Donald Trump’s chances of winning are approaching zero

Calling trump a fascist is just more evidence that Hillary supporters are disconnected from reality. That they lack aware intellects. And, that they never heard of the Princeton Study, which of course MSM failed to cover, even as it was the biggest story, even larger than 911. So as a public service effort, which is the duty of those who are connected with reality, here goes, and I will keep it brief.

The Princeton Study provided the evidence, the congressional record, spanning several decades ending in 2012. They looked at who was being represented by congress and it was hardly a surprise to see only the robber baron elites were being represented in legislation and policy. And this was not only representing the People, but it was in many cases harmful to them, economically. And so the conclusion was, we are either on the way to oligarchy, or we are already under an oligarchy.

Oligarchy for those lacking an education is fascism. It is similar to what Mussolini believed in and wanted for Italy. A system where gov't and the rich elites are indistinguishable, with the gov't working on behalf of the elites. generally to max out their income and wealth, by taking far too much of the income pie, with the collusion of the politicians.

Clinton is clearly one of the puppets of the oligarchs, the robber barons, because one of the devices being used to send the income to the top is open borders free trade, which is the newest scheme to create greater disparity in income, and boy has it worked. The disparity is now greater than was seen in the gilded age, before they crashed the economy and gave us the great depression. FDR had to take away much of their control over our economy, and from that we saw the creation of the largest middle class in world history. This is what expands middle classes. You have to cut off the nut sacks of these robber barons who are driven by sociopathic greed, and have no allegiance to any nation. The only god they worship is the god of greed, money, power.

Since trump wants to reverse what open borders free trade, he is clearly not an oligarch which means he is not a fascist. Clinton is the puppet of the fascists, the oligarchs.

While trump is wrong about some things, he is not a fascist. Clinton meets the definition. Her supporters do not understand much about reality, or so it seems. And apparently the MSM which they believe to be real journalism is also another disconnect. And yet her supporters talk down to trump supporters which they see as uneducated. But at least they are not disconnected from reality, and are voting for trump so he can begin destroying this fascism, this oligarchy, given to us by both parties, who are owned by the same robber barons.

No need to argue with me, you need to argue with the PHD's that did the study and arrived at their conclusion, using something rare amongst Hillary supporters. Logic, reason, rationality. As well as being so ill informed as to be ignorant of this very important, history making study. If only MSM would cover it. So, given they gave it no time, they cannot be journalists, who speak truth to power. I think most have learned in this election exactly what they are.

 

Obama's speech of the 2000 convention was the sort of thing that should be taught in every school in our nation.

It may not have been MLK Jr., but it was one heck of a speech.

It's not always the case that a loser in the primaries can't come back. Her favorability ratings alone demonstrate that.

This is one of the areas where I think R's are blind. They've done an outstanding job of convincing their own that everybody dislikes Hillary. So, the very fact that she is there seems surprising to them.

Obama/Clinton moved the European favorability ratings of the US from incredibly low under Bush to quite high - a dramatic move.

 

You are missing my point. There was no serious contest for the democratic nomination because Clinton was treated as though she was an incumbent President by the party establishment because this election was more like Obama 2012 than 2008. When your only competitor past new Hampshire has virtually no chance, because he was not actually a Democrat longer than a few months before filing, there is a serious problem of process in the democratic party. Clinton was coronated despite her low favorability ratings and trust issues, because she had the treasure, the infrastructure, the connections, the endorsements, the ground game in 50 states. that was plenty to make sure no one of gravitas tried to challenge. The 70 year old socialist won 23 contests because so many Dems did NOT want the Clintons back. There were reasons she had so much trouble wrapping it up. She trust numbers and favorability polling represented historic lows for much of this year. She was a weak candidate, who got very fortunate.

 

What's that quote about sausage-making and politics?

There is no other way to characterize it other than awful. Cringe-inducing, distasteful, disheartening, and realistically; it's probably par for the course. My guess is that you should be careful throwing stones from your glass house. Let's not forget that these people (politicians) are the most (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up people society produces, categorically... Manipulative, power-hungry, artificial weather vanes. At some point, it will be beneficial to someone somewhere to hack some GOP server or other, and I would bet my bottom dollar that it's all the same. Which leaves us with a profound question of what to learn from this moment? Look in the mirror and ask yourself how you will respond when the GOP is shown to be doing the same god-awful crap the DNC is doing? You know it's inevitable right?

Will you say, "You guys did it too!"

My hope is that this dogs them down and destroys the DNC. My hope is that all the scandalous stuff gets trotted out and people have to answer for it. If it destroys the DNC, they damn well deserved it.

Evan McMullin will be receiving my vote.

#nevertrump

 

Yes, this is part of what got the R's so monumentally screwed up. They pushed constituents to believe the alt-right ravers on the far side of Fox.

