factors. I like Corey Booker, and Kaine, and Joe Biden, but there are no Obamas on that list. 

 
I watched it all. Trump was terrible from the beginning, and none of those guys could stop him. 

Cruz was an established politician who shared most of Trump's views. And he didn't really come close to stopping Trump, because of name and face recognition. 


Because of name and face recognition?

I think it has more to do with this being the death rattle of the Tea Party, and everyone in the GOP agreeing that they cannot stand Ted Cruz.

I mean, finding Cruz repulsive is one thing everyone can get on board with.
And by everyone we mean Like  EVERYONE -  he might be the most hated politician in Washington. 

 
Saints, I like your analysis, except- 

On the Democratic side, nobody beats Hillary- not Booker, or Biden, or anyone. Simple reason- she had the best name recognition among African-Americans and they believed she was due. The trust and email issues would have made no difference. 

And once Hillary was the Democratoc nominee she would have defeated anybody on the Republican side. I suspect that deep down conservatives senses this which was part of the reason they went with Trump. Barring a catastrophe, Hillary Clinton was always going to be our next President. 
:bs:

 
My opinion of her doesn't matter. I am trying to point out 2 facts: 

1. Name and face recognition trumps all other factors. 

3. On the Democratic side, when blacks vote as a group, it's over. 
Do you seriously not remember 2008, Tim?  It mattered so much then that an unknown charismatic senator from Illinois thumped Hillary in the primaries.  I think Booker or Biden wipe the floor with Hillary and then would be up 15-20 points on Trump right now.  Would be an even bigger blood bath.

 
Going into this election, the two most famous people in terms of name recognition who chose to run for President were Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Nobody else was even close. It's not a coincidence that these are our nominees. 

In terms of Trump, no celebrity without political experience has ever chosen to seriously run before. But what if one had? Suppose Walter Cronkite had run in 1972? Or Joe Montana in 1996? Or Bruce Springsteen?  With name and face recognition greater than all politicians, who knows? 
There was this Jeb! fella who had pretty strong name recognition. 

 
Do you seriously not remember 2008, Tim?  It mattered so much then that an unknown charismatic senator from Illinois thumped Hillary in the primaries.  I think Booker or Biden wipe the floor with Hillary and then would be up 15-20 points on Trump right now.  Would be an even bigger blood bath.
The battle between Obama and Hillary in those primaries are still legendary, their bloodbath was so vicious that many thought that the very Idea of Hillary serving in the Obama administration simply ludicrous.

 
Not polls, one poll and that is the USC/Dornsife L.A. Times poll that uses questionable methodology because they keep using the same respondents.
That poll has had Trump on top many times and has never had Clinton up by more than a couple IIRC. Outlier for sure but let them keep believing.

link

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Do you seriously not remember 2008, Tim?  It mattered so much then that an unknown charismatic senator from Illinois thumped Hillary in the primaries.  I think Booker or Biden wipe the floor with Hillary and then would be up 15-20 points on Trump right now.  Would be an even bigger blood bath.
Obama had two things going for him: extraordinary charisma, and the first serious chance of a black President, which got all the black vote behind him. He needed both those factors to beat Hillary and then just barely. 

 
From the article:

"Separately, the poll also asks voters which candidate they think will win. That question has often shown greater ability to predict election outcomes than asking people who they will vote for, particularly when the election remains months away. Clinton continues to lead voter expectations by a large margin, 54%-40%."

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Never Trump'Never Hillary voter here

favorite writing from last week.

"He blames the media, for making him look nuts by reporting the things he says — which are nuts."

It’s too early to begin the bloody and tearful recriminations — but there will be a time. Not to blame Trump for being Trump, which is exactly what anybody with a lick of sense would expect him to be. But those who enabled him, who plumped him and the largely fictitious establishment-vs.-the-base soap opera for their own personal audience-building and money-making agendas? We are going to need to have a word about them, come November.Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/438962/donald-trump-media-supporters-loss
 

 
I do agree that Booker or Biden would be doing better against Trump, though not 15-20 points. Slightly better. 
Moot point in that neither ran against her, knowing that she couldn't be beaten.

That said, Booker is not well known to most voters and who knows how well he would have fared under the vetting process. Plus, there would be the question of whether this country would elect back-to-back black presidents (I got no problem with that, but without even explicitly mentioning it, it would bring race to the forefront of the campaign). Biden has his own baggage and never did well in his prior presidential runs - perhaps 8 years as VP would make that irrelevant, but who knows.

 
From the article:

"Separately, the poll also asks voters which candidate they think will win. That question has often shown greater ability to predict election outcomes than asking people who they will vote for, particularly when the election remains months away. Clinton continues to lead voter expectations by a large margin, 54%-40%."
I think Donald covered this.  The game is rigged and everyone knows it.  

 
In his defense, both statements are true. LA Times is credible (though the poll may not be) and he was passing it along. I go to real clear politics and look at the polls (all the polls!) so I've seen this one for a long time being well off of all the others. National polls don't matter much anyway.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top