Jump to content

Early 4 Way Presidential Poll


  

26 members have voted

  1. 1. Who do you want as President?

    • Jeb Bush
      6
    • Donald Trump
      9
    • Hillary Clinton
      3
    • Bernie Sanders
      8


Recommended Posts

Yes, but if there are 10 other GOP candidates in the race through several primaries and they are all splitting 67% of the support, Trump could very well win or be in the top two in a bunch of primaries with only 25%-30% supporting him. I don't see Bush doing well in the debates. Not his strength IMO.

 

I couldn't disagree with you more. Jeb in my view, along with Kasich understand the issues more so than anyone else on the debate stage. All the anecdotal evidence of how Jeb performs in live settings in Townhalls, shows that people come away impressed with his mastery of the issues. In regards to your first point, yes in the first few states when there are so many candidates, with 20% support he could end up winning a state or two. Once the candidates begin to dwindle down, those unfavorable numbers will begin to matter a lot more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 232
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

 

How is it BS? when its simply pointing out facts. It's not making a case one way or another, all the article does which makes sense is connect the dots. It simply states that the people who are voting for Trump tend to be less educated and are against immigration reform. That's not a sleight, that's simply reporting what they see in their polling data. No one is saying there is anything wrong with being less educated, Democrats have shown to have had lower IQ scores than Repubs , but that's besides the point.

 

A lot of people are wondering, who are Trump's supporters? That's a legitimate question considering all the hoopla around Trump. So this article delves into their polling data and there is a sensible explanation to it. I'm not gonna lie, as soon as I read the headline, I was thinking Oh boy, here we go again, some article that was written to caste Repubs in a negative light. But then after reading it, I didn't come away with that whatsoever.

 

It's BS because they make no distinction between immigration and illegal immigration. Trump was talking about illegals, not people who went through the proper channels to arrive here. I understand your point, but mine is that the entire premise of the article - like so many others that deal with the issue - is bunk because they fail to make the distinction between legal and illegal, and they do so in order to reenforce a false stereotype of people who oppose illegal immigration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It's BS because they make no distinction between immigration and illegal immigration. Trump was talking about illegals, not people who went through the proper channels to arrive here. I understand your point, but mine is that the entire premise of the article - like so many others that deal with the issue - is bunk because they fail to make the distinction between legal and illegal, and they do so in order to reenforce a false stereotype of people who oppose illegal immigration.

 

I understand what you are saying, but I believe the main point of the article was to show who the supporters of Trump happen to be. I've read it three times now, and to your point I believe there is an undertone that speaks to that. But it's definitely a secondary and not the primary point of the article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the irony is that trump is much more openly elitist than most of the other candidates: http://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/donald-trump-let-golf-be-elitist. he has never been and will never be a great friend to the working class. he's much more likely to take advantage of them then empower them.

 

It may be elitist, and perhaps that’s what golf needs. Let golf be elitist. When I say “aspire,” that’s a positive word. Let people work hard and aspire to some day be able to play golf. To afford to play it. They’re trying to teach golf to people who will never be able to really play it. They’re trying too hard.

Edited by birdog1960
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I couldn't disagree with you more. Jeb in my view, along with Kasich understand the issues more so than anyone else on the debate stage. All the anecdotal evidence of how Jeb performs in live settings in Townhalls, shows that people come away impressed with his mastery of the issues. In regards to your first point, yes in the first few states when there are so many candidates, with 20% support he could end up winning a state or two. Once the candidates begin to dwindle down, those unfavorable numbers will begin to matter a lot more.

It'll be very interesting to watch this all evolve over the next several months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Golf is elitist again?

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/keyes/150721

 

There is an Ivy League grad who has spent most of his life in Manhattan, where he is chauffeured around in limousines. He frequently brags to strangers about his massive personal wealth. In public statements, he has advocated government health care, a woman's right to an abortion, an assault weapons ban and paying off the national debt by forcing rich people to forfeit 14.25 percent of their total wealth. When the man married his third wife, he invited Bill and Hillary Clinton to the wedding, and he has given many thousands to their political campaigns and their foundation. He's donated many thousands more that helped elect Democrats to the Senate and the House.

Edited by birdog1960
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the irony is that trump is much more openly elitist than most of the other candidates: http://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/donald-trump-let-golf-be-elitist. he has never been and will never be a great friend to the working class. he's much more likely to take advantage of them then empower them.

 

It may be elitist, and perhaps that’s what golf needs. Let golf be elitist. When I say “aspire,” that’s a positive word. Let people work hard and aspire to some day be able to play golf. To afford to play it. They’re trying to teach golf to people who will never be able to really play it. They’re trying too hard.

 

 

Funny you say that, the candidate you support, if he had his way the economy would fall into a tailspin and the middle class would be the hardest hit. Bernie, without doubt is the worst candidate in the entire field for the middle class. Ironically, he'd be the best candidate to slow down illegal immigration, simply because the economy would be so ****ty, illegal immigrants would stay where they are or look elsewhere, because there would be less opportunities. Europe 2.0

 

A vote for Bernie is a vote for slowing down illegal immigration

Edited by Magox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Funny you say that, the candidate you support, if he had his way the economy would fall into a tailspin and the middle class would be the hardest hit. Bernie, without doubt is the worst candidate in the entire field for the middle class. Ironically, he'd be the best candidate to slow down illegal immigration, simply because the economy would be so ****ty, illegal immigrants would stay where they are or look elsewhere, because there would be less opportunities. Europe 2.0

 

A vote for Bernie is a vote for slowing down illegal immigration

 

One gets the sense that after a couple of years of a Bernie Sanders presidency, Mexico would be complaining about all the Americans sneaking into Mexico to find work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I understand what you are saying, but I believe the main point of the article was to show who the supporters of Trump happen to be. I've read it three times now, and to your point I believe there is an undertone that speaks to that. But it's definitely a secondary and not the primary point of the article.

 

I just think that their lack of differentiation between illegal and legal undermines the entire premise of the point they're trying to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I just think that their lack of differentiation between illegal and legal undermines the entire premise of the point they're trying to make.

 

Regardless of how anyone wants to interpret the article, there is some hard data that you can come away with from the polling results regarding who Trump's supporters are. I take more stock on the data than anything else.

Edited by Magox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Regardless of how anyone wants to interpret the article, there is some hard data that you can come away with from the polling results regarding who Trump's supporters are. I take more stock on the data than anything else.

 

Fair enough. I'm personally involved in an immigration case, so I'm very biased on this issue. I'm sure that bias is showing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...