They are going to have to fix this sooner or later. The "everybody hates us" message has the R's disparaging America to the point that they LIKE their congressional leaders dedicating themselves to the failure of the American president as their primary objective!!!

In other words, this isn't just "butt-hurt" - it is an actual threat to America, causing failure in our fundamental institutions.

 

You confuse me with someone other than independent. I have also criticized the corrupt republicans I refer to as Rinos. Feel free to check my glass house for cracks. You will find I have pointed out the corrupt republicans as well. The corruption runs deep on both sides, thats why the establishment republicans (RINOs) are in this up to their eyeballs as well and is why they are also trying to take Trump out. Corruption on both sides will be eradicated with a Trump Presidency. That's why Hillary is being given a pass on her corruption. The republicans have determined that its better to have a Hillary presidency and wait out another 4 years than have a Trump presidency which will overturn the applecart these corrupt establishment politicians are feasting on while the rest of the nation is turning into a third world banana republic right before our eyes.
If thats not clear enough, I wish cancer, slow painful cancer on every single corrupt politician in our system regardless of party. These people are the true enemies of America and every American reading this should be appalled at how these corrupt politicians like Clinton are allowed to operate above our laws.

 

The fundamental institutions outright working for the Dem Party? Oh yes indeedy-do!

 

I don't view it that way. Legislatures always have big disagreements.

The thing we've lost is the ability to understand what the other side needs - which the right is never going to know about if it refuses to read or listen to MSM and sticks to the screamers on the far side of Fox. Instead, we need to be well informed of policy options that are complete and well thought out.

Then, we have the right choosing to oust any legislator who does their job - which is to negotiate and compromise. That's a direct assault on the legislative branch.

What we get is absolutes like shutting down our government over Obamacare without bothering to even discuss a replacement. Or, stating that the right will not confirm nominations regardless of merit. It's gotten so serious that there is no push back when the legislative branch leaders state that their number one objective is the failure of the US president!!!

This is a clear assault on America.

 

Sounds GOOD.

I always love a stacked deck.

As long as it is stacked for my team.

That must be why the GOP loves gerrymandering House districts with their control in state legislatures.

Forget the partisan sob stories. It works both ways.

 

No . . . it . . . doesn't; but then again the chances are very good that in the not too distant future it will no longer matter. There will be consequences.

 

No. HClinton maintained HUGE favorability ratings among Democrats for years - and let's not forget that it was a Democratic primary.

This is an important part of the right wing confusion. They TRY to ignore all but their alt-right view, and thus have NO CLUE what's going on in total. So, anything that doesn't match their alt-right screamer becomes more conspiracy and distrust in America. You think everyone hates Clinton, because YOU hate Clinton . And, the right mostly hates Clinton because they were told to hate her. The right still brings up long resolved issues as if they are part of a plot against the right. And, no investigation or explanation is accepted, because it isn't consistent with what the alt-right has been telling people. This is total failure. You can't seriously expect America to work when that is what is going on.

Yes, Clinton had a FAR more advanced campaign than Bernie did, and now has a far more advanced campaign machine than Trump, too.

You seem to forget that Obama challenged her before, and won. She did not have a mortal lock. But, she brings some major game. Surely you have noticed that.

 

Yes, its a strange era, where Hilary sycophants and "never Trumpers" ignore the facts exposed by wikileaks and others, such as video of "progressives" admitting that all those so-called conspiracy theories are actually true.

By the way, it was Hilary supporters who in 2008 thrust the "birther" issue into the limelight. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ow-began-with-Hillary-Clinton-supporters.html

Try to keep up to speed. The times are changing so fast the Truth is being revealed faster then proggies can handle, but try.

 

Hillary is not popular on the Left. Were she then Bernie -- who was ever only supposed to be a placeholder -- would have never taken off like a skyrocket. What Hillary has got is the across the board cooperation and support of both the Obama Administration and the Mainstream Media. Hillary is not even campaigning. The MSM is campaigning in her place.

 

Let's say Trump loses pretty resoundingly and Dems are the Senate majority - which appears to be by far the most likely outcome.

What are Republicans going to do?

At what point will Republican congressmen start presenting compromise legislation to their constituents as successes, demonstrating their ability to move legislation? Or, do you think the R's will perpetuate their death spiral of attempting to cause failure?

 

I think that under leftist control and rule that Venezuela is this nation's future. A Hillary presidency would simply make the inevitable occur a trifle faster.

 

Why would the MSM media cover it? The people who run this country and much of the world also own the media and everything that falls under that corporate umbrella. Just wait till they are done merging with each other and there are only 2 corporate entities that own all the media in this country.

 

No, you are just wrong about Democratic opinion of Hillary. She pegged a 90% favorable in 2010 and has consistently been in the high 70's to mid 80's.

BTW: People can have highly favorable opinions of more than one person at a time.

This isn't like marriage!

