Trump

[F-ZeroOne]

"WHAT HAVE I DONE?!"...?

[gravy]

[gumboot]

No disrespect intended, but I'm getting a little worried about Sanders picking up steam. He may be Trump's only hope. What if it really did come down to those two? I can't see the US taking a giant leap to the left.

[Darkflame]

Thing is, pretty sure every statistic I have seen shows Sanders beating Trump if matched up though.
Trump really isn't great and popular in absolute terms so much as every other republican being really shit.
Sanders probably also has some odd advantage amongst Trump-hating republicans as in a weird way being more acceptable then Hillary. Hilliary is the establishment. The enemy. ""The same"". Sanders is, relatively, another outsider.

Sanders weakness I think is more the perception of his positions also, rather then his actual positions. So while it is a leap left, the "big leap" is more in perception then in actual policy.

[pogo]

The polls that match up Sanders and Trump are misleading I think, as they do not truly show how Sanders would do in the general election. The problem is no-one at any point has thought he would win, so no-one has got him in their sights and is attacking him. Except Clinton in their debates but that has been far too civilised. She has been trying to win over his supporters, not paint him as a dangerous socialist.

And there is a lot in his platform to attack. Although universal healthcare seems as a no-brainer for us it would have significant costs and problems in the US. Even Obamacare which was far less ambitious has faced numerous challenges because of the disruption and losers under it. Sanders plan would be many times more disruptive. More practically it’s hard to see anything like it getting through the US Senate.

But I don’t think much has changed, in his chances of winning. He won the last round but the three states (Washington, Alaska and Hawaii ) had two things in common. They are all caucus states and they are overwhelmingly white. Problem is there are few caucus states left, all small, and the remaining states are far more diverse. Both of these help Clinton.

The other problem for Sanders is all the Democratic primaries allocate delegates proportionately. It’s not like on the Republican side where winner-take-all states can hand a candidate a sudden boost. Sanders instead needs a large swing across the board, and soon before they run out of states and delegates.

[gravy]

The polls that match up Sanders and Trump are misleading I think, as they do not truly show how Sanders would do in the general election.

No. They do.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... -5565.html

[pogo]

Those are exactly the sort of polls I was referring to. The problem is Sanders is not in the general election now. He is not facing the sort of sustained attack he would surely face in the general election. This attack could take many forms.

They could attack his policies, and probably much more robustly from the right than the left. E.g. some conservative commentators complained about the lack of questions on abortion in the Democratic debates. I think they did eventually cover it, briefly, but it is not a big wedge issue among Democrats. Other issues such as immigration, taxes, Obamacare are all much more important to Republicans and so would be used to challenge him relentlessly.

They could attack his age and religion. Maybe not directly by mainstream Republicans but in the wider blogosphere and media. And there are things even the Republicans can do, to draw attention to his age, or to try and associate him with Jewish stereotypes. Much harder to do with Clinton’s gender as more than half of voters are women.

And they could dig stuff up to attack him with, whether true or not. See e.g. the attacks on John Kerry and John McCain over their war records. Sanders’s time as a political activist could be used against him.

[gumboot]

The polls that match up Sanders and Trump are misleading I think, as they do not truly show how Sanders would do in the general election.

No. They do.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... -5565.html

Huh. Well that's good news!

Notable that both parties' strongest presidential candidate is the guy in last place. I wonder if that's often the case. What's that about?

[pogo]

It’s not that unlikely. A big flaw with the US primary system is that the people who do well in it are often the worst ones for the general election. To do well in the primary you need to appeal to your party’s base. which means pandering to the extreme, minority views they hold. So the “best” candidates for the general often do worst in primaries. Sometimes the party comes to its senses and chooses the best, or at least a better, candidate. But often not. The Republicans have suffered from this in particular, in recent years.

Of course it’s not just over there, but over here too. The Labour Party in its wisdom decided it too should leave the choice of leader and PM candidate to its members. And of course they went for the most extreme, least electable. Unfortunately there were not multiple rounds of primaries for them to realise the error of their ways and choose someone more electable, there was just one vote. Nor will it be all over in November so they can take stock and rebuild. It may take years, maybe even five, before someone else can take over.

[gravy]

The polls that match up Sanders and Trump are misleading I think, as they do not truly show how Sanders would do in the general election.

No. They do.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... -5565.html

Are you really making the point that polls are polls and not the general election itself?

And then claiming they're wrong (misleading) because they don't agree with your point of view or the outcome of a scenario you've made up in your head?

I think we're all at ease with the idea of what a poll is.

Shame it won't be tested, Clinton will be the candidate

[pogo]

I mean they are misleading in that it wrong to judge how Sanders might do in a general election from them. One big difference between them is that Clinton has in many ways been tested on the national stage already. In particular the Republicans have been going after her already as the presumed candidate. In particular they held hearings, supposedly to investigate Benghazi, but really to try and catch her out via a marathon 11 hour session, to provide some soundbites for use in the general election.

Sanders has faced nothing like this. He has escaped it because he has never looked like winning. If he did look like it then expect Republicans to turn the full force of their attacks on him. If anything they would go after him much more than Clinton. If she is the candidate against Trump then some Republicans could support her, rather then Trump, given how he has divided the Republican party. But Sanders is unlikely to benefit from this.

[merman]

Trump aide charged with assault

Donald Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski has been charged with assaulting a journalist at a campaign event. Mr Lewandowski is charged with simple battery over his encounter with former Breitbart reporter Michelle Fields. Police allege that on 8 March after a news conference in Florida, he grabbed her arm when she tried to ask Mr Trump a question, leaving a bruise.

[gumboot]

Shame it won't be tested, Clinton will be the candidate

He's not done yet! It's looking quite positive for him, compared to a few weeks ago.

Perhaps Trump is what's needed to push the US over that last hurdle towards the left?

Anywy, I feel significantly better about the US having data that says a socialist could beat Trump in a presidential election. I won't let Pogo take that away from me.

[pogo]

Again, he can enjoy his wins in Washington State, Alaska and Hawaii for now. But he has few opportunities to repeat this. He has a clear lead in the states that have held caucuses, including these three. Clinton has a clear lead in the states running normal polls. But the states running caucuses are in a minority and there are only two small ones, N Dakota and Wyoming, left.

Basically he needs to start winning in states that run regular polls. And he needs to do this soon, as the longer he waits the more of a lead he has to overcome and the fewer states are left. He also needs to appeal more to Blacks and Hispanics. Right now they are overwhelmingly going for Clinton, handing her large wins in states where they make up a significant portion of the Democratic electorate.

[gumboot]

Maybe he needs to improve his gansta image.