Doctor Fate wrote:

geojanes wrote:10 days till Iowa and Trump is back in the lead:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ia/iowa_republican_presidential_caucus-3194.html

My mother-in-law is a big Trump supporter. Has made for some "interesting" family discussions.

People are angry. I get it. But, going from one narcissistic authoritarian to another is not the answer.

Thankfully, I don't have any family members or close friends who are Trumpettes.

One of my fears is that we are underestimating Trump's strength. He's considered an embarrassment amongst the Media, social media, societal institutions, and even the UK Parliament. The tendency is that such an individual will do better than the polls as hidden supporters are not willing to make their views known to poll questioners. I've been in social situations where Trump supporters hold their tongue upon realizing that theirs is an unacceptable view among polite company..

Ray Jay wrote:One of my fears is that we are underestimating Trump's strength. He's considered an embarrassment amongst the Media, social media, societal institutions, and even the UK Parliament. The tendency is that such an individual will do better than the polls as hidden supporters are not willing to make their views known to poll questioners. I've been in social situations where Trump supporters hold their tongue upon realizing that theirs is an unacceptable view among polite company..

Probably true.

Now, I said I don't have any family/close friends who support him. However, I do "know" people on Facebook who are rabid Trump supporters.

I'm about to step over a big line.

He reminds me of Hitler. No, I don't think he's intending to start a Holocaust. No, I don't think he will do away with the Constitution. However, people who follow him are indifferent to whatever he does or has done in the past. They don't care about his obvious gaps in knowledge or his embarrassing comments.

They know two things: 1) politicians are failures; 2) Trump will not fail.

Nothing else matters.

I don't know if he has enough followers to win the nomination. If he wins Iowa, I'm going to be petrified. However, the polls are not reliable when it comes to Iowa because of its arcane structure. I doubt anyone here can even fully explain the Iowa caucus--without looking it up.

Trump is not a spellbinding orator. However, he has grasped the mood of the electorate. He is a combination of anger (against failed policies and incompetent leadership) and fear (Muslims, illegal aliens), plus a good dose of disgust with the GOP. He also communicates in a way that makes many believe they actually know a billionaire.

Can he win the Presidency? Yes, if he gets the nomination, for two reasons: 1) Hillary's legal problems are no joke. At the very least, they confirm what many people believe: she is a first-class liar; 2) if Sanders somehow gets the nomination, Trump will be President--no matter what the polls say. The economic stupidity of Sanders' proposals is bad enough. Now, throw in honeymooning in the Soviet Union. The guy is "out there."

In some ways, for some people, Obama is a bit like the Weimar Republic: projecting weakness, promoting unpopular policies, and generally taking on an anti-nationalism that much of the electorate does not agree with. Trump is the anti-Obama in that respect. He is all nationalism, all the time. He makes ridiculous claims. He promises national greatness.

Again, I'm not saying he is Hitler. I am saying a lot of the themes and techniques are similar.

Doctor Fate wrote:

Ray Jay wrote:One of my fears is that we are underestimating Trump's strength. He's considered an embarrassment amongst the Media, social media, societal institutions, and even the UK Parliament. The tendency is that such an individual will do better than the polls as hidden supporters are not willing to make their views known to poll questioners. I've been in social situations where Trump supporters hold their tongue upon realizing that theirs is an unacceptable view among polite company..

Probably true.

Now, I said I don't have any family/close friends who support him. However, I do "know" people on Facebook who are rabid Trump supporters.

I'm about to step over a big line.

He reminds me of Hitler. No, I don't think he's intending to start a Holocaust. No, I don't think he will do away with the Constitution. However, people who follow him are indifferent to whatever he does or has done in the past. They don't care about his obvious gaps in knowledge or his embarrassing comments.

They know two things: 1) politicians are failures; 2) Trump will not fail.

Nothing else matters.

I don't know if he has enough followers to win the nomination. If he wins Iowa, I'm going to be petrified. However, the polls are not reliable when it comes to Iowa because of its arcane structure. I doubt anyone here can even fully explain the Iowa caucus--without looking it up.

Trump is not a spellbinding orator. However, he has grasped the mood of the electorate. He is a combination of anger (against failed policies and incompetent leadership) and fear (Muslims, illegal aliens), plus a good dose of disgust with the GOP. He also communicates in a way that makes many believe they actually know a billionaire.

Can he win the Presidency? Yes, if he gets the nomination, for two reasons: 1) Hillary's legal problems are no joke. At the very least, they confirm what many people believe: she is a first-class liar; 2) if Sanders somehow gets the nomination, Trump will be President--no matter what the polls say. The economic stupidity of Sanders' proposals is bad enough. Now, throw in honeymooning in the Soviet Union. The guy is "out there."

In some ways, for some people, Obama is a bit like the Weimar Republic: projecting weakness, promoting unpopular policies, and generally taking on an anti-nationalism that much of the electorate does not agree with. Trump is the anti-Obama in that respect. He is all nationalism, all the time. He makes ridiculous claims. He promises national greatness.

Again, I'm not saying he is Hitler. I am saying a lot of the themes and techniques are similar.

Yes, I think that's right. Trump's a demagogue who appeals to our lowest instincts. It's confidence and strength without substance and perspective.

