Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump is quickly turning into 2016's Sarah Palin.

Palin, but without her IQ, executive experience or policy expertise.

All of which, of course, are laughable to begin with.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Nobody gives a damn who George Will supports. A meaningless list.

I agree.

These are mostly the "establishment" that Trump has been railing against. Why would they back him?

It would not surprise me if Trump reads some of these names at one of his rallies and tells people what he is up against with establishment Republicans opposing him - and how he is fighting for the "average" working person who has been shafted by the establishment. It is a message that will resonate.

Perfectly true, yet this will not make Trump win the election. He doesn't have enough support because he keeps alienating more and more groups. If only a portion of angry white American males vote for him, it's not enough.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are showing me a list of republicans that have put their own needs and desires above the people, I agree.

A Republican publicly endorsing Clinton is putting his own needs and desires above the country? It's actually putting his own needs and desires above the party.

Republicans spent the past eight years putting party above country. The logical conclusion is putting self above party.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump is quickly turning into 2016's Sarah Palin.

I have zero respect for Sarah Palin. But, to be fair, she may be ignorant and a laughingstock (like Trump), but deep down, she doesn't seem mean/ inherently unable to feel empathy/ devoid of character.

When I think of Sarah Palin the words "empathy" and "character" don't spring to mind, sorry.

Anonymous wrote:Trump is quickly turning into 2016's Sarah Palin.

Palin, but without her IQ, executive experience or policy expertise.

What is the over-under on Paul Ryan unendorsing trump before November? I say 60-40

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
As to the main point, no matter what, trump has a much narrower path than Hillary. This is the same country which voted for Obama twice and he won very comfortably in the end. Where do the republicans get their votes? Dems will beat trump with his Made in China and him still recruiting foreigners(as of 3 days ago) at the cost of american workers. Besides he is a gift that never stops giving. Structurally this country is tilted left and that won't change in this election. Trump will gain some and lose some and that is status quo. That equation only gets worse for trump as he spews for the next 100 days.

Trump's path to victory is admittedly narrow but certainly within reach. The Democrat's vulnerability is the rust belt which is why they are spending so much time there. If you look at the current polling in certain key states, there is not much separating Trump from Hillary.

Trump has to win PA - and that is within reach as even former Democratic governor Rendell said. He has to take OH and then there are a couple of states such as FL that are within reach and if gets those states and holds the ones that Romney won in 2012, he is there.

Trump's big issue is he has to win all 3 big states(PA,OH,FL) while Hillary needs just one. The issue with PA is that Philly area population increases with mostly Yankees, Jerseyans, Minorities moving into the big city area. Those are mainly progressive voters. But the middle PA voters are declining in numbers in every election cycle, some due to death but most are moving down south as manufacturing goes to TN, AL, GA, etc. On top of this demographic shift compensation that trump faces, he is losing traditional republican moderate voters and women. So it is a very long shot. Is it possible, yes, but it is not probable.

WRT OH, it has 3 big city clusters that are primarily dem voters. OH actually voted for Kasich's moderate gop by a big number. Besides, OH is not suffering as much, after the return of the auto industry. Central and West Ohio benefits from that. NE Ohio suffers the most but doesn't have as many votes to compensate for loss of kasich voters. Trump has made enemy with the worst man who will hurt him. Ohio maybe a better shot than PA, but thats not exactly great.

WRT FL, every election cycle hispanic voters(primarily PuertoRicans) increase by 3% with corresponding decline of white voters. Thousands of Puertoricans have landed in FL due to really terrible economic situation there and they don't vote like older cuban immigrants. Next gen cuban immigrants vote democratic as well. FL is going to be difficult as well.

Not to forget in another 100 days, Trump has so much time for his short fingers to tweet and his mouth to spew, driving away even more voters from him.

Anonymous wrote:
As to the main point, no matter what, trump has a much narrower path than Hillary. This is the same country which voted for Obama twice and he won very comfortably in the end. Where do the republicans get their votes? Dems will beat trump with his Made in China and him still recruiting foreigners(as of 3 days ago) at the cost of american workers. Besides he is a gift that never stops giving. Structurally this country is tilted left and that won't change in this election. Trump will gain some and lose some and that is status quo. That equation only gets worse for trump as he spews for the next 100 days.

Trump's path to victory is admittedly narrow but certainly within reach. The Democrat's vulnerability is the rust belt which is why they are spending so much time there. If you look at the current polling in certain key states, there is not much separating Trump from Hillary.

Trump has to win PA - and that is within reach as even former Democratic governor Rendell said. He has to take OH and then there are a couple of states such as FL that are within reach and if gets those states and holds the ones that Romney won in 2012, he is there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Nobody gives a damn who George Will supports. A meaningless list.

I agree.

These are mostly the "establishment" that Trump has been railing against. Why would they back him?

It would not surprise me if Trump reads some of these names at one of his rallies and tells people what he is up against with establishment Republicans opposing him - and how he is fighting for the "average" working person who has been shafted by the establishment. It is a message that will resonate.

