quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:

quote:

Yes they are, the will of the people is being heard loud and clear.

Hillary Clinton: 9,350,572
Donald Trump: 8,197,535
Bernie Sanders: 6,946,913
Ted Cruz: 6,263,349

37,164,358 Americans have spoken (so far). You're saying that Cruz is the "will of the people". I think you and his dad are smoking the same stuff.

You're having a hard time understanding how ridiculous it is to be comparing the raw primary numbers of one party against the other. If Hillary is nominated, do you think all of Sanders' votes in the primaries will automatically go to her in the general?

quote:

You're having a hard time understanding how ridiculous it is to be comparing the raw primary numbers of one party against the other. If Hillary is nominated, do you think all of Sanders' votes in the primaries will automatically go to her in the general?

No I'm not. I understand it's not black and white. But it's also not pink. It's grey.

Know how ridiculous it is? Look at all of the past elections in recent history, and then compare who became President to who had the highest percentage of votes in the primary (both sides combined, just like I'm doing with these numbers). More often than not, by a huge margin, the highest percentage earner in the primaries is the highest percentage earner in the general.

I know this is a mystery to some, and I'm only assuming here, but I suspect that those who make the effort to vote in the primaries are a somewhat accurate sample of those who will vote in the general.

I'm also not saying that because these are the numbers now, that they tell the story in the future. Things can change. But these numbers, without a doubt, show a trajectory at this exact moment in time. Certainly more so than polls. Primary numbers = reality. Poll numbers = some degree of make believe.

What about people crossing over in open primaries who vote for the candidate in the opposite party who they think their candidate will have a better shot of beating in the general?

I think there are many Sanders supporters who hate Hillary enough that they would vote for Cruz just to not vote for her.

quote:

What about people crossing over in open primaries who vote for the candidate in the opposite party who they think their candidate will have a better shot of beating in the general?

You're assuming that's happening in any real numbers, and further assuming a nefarious intent.

What about people crossing over to vote for the candidate that they like better than their own?

That's one area where Cruz is lacking. He wouldn't draw nearly as many "former democrats" as Trump would (and is). Let's not forget all of the those here on the forum praising Cruz for being a true conservative, and Trump for being a Democrat in disguise. You can't have it both ways.

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:

quote:

What about people crossing over in open primaries who vote for the candidate in the opposite party who they think their candidate will have a better shot of beating in the general?

You're assuming that's happening in any real numbers, and further assuming a nefarious intent.

What about people crossing over to vote for the candidate that they like better than their own?

That's one area where Cruz is lacking. He wouldn't draw nearly as many "former democrats" as Trump would (and is). Let's not forget all of the those here on the forum praising Cruz for being a true conservative, and Trump for being a Democrat in disguise. You can't have it both ways.

I'm not talking about in the general with this comment. I'm talking about the primaries where in your math you're comparing votes between parties.

quote:

I'm not talking about in the general with this comment. I'm talking about the primaries where in your math you're comparing votes between parties.

So tell us then. How many of those votes are cross overs with the specific intent that you mentioned?

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:

quote:

What about people crossing over in open primaries who vote for the candidate in the opposite party who they think their candidate will have a better shot of beating in the general?

What about people crossing over in the general election to vote for the candidate that they like better than their own?

That's one area where Cruz is lacking. He wouldn't draw nearly as many "former democrats" as Trump would (and is).

That has a simple explanation, he was a democrat up until the day he decided to run. He is a high tax/tariff, federal education, single payer/universal healthcare kind of guy. If Bernie doesn't get on the ballot, his supporters will just back the next guy closest to him, Trump.

I like my presidents to be conservative, constitutionalist, small government with a dash of libertarian.

Here's some neat info about who The Apprentice donates to. Anyone who donates to Hillary Clinton is not fit to run for the Red ticket. When he drops out maybe Hil will pick him as her running mate.

http://www.usnews.com/news/blo...democrats-until-2008

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:

quote:

I'm not talking about in the general with this comment. I'm talking about the primaries where in your math you're comparing votes between parties.

