It will be Clinton v. Trump, and Clinton will win

[laughing dog]

But it is two completely different levels of not wanting. I don't want to be shot... and I don't want to get stuck in traffic.

I would prefer not to be stuck in traffic after I have been shot. I do not share your view that one is much worse than the other. Trump talks crazy, but he doesn't really act crazy. Clinton does not talk crazy, but I find her totally insincere and I do not trust her at all (and I did not trust her husband either).

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

But it is two completely different levels of not wanting. I don't want to be shot... and I don't want to get stuck in traffic.

I would prefer not to be stuck in traffic after I have been shot. I do not share your view that one is much worse than the other. Trump talks crazy, but he doesn't really act crazy.

We have no idea what he'd do if elected. We have no idea what his general tax policy would be, his foreign policy would be, or his Judicial nominees would be. We also have no idea what his Cabinet would be. Trump is an absolute wild card and all we really know if that his support right now is amongst the ugliest factions of our country.

Clinton does not talk crazy, but I find her totally insincere and I do not trust her at all (and I did not trust her husband either).

I trust Clinton to do what is mostly right in the general interests overall, and enact some policies that will help ensure her wealth down the line. I trust she will replace SCOTUS Justices with moderate Justices that will be much much much more likely to ensure the general protection and expansion of Civil Rights, not the retraction of them. Her foreign policy will likely be a continuation of Obama's, not an escalation.

 

[laughing dog]

I would prefer not to be stuck in traffic after I have been shot. I do not share your view that one is much worse than the other. Trump talks crazy, but he doesn't really act crazy.

We have no idea what he'd do if elected. We have no idea what his general tax policy would be, his foreign policy would be, or his Judicial nominees would be. We also have no idea what his Cabinet would be. Trump is an absolute wild card and all we really know if that his support right now is amongst the ugliest factions of our country.

Clinton does not talk crazy, but I find her totally insincere and I do not trust her at all (and I did not trust her husband either).

I trust Clinton to do what is mostly right in the general interests overall, and enact some policies that will help ensure her wealth down the line. I trust she will replace SCOTUS Justices with moderate Justices that will be much much much more likely to ensure the general protection and expansion of Civil Rights, not the retraction of them. Her foreign policy will likely be a continuation of Obama's, not an escalation.

Unless Clinton can pull in enough voters to get a Democratic House and Senate, we have no idea what Clinton will be able to do at all. Clinton's speechs on foreign policy have indicated a more bellicose view of matters. I am not defending Trump but from what I know about his life and his accomplishments, he is not some right-wing loony. I think his political rhetoric now is pure bullshit - it sounds good to his base. I suspect Trump is more likely to be more "pro-business" than Clinton, but other than that, I don't share your optimism over their differences or the sincerity of the proposed policies.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Democrats will likely tighten the deficit in the House and regain the Senate, but well below the filibuster limit. I can't imagine obstruction of Clinton will be any greater than that against Obama's.

If Trump were running as a moderate, fine, but he is slogging with the ugliest elements in politics right now. His previous history is irrelevant, much like McCain's history was in '08.

One other thing to look at ld, is the whole Sarah Palin endorsement and saying he wants her in his Cabinet, his executive cabinet not as a sex slave. What are we to derive from that sort of endorsement?

 

[Derec]

Man, I love sticking my neck out, so my election prediction is as follows: Both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump will win their party's respective nominations, but Hillary will go on to defeat Trump in the general election.

Perhaps, if she doesn't get indicted over her damn emails...

First, I love Bernie!!!! I do indeed feel the Bern.

Maybe you should check that out ...

But he is not a serious presidential candidate and could not govern if he won. And while he is doing well in the polls in Iowa and New Hampshire, those are basically his only strong constituency. He'll lose everywhere else even if he does win those two. Most democrats realize he is less electable than Clinton; although admittedly, even he might beat the Donald. I'd sure help!

