keepthefaith

and bunches of experts in the summer of '12 said that a president with a 45% ish approval rating and unemployment above x% has never won re-election. I don't disagree with your present assessment at all and by now I would have thought Trump would have dropped some as he has tried pretty hard to blow himself up with some of the comments but he's still motoring down the track. Maybe after a couple more debates we'll see a candidate or two make a move up.

I'm not saying what we should do as a country or who we should elect. I'm simply pointing out that as a nation we are very capable of electing a president that for many seems like an obvious bad choice or has questionable policy positions.

The electorate of the United States Re-elected Barack Obama. Anything is possible, even when it makes no sense at all.

I'd say the page count on this forum is a good indicator of support nationwide. At this time it's Hillary leading with 63, Trump second at 55 but closing the gap, Bernie at 33 and Jumpin' Joe Biden at 2. Joe's got a lot of upside though if he gets in. Past gaff's alone will propel him past Sanders.

It's soda pop. You are both right.

We've had a different deal regarding shipping with Canada forever, way before NAFTA. Whether or not NAFTA as written is a good agreement would be a good debate.

No he didn't, he simply made a joke about it. He said this “Ford is building a $2.5 billion plant in Mexico,” [Trump] roared to a packed auditorium in Birch Run, Michigan, and 2,000 voices responded with lusty boos. “I’ll actually give them a good idea. Why don’t we just let the illegals drive the cars and trucks right into our country?” Given our border policies, it's not a stretch. My point was that Mexicans very likely will be bringing the cars or parts into the country, except they will be on a truck. Trump actually seems to give a **** about jobs.

I simply pointed out that the left criticizes Republicans for being the party of old white male people who elect the old white male people that run yet the Dems have only old white people running. So given that, can we now count on the left to completely drop that talking point altogether since the Republicans have some younger candidates along with a woman, a black man, a couple hispanics and an Indian running while the Dems are only old and white?

Just maybe you missed the point. Obama signed off on allowing the Mexican truck drivers to deliver products into the US rather than having U.S. truck drivers move the goods from the border to the interior of the U.S. For sure that reduces U.S. jobs and there was concern that Mexican trucks are not maintained to the same standards as U.S. and that Mexican drivers are not trained as well. The article seems to say that safety hasn't been an issue, but we were pressured by the Mexican government to agree due to tariffs on US goods going into Mexico. Imagine that, the Mexican government putting some pressure on the US and us caving in to that.

84% Jeb Bush Republican on economic, immigration, foreign policy, domestic policy, environmental, and healthcare issues. 84% Rick Santorum Republican on immigration, foreign policy, social, and healthcare issues. 83% Ted Cruz Republican on immigration, foreign policy, social, and healthcare issues. 82% Scott Walker Republican on economic, environmental, social, and healthcare issues. 81% Mike Huckabee Republican on economic, domestic policy, social, environmental, and healthcare issues. 81% Rick Perry Republican on economic, immigration, foreign policy, social, and healthcare issues. 80% Marco Rubio Republican on immigration, foreign policy, social, and healthcare issues. 77% Ben Carson Republican on economic, foreign policy, social, and healthcare issues. 76% Donald Trump Republican on economic, foreign policy, immigration, and social issues. 76% Carly Fiorina Republican on economic, foreign policy, social, and healthcare issues. 75% Rand Paul Republican on immigration, social, environmental, and healthcare issues. 71% Chris Christie Republican on economic, foreign policy, and healthcare issues. 70% Bobby Jindal Republican on social and environmental issues. 66% Lindsey Graham Republican on foreign policy and healthcare issues. 61% John Kasich Republican on economic, environmental, and education issues. 46% Hillary Clinton Democratic on domestic policy issues. 28% Bernie Sanders Democratic on domestic policy issues.

That may be true as NAFTA now allows for Mexican truck drivers to transport goods over the border and to their destination in the U.S. http://www.dallasnews.com/business/headlines/20150109-mexican-truckers-allowed-u.s.-trips.ece

Trump to Lindsey Graham on twitter... 9 hours ago Congrats @LindseyGrahamSC. You just got 4 points in your home state of SC—far better than zero nationally. You’re only 26 pts behind me. Ouch!!!

Malkin's a tiger. Now if she also had a british accent too, I'd be hooked. That's a rare combination Asian and British. I think we know what to expect from Trump as the pattern develops. About every two weeks he's gonna lob a bomb that drops near his own feet. You read that Kelly stuff and the only explanation has to be alcohol.

Rest assured, if Trump somehow wins the nomination, the mainstream media will have the field day of field days with him and his unapologetic nature will make this the greatest media circus of all time.

So you're busting my balls about me busting his balls. That's cool with me.

It sucks when people can't find work but anyone going to grad school for the "big job" plays the risk/reward game. You invest more time and money and hope there is a return on the investment. Sometimes the reward part takes a while which has to be a known risk when you go down that road.