So tell us then. How many of those votes are cross overs with the specific intent that you mentioned?

Probably not a lot, but the point is you do not know how the losing voters in the primaries will vote in the general. What's the split right now of Sanders' voters between Cruz and Trump?

quote:

That has a simple explanation, he was a democrat up until the day he decided to run.

He was registered as a Republican for longer than he was registered as a Democrat. Indeed, he's a slight mix of both, but I don't know many Democrats who are interested in building walls, etc.

You know, if he was such a good Democrat, then he wouldn't be being trashed by the Democrats. Trump is the only candidate taking the level of heat he is from every single side. Yet he's still doing well.

quote:

If Bernie doesn't get on the ballot, his supporters will just back the next guy closest to him, Trump.

So far, more people have voted for Bernie than for Cruz. So if you believe what you say, then you conceed that Cruz is not the best option. Trump is. Trump's votes with Sanders votes trounces Clinton. I don't believe it, but if it's what you believe, then I don't understand you backing Cruz (assuming you actually would like to win).

quote:

I like my presidents to be conservative, constitutionalist, small government with a dash of libertarian.

Me too. But if you want the votes from across the spectrum, you have to have some positions that range across the spectrum.

quote:

Here's some neat info about who The Apprentice donates to. Anyone who donates to Hillary Clinton is not fit to run for the Red ticket.

If memory serves, he has donated more to Republicans than he has to Democrats.

He's not hard right. I get it. He's middleish. And that's why he gets as much support as he does. There are more people in the middle than there are on the hard right.

quote:

Probably not a lot,

So then it probably doesn't make a lot of difference.

quote:

Originally posted by a1abdj:
So far, more people have voted for Bernie than for Cruz.

Which is irrelevant since Cruz wasn't running against Sanders.

quote:

Which is irrelevant since Cruz wasn't running against Sanders.

No. It's not irrelevant. Imagine a "national poll" where tens of millions of people vote for the candidate that best represents their views.

I believe we call them primaries. Have you taken the time to look at the results of previous primaries?

You say primaries mean nothing, but they mean much more than a poll. Polls are random telephone samplings of people who claim to be registered voters and plan on voting. Primaries are all inclusive samplings of people who are registered voters and have voted.

Not only do they tell you who the people tend to lean towards, but they also give you an indication at what the turn out in the general will be.

quote:

it can't be over soon enough

ain't that the truth.

I generally relish life, even on the bad days, but if I could fast forward from now until after the conventions I would.

I'll repeat myself too: primaries and conventions are not about the will of the people. They are the party picking its nominee.

nothing matters until November 3rd

it can't get here soon enough

the establishment is not going to let Trump win

the convention is likely already rigged - much like elections in Chicago

The trump was a D argument is weak, an overreach, meaningless, the mans company hq is in solid D territory, as a business man you have to grease the wheels that gets things done

Stand on your high horse in nyc and you will be broke

Btw. That Trump guy has 60% of the NY vote, kasaich in second Cruz last at 11% 60% means all delegates to trump

quote:

Originally posted by showpro:
I'll repeat myself too: primaries and conventions are not about the will of the people. They are the party picking its nominee.

Precisely because both major parties themselves have consistently failed, miserably, to carry out the will of the people, because they largely serve themselves instead, is the reason that, for the most part, no one gives a shit about what you're saying - even though you're technically correct. The parties themselves are barely relevant to most Americans.

They are a wart on the ass of our system, a necessary evil, and little more, in their current form.

I wonder what is afoot here...

Megyn Kelly spotted incognito in Trump Tower, met by member of Trump’s team

http://www.politico.com/story/...r-lewandowski-221921

A Florida prosecutor has decided not to prosecute Donald Trump’s campaign manager for battery after a March run-in with former Breitbart reporter Michelle Fields, sources with knowledge of the situation told POLITICO.

The decision not to press charges against Corey Lewandowski is scheduled to be announced on Thursday afternoon by Palm Beach County State Attorney David Aronberg.


Fields may still pursue a defamation case against Lewandowski, a source said.