Havent watched Fox in a few weeks. Turned it on now just to Rove discussing how to stop Trump.

quote:

Originally posted by entropy:
Havent watched Fox in a few weeks. Turned it on now just to Rove discussing how to stop Trump.

Yeah, I just saw that. Karl Rove is a lot like Megyn Kelly. They both devote each and every day on what they can do or say to defeat Trump. They are gonna be so bummed out come November.

quote:

Originally posted by entropy:
Havent watched Fox in a few weeks. Turned it on now just to Rove discussing how to stop Trump.

You must have turned it on at just the right time. Fox is nothing but the Trump show and has been even more so ever since Rubio dropped out. If you haven't been watching because you thought they were anti Trump, maybe you should check them out again because they are very very pro Trump for the most part. At least they have been any time I've tuned it in, but I only catch it on the radio.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
I've never understood the philosophy that spending money on TV ads convinces votes who to vote for. Are you swayed by that stuff? Is this how you make such decisions?

It really is a puzzler. I can only imagine these type ads are directed at a very, ahem..."special" type of voter.

When I see those ads with others in the room, no matter if I know them or not, I always have fun with them. If it's a negative ad, I say, "man, that guy looks like he sucks; I ain't voting for that a-hole."

If it's a positive ad, I just stand there and nod my head in enthusiastic agreement as I look over to whoever might be standing next to me and just say, "hell yeah! That's what I'm talking about. Now there's a real American right there. Am I right, buddy?"

quote:

Originally posted by cobrajet:

quote:

Originally posted by entropy:
Havent watched Fox in a few weeks. Turned it on now just to Rove discussing how to stop Trump.

You must have turned it on at just the right time. Fox is nothing but the Trump show and has been even more so ever since Rubio dropped out. If you haven't been watching because you thought they were anti Trump, maybe you should check them out again because they are very very pro Trump for the most part. At least they have been any time I've tuned it in, but I only catch it on the radio.

I would have to disagree. Seems like Sean Hannity is the only one who supports him on the channel. Megyn Kelly spends most of her time attacking him and Bill O'Reilly is kind of in the middle, leaning toward anti-Trump.

quote:

Originally posted by EmpireState:

...and Bill O'Reilly is kind of in the middle, leaning toward anti-Trump.

And I'll have to disagree with that, but only just. My impression is that he leans slightly in favor of Trump, but that's just my impression from the limited amount of time that I tend to watch him now.

Hillary can't stop screaming during her speeches. She may think it makes her sound more "assertive" but it really does not work well for her, not that I'm complain about that aspect. Her voice is already an annoying, lecturing tone and cadence, but it's that much more annoying and painful when she tries to project her voice and sound forceful. She sounds like a nagging, growling, banshee no matter what she is talking about. The vocal equivalent of a cheese grater. ugh!

She is actually using Trump's name now in her diatribes. Can't wait to see Trump turn up the heat on her.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by EmpireState:

...and Bill O'Reilly is kind of in the middle, leaning toward anti-Trump.

And I'll have to disagree with that, but only just. My impression is that he leans slightly in favor of Trump, but that's just my impression from the limited amount of time that I tend to watch him now.

I'm not sure if O'Reilly himself is against Trump, but he sure does let Rove and Krauthammer and others bash him on a regular basis. Thats why I feel he leans toward anti-Trump, although I could very well be wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by Dtech:
Hillary can't stop screaming during her speeches. She may think it makes her sound more "assertive" but it really does not work well for her, not that I'm complain about that aspect. Her voice is already an annoying, lecturing tone and cadence, but it's that much more annoying and painful when she tries to project her voice and sound forceful. She sounds like a nagging, growling, banshee no matter what she is talking about. The vocal equivalent of a cheese grater. ugh!

Yup... everytime I hear her I beat feet to switch her off. But more to the point of your comments, for me her voice conjures up images of the Wicked Witch of the North <yuk>!

I can't believe you guys listen to the Hannitys and Oriellys and Rushs of the world.

How can you stand it, not just the content but their delivery?

I'd just as soon smack each in the face with a shovel than hear a word from those particular people and those like them. Nails on a chalkboard, the gnashing and pontificating.

Although Trump wins Arizona, the Utah results are quite expected. There is a large voter pool affected by Mormonism in Utah.

In the 1840s, the Mormons found themselves driven from Missouri and they landed in Illinois. One of the things their neighbors did not like was that Mormons voted in a block. Mormons received word from the leadership and that was it.

After Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism, was killed by his fellow citizens in 1844, the Mormons were persecuted into a move to Utah. They still created a voting block once there because they created their own enclave. So, Romney, Beck and the Mormon leadership talked of everything from prophesy to social mores to attack Trump in this caucus season. 60% of Utah voters identify themselves as Mormon.

There are no more Mormon enclaves to drive away from Trump in the coming states. So, the anti-Trump folks will likely try other issues to wedge other voters in the upcoming states.

This all is an interesting process on the way to a general election. All that is left in the wake of wedge politics are candidates that are sullied because voters are asked to hate a certain candidate but it does not encourage voters to love another, leaving the process as a Republican effort to destroy their own candidates as opposed to building them up.