It is not to dissuade Trump voters. They are a lost cause. The list is not comprehensive and generally the people on the list motivate independent and moderate republicans. So the loss of big name republicans doesn't come without a loss. Independents who lean republican and fiscal moderate republicans are not insignificant and Trump can't win without them. Trump's pipe dream of getting democrats to cross over will not work because as he is getting those votes, he is bleeding moderate republican votes and women votes.

Under normal circumstances you would be right. What makes it different this time is that many independents and moderate Republicans have an aversion to Hillary Clinton. They view it as a choice between two evils and for the groups you identified she is the worse of the two. She is so widely distrusted as evidenced in the polls.

The other huge issue is the Supreme Court. I have a friend who dislikes Trump intensely but he said he is going to vote for him because he does not want HRC appointing judges to the court. Don't underestimate this factor - it is as decisive as it is for Democrats who don't like Clinton but will vote for her because of court appointments.

Trump realizes this and that is why he said at a recent rally that even those people who don't like him will vote for him because of the Supreme court.

My moderate fiscal conservative republican family is socially left leaning. Supreme court judges don't alter the basic capitalism of this country. They may help with social causes BUT even that is doubtful because the judges change with time. Thats why so called conservative judges over a long period of time vote progressive. That won't change no matter who is nominated. So not worried much about that.

But stopping trade will destroy America. We are not a super power when it comes to market size. We are only 300 million, China and India alone are 2.5 billion. So as far as trade goes, we benefit from trade as most american companies make more than 50% of their revenue from outside. Trump can destroy this country's economy and create a depression. I am fairly well to do and I don't want stock market to crash and wipe out accumulated wealth because if Trump is elected stock markets will crash bringing in recession.

As to the main point, no matter what, trump has a much narrower path than Hillary. This is the same country which voted for Obama twice and he won very comfortably in the end. Where do the republicans get their votes? Dems will beat trump with his Made in China and him still recruiting foreigners(as of 3 days ago) at the cost of american workers. Besides he is a gift that never stops giving. Structurally this country is tilted left and that won't change in this election. Trump will gain some and lose some and that is status quo. That equation only gets worse for trump as he spews for the next 100 days.

You lost me here? Are you just making stuff up? Trump wants trade deals that are better for America middle class, not stopping trade. This is unlike the Dems and Clinton. The Dems have abandoned the middle class. These people worry about their future and their children's future. You call them stupid and racist and keep push the same policies that destoried most of the middle class in this country. This is why the democrats will suffer the same faith as the republicans. The rank and file will revolt. Let's face it, our retirement system is disaster, college is too expensive, the tax system favor investment class over manufacturing, trade deals export jobs while investment banks make money, real wages have not increased since 1972 and the financial system is rigged against the consumer. You think it's about Trump vs Hillary? It's not.

I would love to know what the outlines of a bilateral trade agreement with a nation like China or India looks like, when a person living in China and India will work for pennies on the dollar (and remembering that both countries, not just the US, must sign it). And be sure to add into your framework Trump's promise to add Yuuggeee tariffs to imported goods. Go ahead, we'll wait...

In the meantime, welcome to the knowledge/service sector economy. No amount to "it will be greats" is going to bring manufacturing back to the US at a living wage.

Well most people think economics is one way street where US is THE BOSS AND it controls all things. Every country has leverage. China has a huge market as leverage. So China says, if you want GM to sell in our market, then US has to bring manufacturing to China. US corporations ofcourse cant stop growing because capitalism needs constant growth for better stock performance and 401K gains. Our system is attached at the hip to the global market and we demand constant growth from American companies. You can only grow so much with a tiny 300 million market. So that is the weakness USA has and it is trying to create a bigger trade zone to eliminate its weakness as a small market.

Thats how the cost arbitration works. Americans GET THE BENEFIT when they pay very less for the goods made in China in stores. If you suddenly bring back everything to be manufactured in USA, without corresponding increase in pay, inflation will go sky high as price of everything goes higher in a short time.

Another history most Americans are unaware is that China and India were the worlds largest two economies(because they always had the largest market since they have vast plans fed by huge Himalayan rivers) by 1700s. India started slipping around this time. China kept its status as the largest until 1800s. Do you know what brought down these two giants? They both pulled back and tried to shut down their market to the western trade partners. And their textile industry was decimated by CHEAPER PRODUCTS coming from the Americas helped significantly due to slave labor. China and especially India just couldn't compete with cost arbitration that USA had. So now history is coming a full circle and these two asian giants are flexing their market muscle as they race to the top again.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump is quickly turning into 2016's Sarah Palin.

Yet he has a die-hard base of support that would believe him if he said he was the second coming of Christ. He may yet pull the rabbit out of the hat.

Palin has that die-hard base of "Grizzly mamas" too. She's folksy and crazy; he's rich and crazy. Both crazy, both laughingstocks.

Anonymous wrote:Trump is quickly turning into 2016's Sarah Palin.

Yet he has a die-hard base of support that would believe him if he said he was the second coming of Christ. He may yet pull the rabbit out of the hat.