I don't think Jeb is going anywhere even with the party leadership firmly behind him. He seems like a very good and competent man but I don't think he is charismatic enough to overcome the large field of candidates in most of the primaries.

Trap? Hardly. Where have I ever said a fence will cure the issue? My position on illegal immigration is not known by anyone here as I have never posted it. I've simply commented on other people's position. As for the answer to your silly question, I think Trump or anyone else serious about securing the border understands that simply building a fence and walking away is not going to do it. Others running for President would take a different approach (and they have said so) which would use more technology and law enforcement. There are probably several approaches that can work.

You're fighting this illegal immigration thing pretty hard. No doubt it's a large and serious issue for the country and what to do about it is a good debate, but you sound like someone who has something to lose if we can't make citizens of all these people. Are you banging your maid and is she an illegal? You're afraid that she might have to leave? Ben Affleck's nanny might be available.

Dem candidates, old and white older and whiter with Joe. How is the left going to defend that?

Apparently you missed where I stated (again) that Trump is not my choice nor do I support mass deportation. I'm simply making the point that being strong on illegal immigration (which doesn't have to go as far as mass deportation) may be a winning position for the eventual Republican nominee given public opinion. If I were DC Tom I would be calling you an idiot now but I'm not so I won't.

An amazing feat when looking back on the recent gloom and doom of the team's performance and the uncertainty of ownership beyond Ralph. Bravo Bills!

Well, you're letting your disdain for Trump get the best of you. Again and now for the record, Trump is not my top choice in the field and I'm very undecided at this point. My original point was that a tough stance on illegal immigration (which doesn't have to go as far as mass deportation and could be adopted by the eventual Republican nominee) might be a winning stance. There's a poll or two floating around that shows that about 1/3 of combined dem and independent voters support deportation. So the pool of non-Republican votes that could vote for the Republican if swayed by a strong stance on illegal immigration is far larger than the small percentage of votes lost to pissed off latinos who would have otherwise voted Republican even in a swing state with 20% latino population. The Dem candidate will likely run soft on the issue giving many Independents and dems a reason to vote the other party. Couple that with Hillary limping to the finish line and it could be a winner. Some approximate numbers... Overall percentage of voters who are independent or democrat about 60%, One third of these are pissed off about immigration so they make up 20% of voters. In a state with 20% latino voters, assuming 70% usually vote dem, then tough immigration stance puts 6% (30% of 20%) of overall votes at risk to Republican. So the question is can the Republican get an additional 7% or non-latino voters (dem and independent) to vote for them with a tough stance, a solution to the problem which protects American workers and solves the madness at the border. I say it's not a huge stretch and in states with smaller Latino populations the numbers are much easier to achieve. Agree that CO and FL are absolutely key states and that this is a tougher proposition there. CNN/ORC Poll. July 22-25, 2015. N=1,017 adults nationwide. Margin of error ± 3. "What should be the main focus of the U.S. government in dealing with the issue of illegal immigration: developing a plan that would allow illegal immigrants who have jobs to become legal U.S. residents, or developing a plan for stopping the flow of illegal immigrants into the U.S. and for deporting those already here?" RV = registered voters Legal Status Stop Flow, Deport Undecided % % % 7/22-25/15 All 56 42 3 Democrats 69 29 2 Independents 58 39 3 Republicans 34 63 2

So, I was walking through the mall and I saw that there was a "Muslim Book Store." I was wondering what exactly was in a Muslim bookstore so I went in. As I was wandering around taking a look, the clerk stopped me and asked if he could help me. I imagine I didn't look like his normal clientele, so I asked, “Do you have a copy of Donald Trump's book on his U.S. Immigration Policy regarding Muslims and illegal Mexicans?" The clerk said, "!@#$ off, get out and stayout!" I said, "Yes, that's the one. Do you have it in paperback?"

Interesting rant. For the record I didn't Trump. I only mentioned a candidate tough on illegal immigration which is more than just Trump. Latinos who can vote are still a minority in these swing states and their outrage doesn't multiply their votes. Yeah, it might drag along some family and friends but the remainder and majority of the population only needs a fractional uptick in support of a tough immigration candidate to have a net gain in votes. Certainly the election doesn't come down to this single issue for most voters so the math isn't this simple. The republican no matter who they are isn't getting many latino votes anyway (so says history, see G. Bush the elder who got only a small portion of the latino vote after his party and President signed amnesty and every election since then) so how much is lost by being a bastard is probably small. What we're seeing now in the "marketplace of voters" is a great deal of pent up anger over decades or illegal immigration which has been silenced by PC and the liberal media and is now coming to the surface in both the campaign and the news as serious crimes committed by illegal immigrants are more often being reported. Both the campaign and the news is shifting public opinion toward a tougher stance. You're crow about NC and that's the first and only state that you mentioned that I bothered to look up, well, would it surprise you that only 8% of the population is hispanc? https://suburbanstats.org/population/how-many-people-live-in-north-carolina