Can somebody explain to me why the Republican candidates are having so many TV debates ? I haven't watched any of them of course, but I'm guessing they must simply be repeating the same old mantras again and again. Is anybody still watching at this point ?

Sassenach wrote:Can somebody explain to me why the Republican candidates are having so many TV debates ? I haven't watched any of them of course, but I'm guessing they must simply be repeating the same old mantras again and again. Is anybody still watching at this point ?

Me.

And, no they're not. Some of it is the same. In fact, I would argue that every Kasich answer is the same. He's the reason my mute button is just about worn out.

The moderators themselves shape the debates as much as the candidates.

Contrast the GOP with the DNC. They were trying to hide Hillary by having their few debates on at times no one would watch (like Saturday nights). Now that she is getting shellacked in NH and losing ground in Iowa, they're talking about more debates. This is known as "panic mode."

I think this article does a great job of explaining why Trump is succeeding. http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... ght-213572

I have been watching all of them also.

You don't have to watch all of them. Not everyone wants more information. However to NOT show the debates and give those who like the information, or need the information to make a decision is short-changing the electorate.

Which is better? A side that gives the electorate more opportunities to see it's candidates, or one that doesn't?

Trump appeals to authoritarian voters?
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... ian-213533

freeman3 wrote:Trump appeals to authoritarian voters?
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... ian-213533

We've known that. It's one reason he doesn't appeal to me.

Hillary appeals to ex-cons. :)

Which is better? A side that gives the electorate more opportunities to see it's candidates, or one that doesn't?

I wasn't trying to make a partisan point (in fact I have no idea how many debates the Dems are having because they don't get any coverage over here). I just think it's a little weird that there are so many debates. I don't recall this many in any other electoral cycle, although since Trump wasn't involved they maybe just didn't get any attention here.

I am not really sure I understand this reference to Hillary supporters but your party seems to be inclined right now to elect Trump or Cruz--one a demagogue and the other a scary ideologue.

freeman3 wrote:I am not really sure I understand this reference to Hillary supporters but your party seems to be inclined right now to elect Trump or Cruz--one a demagogue and the other a scary ideologue.

And, the Democrats . . . a scary ideologue versus a serial liar and lawbreaker.

Great choices!

The good new for the GOP: Iowa and NH rarely go as scripted.

fate

The good new for the GOP: Iowa and NH rarely go as scripted.

Trump is leading in Iowa, New Hampshire South Carolina Wisconsin and Pennsylvania according to polls today...
https://www.scene.ca/Home.aspx

Right now, he's odds on to be the Republican nominee. Unless the field winnows quickly, and the opposition coalesces around someone else, he'll have the nomination locked after Super Tuesday.

Sass

Can somebody explain to me why the Republican candidates are having so many TV debates ? I haven't watched any of them of course, but I'm guessing they must simply be repeating the same old mantras again and again. Is anybody still watching at this point

There were just as many last election cycle. This time Trump's performances are attracting more viewers and interest. In a world where viewers have 200 viewing choices, if 3 or 4 % of households are watching that's a pretty big audience. Sunday night football is the most watched regular show and it gets a 7.3 rating... (18-49 year olds).
Its pretty cheap to produce a debate show, so a 3 or 4 rating would be profitable. SO Trumps right that he was making money for Fox.
I was curious and looked for actual numbers..

To paraphrase Megyn Kelly, let’s talk about the elephant not on the Big 4: the GOP debate that ran on Fox News last night. While a boycotting Donald Trump ended up not being there after all, it looks like the Kelly co-moderated Republican gathering escaped hitting a ratings low. With an 8.4 result in metered market ratings, last night’s debate from 9-11 PM ET was up 14% from the low of sixth GOP debate held on Fox Business Network on January 15. That debate went on to see a total viewership of 11 million, the worst any GOP debate has done this election cycle. Early estimates have last night looking slightly better, in the 12 million range.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/29/media/republican-debate-ratings-donald-trump/index.html

CNN averaged 1.7 million viewers during those two hours and MSNBC averaged 1 million.

"Maybe Fox was gonna have a 20 or 25 million person debate, but without Mr. Trump's participation, I think they might have a one to two million person debate," Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski said earlier in the week.

Fox's Trump-less debate had 12.5 million viewers between 9 and 11 p.m., according to Nielsen.

On the other hand, according to Google, "debate live stream" beat out searches for "Trump live stream" by 170% on Thursday night.

'nuff said

rickyp wrote:fate

The good new for the GOP: Iowa and NH rarely go as scripted.

Trump is leading in Iowa, New Hampshire South Carolina Wisconsin and Pennsylvania according to polls today...
https://www.scene.ca/Home.aspx

Right now, he's odds on to be the Republican nominee. Unless the field winnows quickly, and the opposition coalesces around someone else, he'll have the nomination locked after Super Tuesday.

Thank you, Mr. Forest, for missing the trees.

Santorum was third in the polls four years ago in Iowa. He won.

Gingrich led much of the national polling at this time 4 years ago. He lost.

Thus my comment "The good new for the GOP: Iowa and NH rarely go as scripted."

Your blurb was just so much . . . well, blurb.