I think the idea of superior electability of "broke ass" Hillary "the Bullet Dodger" Clinton is greatly exaggerated. And why do you think Iowa and NH are the only states he could win? If he manages to win those two that will buoy him elsewhere as well.

There does not seem to be anyone who can truly effectively challenge him. Personally I think it's a sign that the Repub party has gone off the deep end, and fortunately so do many other people, who aren't necessarily progressive types.

If Trump manages to win Iowa and NH expect all establishment friendly candidates to drop out except one. Last stand defense if you will.

So it comes down to the electoral college and getting 270 or more EVs. The way I see it, Hillary likely has 263 EVs pretty much locked up (barring major catastrophe and/or unknown black swans). This includes both Iowa and Nevada with 6 EV's a piece. Recent polling in Iowa show her trouncing Trump there and it's generally a blue state - trending even more that way over the years. Same with Nevada, it was kind of red in the past but has trended blue, if not solidly, close enough to call it for her most likely.

I think that greatly exaggerates Hillary's appeal to voters.

The problems with this prediction though are that there can be no really great surprises in 2016. The economy must continue to grow - even if it is not as fast as it should be. There can't be any horrific terrorist attacks in the U.S. There can't be other international crisis that deflect the attention of the voters too much. I suspect that there won't be, but there will always be scares and other issues throwing up their ugly head. The other Black Swan out there lurking is Hillary's health. She ain't no spring chicken anymore, and she's had one fainting spell. Of course Trump could have the same problem. And finally there's an assumption that the email scandal tracking Hillary won't totally blow up on her and there will be no smoking gun to indicate her doing something awful that utterly turns the voters off. For the most part though I think the damage from that scandal has already passed, but we will see.

That's a lot of assumptions. Note also that if Bernie fans feel that they have been robbed of the nomination a lot of them will stay home or vote third party (Jill Stein could get more than 1% this time, exciting for her I'm sure) which could sink Hillary in a close election.

 

[SLD]

Perhaps, if she doesn't get indicted over her damn emails...

First, I love Bernie!!!! I do indeed feel the Bern.

Maybe you should check that out ...

But he is not a serious presidential candidate and could not govern if he won. And while he is doing well in the polls in Iowa and New Hampshire, those are basically his only strong constituency. He'll lose everywhere else even if he does win those two. Most democrats realize he is less electable than Clinton; although admittedly, even he might beat the Donald. I'd sure help!

I think the idea of superior electability of "broke ass" Hillary "the Bullet Dodger" Clinton is greatly exaggerated. And why do you think Iowa and NH are the only states he could win? If he manages to win those two that will buoy him elsewhere as well.

There does not seem to be anyone who can truly effectively challenge him. Personally I think it's a sign that the Repub party has gone off the deep end, and fortunately so do many other people, who aren't necessarily progressive types.

If Trump manages to win Iowa and NH expect all establishment friendly candidates to drop out except one. Last stand defense if you will.

So it comes down to the electoral college and getting 270 or more EVs. The way I see it, Hillary likely has 263 EVs pretty much locked up (barring major catastrophe and/or unknown black swans). This includes both Iowa and Nevada with 6 EV's a piece. Recent polling in Iowa show her trouncing Trump there and it's generally a blue state - trending even more that way over the years. Same with Nevada, it was kind of red in the past but has trended blue, if not solidly, close enough to call it for her most likely.

I think that greatly exaggerates Hillary's appeal to voters.

The problems with this prediction though are that there can be no really great surprises in 2016. The economy must continue to grow - even if it is not as fast as it should be. There can't be any horrific terrorist attacks in the U.S. There can't be other international crisis that deflect the attention of the voters too much. I suspect that there won't be, but there will always be scares and other issues throwing up their ugly head. The other Black Swan out there lurking is Hillary's health. She ain't no spring chicken anymore, and she's had one fainting spell. Of course Trump could have the same problem. And finally there's an assumption that the email scandal tracking Hillary won't totally blow up on her and there will be no smoking gun to indicate her doing something awful that utterly turns the voters off. For the most part though I think the damage from that scandal has already passed, but we will see.