Anonymous wrote:Trump is quickly turning into 2016's Sarah Palin.

I have zero respect for Sarah Palin. But, to be fair, she may be ignorant and a laughingstock (like Trump), but deep down, she doesn't seem mean/ inherently unable to feel empathy/ devoid of character.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Nobody gives a damn who George Will supports. A meaningless list.

I agree.

These are mostly the "establishment" that Trump has been railing against. Why would they back him?

It would not surprise me if Trump reads some of these names at one of his rallies and tells people what he is up against with establishment Republicans opposing him - and how he is fighting for the "average" working person who has been shafted by the establishment. It is a message that will resonate.

It is not to dissuade Trump voters. They are a lost cause. The list is not comprehensive and generally the people on the list motivate independent and moderate republicans. So the loss of big name republicans doesn't come without a loss. Independents who lean republican and fiscal moderate republicans are not insignificant and Trump can't win without them. Trump's pipe dream of getting democrats to cross over will not work because as he is getting those votes, he is bleeding moderate republican votes and women votes.

Under normal circumstances you would be right. What makes it different this time is that many independents and moderate Republicans have an aversion to Hillary Clinton. They view it as a choice between two evils and for the groups you identified she is the worse of the two. She is so widely distrusted as evidenced in the polls.

The other huge issue is the Supreme Court. I have a friend who dislikes Trump intensely but he said he is going to vote for him because he does not want HRC appointing judges to the court. Don't underestimate this factor - it is as decisive as it is for Democrats who don't like Clinton but will vote for her because of court appointments.

Trump realizes this and that is why he said at a recent rally that even those people who don't like him will vote for him because of the Supreme court.

My moderate fiscal conservative republican family is socially left leaning. Supreme court judges don't alter the basic capitalism of this country. They may help with social causes BUT even that is doubtful because the judges change with time. Thats why so called conservative judges over a long period of time vote progressive. That won't change no matter who is nominated. So not worried much about that.

But stopping trade will destroy America. We are not a super power when it comes to market size. We are only 300 million, China and India alone are 2.5 billion. So as far as trade goes, we benefit from trade as most american companies make more than 50% of their revenue from outside. Trump can destroy this country's economy and create a depression. I am fairly well to do and I don't want stock market to crash and wipe out accumulated wealth because if Trump is elected stock markets will crash bringing in recession.

As to the main point, no matter what, trump has a much narrower path than Hillary. This is the same country which voted for Obama twice and he won very comfortably in the end. Where do the republicans get their votes? Dems will beat trump with his Made in China and him still recruiting foreigners(as of 3 days ago) at the cost of american workers. Besides he is a gift that never stops giving. Structurally this country is tilted left and that won't change in this election. Trump will gain some and lose some and that is status quo. That equation only gets worse for trump as he spews for the next 100 days.

You lost me here? Are you just making stuff up? Trump wants trade deals that are better for America middle class, not stopping trade. This is unlike the Dems and Clinton. The Dems have abandoned the middle class. These people worry about their future and their children's future. You call them stupid and racist and keep push the same policies that destoried most of the middle class in this country. This is why the democrats will suffer the same faith as the republicans. The rank and file will revolt. Let's face it, our retirement system is disaster, college is too expensive, the tax system favor investment class over manufacturing, trade deals export jobs while investment banks make money, real wages have not increased since 1972 and the financial system is rigged against the consumer. You think it's about Trump vs Hillary? It's not.

I would love to know what the outlines of a bilateral trade agreement with a nation like China or India looks like, when a person living in China and India will work for pennies on the dollar (and remembering that both countries, not just the US, must sign it). And be sure to add into your framework Trump's promise to add Yuuggeee tariffs to imported goods. Go ahead, we'll wait...

In the meantime, welcome to the knowledge/service sector economy. No amount to "it will be greats" is going to bring manufacturing back to the US at a living wage.

Trump is quickly turning into 2016's Sarah Palin.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Nobody gives a damn who George Will supports. A meaningless list.

I agree.

These are mostly the "establishment" that Trump has been railing against. Why would they back him?

It would not surprise me if Trump reads some of these names at one of his rallies and tells people what he is up against with establishment Republicans opposing him - and how he is fighting for the "average" working person who has been shafted by the establishment. It is a message that will resonate.

It is not to dissuade Trump voters. They are a lost cause. The list is not comprehensive and generally the people on the list motivate independent and moderate republicans. So the loss of big name republicans doesn't come without a loss. Independents who lean republican and fiscal moderate republicans are not insignificant and Trump can't win without them. Trump's pipe dream of getting democrats to cross over will not work because as he is getting those votes, he is bleeding moderate republican votes and women votes.

Exactly right. Of course Trump's core supporters will stick with him. But tons of moderate Midwestern Republicans - the heart of the Heartland - don't want a clown like Trump. And tons of conservative Northeastern Republicans don't want Trump's uninformed jingoism. When those groups abandon him, other groups are not filling the gap. Trump's going to be left with just the dead-ender racists in the end.