Wow! Kasich really has a chance!!

quote:

Originally posted by entropy:
Wow! Kasich really has a chance!!

It's going to be like one of those films from the 1980s, where the working class kid overcomes tremendous adversity to beat the mean, snobby rich kids in the big race and win the girl, too!!

It’s obvious that the money candidates have to spend on their campaigns does influence the election. It makes me crazy, though, when people seem to think that that’s okay: “Well yes, he was elected because he out-spent his opponent two to one; what else should happen?” To the extent that it’s true, it’s a condemnation of the American electorate: If someone’s decision is based on the number of campaign ads he sees on the teevee, then he’s an idiot or totally irresponsible and shouldn’t be allowed to vote.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
It’s obvious that the money candidates have to spend on their campaigns does influence the election.

Obvious to whom?

To me.

But if the things we hear over and over have any significance whatsoever, I am not the only one who believes that many people are influenced by the advertising they’re exposed to, and advertising costs money. I don’t watch TV, but even in the print media the pundits continually talk about how much money candidates have spent on their campaigns. If they didn’t believe it themselves, I doubt they would make such an issue of it.

Added: It also seems to me that the candidates themselves believe that advertising is important—or at least they believe potential donors believe it. One of the most common pleas from candidates refers to the fact that they need a last minute media effort to get their message out to as many voters as possible. I’m the first to agree that many fictions are perpetrated as truths in the process, but I do believe that advertising affects how some people vote.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
I've never understood the philosophy that spending money on TV ads convinces votes who to vote for. Are you swayed by that stuff? Is this how you make such decisions?

Ads do drive voting behavior at the margins and when there is a closely contested election those margins make a big difference. Low information voters are bombarded with ads about how this or that candidate is an evil monster because of XYZ, and it sticks or confirms preconceived notions. It's often enough to tilt the scales and get someone to vote for the other guy. There is a reason candidates spend hundreds of millions on such ads. They work.

quote:

Originally posted by sigcrazy7:

quote:

Originally posted by ChicagoSigMan:
I'm curious what plans Trump has to fund the general election. Hillary will likely have over $1 billion for ads and GOTV organization, as well as real expertise from Obama's organizing team. I don't expect her to match turnout for Obama, but you can bet this team with serious dollars will be maximizing whatever GOTV potential she has.

I don't know that Donald has that kind of liquid cash and if he is really willing to use it. Even if he is, I hope he has some kind of ground game that he is keeping secret.

He will need a serious team on the ground to drive turnout to match Hillary's (plus the DMC - that's the Democrat Cheating Margin).

He also might get free media but you can bet most of it won't be favorable....when it's down to the wire between him and Hillary, you know the media will do everything possible to tear him down.

I've accepted that he will likely be the nominee, but I'm nervous that he is not ready for the general. Fingers crossed.

I'm not so sure that the Trump needs the kind of cash that a typical candidate does. He just shows up and the media kill themselves trying to get a camera on him. Furthermore, he doesn't need to buy name recognition like most candidates.

Hillary has the same name recognition. Yet she will still be spending big on media buys - mostly for negative ads on Trump.

But you guys are missing the point. It's not just about ad buys. The general election will require a serious GOTV effort and that is a completely different issue from media time and ad buys. It requires a lot of money and a very well organized ground team in any contested state. It is what Obama and OFA did so well. Is Trump just going to rely on hype and hope that it's enough to drive people to the polls? I hope not. That will be a recipe for disaster. He needs to find people who might not otherwise go out and vote and literally drive them to the polls. You need people in every county getting people to the polls.

quote:

Originally posted by entropy:
Wow! Kasich really has a chance!!

Seriously, please...

Can someone please explain how "the polls show that DT loses to HRC" and looking at this we are to *believe* that TC can win over the witch?

I know polls can be *tuned* to say anything, but I have got a coworker who believes the RealClearPolitics poll distillation that says DT cannot take the HillHag.

(Heck, I've got someone whom I think is 'very conservative' telling me: "I really HONESTLY think she'd do less harm to USA than Trump will do to the GOP, and I think many on the Right are seeing that too. NO, I won't vote for Killary, and we both know exactly what she is, but she is out for #1, herself. (Just like Trump.) But Trump is everything the Left wants to believe about the Right. 'He's a crook, a cheat, a liar, a dishonest businessman who plays the system-games, an adulterer, a womanizer, blah blah blah.'")

Perhaps this is indeed how the far-right views DT and with this kind of distain? It might explain how I can no longer listen to Bill Bennett in the morning...

I mean, I see DT for what he is and I don't care that he's not a "conservative." I do know that he is not a FGDC !!! I just don't care he's not a so-called conservative and this is from someone whose father said he is "fifty feet right of Calvin Coolidge."

It looks to me, seeing all the energy rising and people finally waking up that DT is the one finally reaching across many groups to start to get us to pull ourselves together again. As much as Cruz is a conservative, I just do not see that happening.

Although I was fortunate enough to be able to vote for Reagan, does anyone recall any similarities to what is happening now ?

No matter what, we have absolutely got to stop the GDCs from taking the WH again. This is it.

41