That's a lot of assumptions. Note also that if Bernie fans feel that they have been robbed of the nomination a lot of them will stay home or vote third party (Jill Stein could get more than 1% this time, exciting for her I'm sure) which could sink Hillary in a close election.

More Hillary will be indicted bovine scat. Outside of Fox News and other right wing websites there is no serious call for her to be indicted. There isn't even a criminal probe of her email issues going on. There is an inspector general investigation, but indictment? Hardly in the cards. Critics will call it a white wash, but the real truth is that there is no reason to indict her at all. At the time, it was legal for her to have the server (the law changed after she left State); and absent her taking something off of SIPRNET or another classified system and putting that on her server deliberately (and that means her, not someone else who sent something to her), she is not subject to any kind of punishment - not civil or criminal.

So you might as well quit pipe dreaming about it.

SLD

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Could sink Hillary in a close election?

Seriously? Have you seen the idiot parade in the Republican Party? The two leading candidates are people the party itself doesn't want to get the nomination. The guy in first and likely to with New Hampshire is a noted businessman was has succeeded well in the business world and shows little talent otherwise. He has campaigned by stoking the irate feelings of racist assholes.

The other, perhaps a candidate that is ten times as fake as Hillary Clinton. A Tea Party candidate only because he needed something to separate himself in a primary, and a seeker of god because that is a major constituency in these primaries, the man likely to win Iowa doesn't seem to actually have any positions that aren't related to electoral politics.

Close election? The Republicans may be lucky to hold onto the House, despite a huge lead in there already.

 

[SLD]

I would prefer not to be stuck in traffic after I have been shot. I do not share your view that one is much worse than the other. Trump talks crazy, but he doesn't really act crazy.

We have no idea what he'd do if elected. We have no idea what his general tax policy would be, his foreign policy would be, or his Judicial nominees would be. We also have no idea what his Cabinet would be. Trump is an absolute wild card and all we really know if that his support right now is amongst the ugliest factions of our country.

Clinton does not talk crazy, but I find her totally insincere and I do not trust her at all (and I did not trust her husband either).

I trust Clinton to do what is mostly right in the general interests overall, and enact some policies that will help ensure her wealth down the line. I trust she will replace SCOTUS Justices with moderate Justices that will be much much much more likely to ensure the general protection and expansion of Civil Rights, not the retraction of them. Her foreign policy will likely be a continuation of Obama's, not an escalation.

Damn straight, Jimmy!

I don't understand all of this "I don't trust, Hillary" talk. OK. Fine. Who gives a shit. You shouldn't trust anyone. This isn't a faith based discussion board is it!! The question is what do you really expect her to do or not do, and why? There are a lot of people I don't "trust" but I have to deal with them. Yes, we get generalized feelings of distrust about a lot of people, based on little things like the tones in their voice and a lot of it based on what others say about the person. Big deal. When it comes to picking a presidential candidate to vote for, you generally are limited to a few choices and you have to pick the best regardless of your feelings. Your reason for not trusting Hillary need to be explicit - and should be in reality based on specific examples of mendacity on her part. Not speculative generalizations. And they should be about how she will act as President. I've seen nothing in Hillary Clinton's past that indicates she is more mendacious than any other person. Does she spin things her way? I'm sure that's never been done by any Presidential candidate ever!

Trump may come across as sincere. (Hey, if you can fake that, you can do anything!) But it is precisely that which scares the living shit out of me! He's going to drag us into another war in the middle east. he's going to gut environmental protections. He's going alienate the US in huge parts of the world. And i suspect he's going to seriously damage our economy with tax breaks for the extreme rich. But, hey - he is trustworthy!

SLD