The press has carried FAR more free time for Trump. It's not even close. And, I mean time on news outlets, not opinion/analysis.

I think you are suffering from isolation. Actually, I think a major part of the Republican constituency is suffering from isolation from a broad presentation of news.

For years I've read Fox, Drudge, NYTimes (where I have a subscription), Washington Post, NBC/CNN (read, not listen to). Listening to news is idiotic - amounting to sound bites. The nightly news totally is useless, as there is zero time for real analysis. There is no way to talk about Syria on the nightly news - it ends up being "look at these bombs fall" and "look at our troops". So, from there one has to look at actual policy papers and analysis.

Do Republican voters know what our strategic direction in Syria is, and why?

Which sites do you read on a daily basis? How do you find out what really happened?

 

This will definitely be interesting. I remember Reagan supposedly had no chance of winning before his landslide against Carter. The polls were eerily similar. I believe they had it something like Carter at 47% and Reagan at 38%. Of course the results were much different with Reagan winning in a landslide. It will be interesting to see if history repeats.

 

The guy doesn't come off as very emotionally stable, to say the least. I doubt any reasonable person would disagree on that point. It's that versus the much more "in control" conniving malfeasance and calm, straight-faced lying of Hillary. Both of these people are dangerous and unfit to be president. I don't think we've ever had choices this bad on the two big tickets in a presidential race before.

- - - Updated - - -

Were polls conducted the same way then as now?

 

People who vote for Hillary are sure to be disappointed. Wages are the same as when her husband took office over 20 years ago. The trade deals he passed ensured that they would be.

He stabbed workers in the back, as will Hillary with TPP. The media is corrupt and taking her money, and will paint any picture it takes to get her elected. There is really no justification for not voting against her.

 

I hate Clinton? well take a gander at this http://www.politicalforum.com/political-opinions-beliefs/480592-trump-definitely-will-accept-results-election-4.html specifically from post #31 forward where as we type today, I have been defending the integrity of Hillary Clinton. I pick my words with care. I have said she is a terribly weak and damaged candidate. I have claimed the process that produced this result is flawed. I have not claimed that Clinton did much of anything wrong or unethical or illegal. Nor have I said she would be a bad President. I know which primary it is, we have never sent a nominee with higher unfavorable polling numbers out of our convention. Not Dukakis, not Kerry, not Mondale.

Please pick your words with care or research the poster you are making accusations of.

Yes Obama won but during the process, Clinton established even stronger ties to each state party and an organization and phone bank as well as stronger financial ties all of which were there to be reawakened in four years. That's good for Clinton, but bad for the party which will not have had a serious contest from 2008 to 2020 by the time she runs for re-election and its highly unlikely that a sitting incumbent president will produce one. that is why it is important that non-incumbent nomination years produce one. Is it unreasonable to hope that some of these primaries and caucuses provide their original function to the party? There was zero point to this exercise after O'Malley was driven out. He was mortally wounded in Iowa and quit after new Hampshire. This is a problem.

 

Every American Citizen who sees thru the above load of trash should vote for the Game Changer Donald Trump, because the other choice is equivalent to pulling the commode handle on the United States...

She brings absolutely nothing to the table but a hammer to knock the legs out from under it...nothing good comes from installing a Criminal in a position of power.

 

Outside of my phrases, I'd call myself a right-of-center kind of guy. Fiscally Liberal(but still more conservative than what makes up today's Democratic Party) but Socially Conservative. We've broken down enough barriers in the 21st century. Time for our country to heal up. If we could invest in major areas and have our government operate in a revenue-oriented mindset(You know, getting back to making surpluses. And it's not that hard. The President talked about cutting for every dollar you spent. No, what we need to do is make two dollars for every ONE that we spend.)

If money is funneled back into the economy, then it's money well spent. But if the money goes into a black hole(such as derivatives, other countries, etc.) then it drains the wealth from our communities and forces us to spend even more. Wasteful spending perpetuates itself, careful spending leads to growth.

 

Woops - that was bad. I really screwed that up, and it wasn't the best way to communicate my point of view, regardless. I do apologize.

As for the points made, I think the real Clinton weakness of opinion comes from the years of Republicans focusing their constituents on hating Clinton. It's the only possible explanation of her super high favorability among Dems paired with the super low favorability among Rs.

I was trying to say that an individual takes on the "hate" view when their one source of info tells them to hate - meaning that limited sources is a big problem. Obviously I shouldn't have used "you".

I think our process is reasonable. I don't like the "superdelegate" thing. At the least it is too heavy handed. And, the amount of money that goes into US elections is anti-democratic to the point of being a threat to our nation.

Asking the D's to nominate someone other than the one with the vast policy experience, super high favorability among Dems, major campaign organization, etc., is a tough direction to take.

That said, what would you change? Would it just be the superdelegates and the funding?

 

The problem isn't with republicans disliking her its with independents. I get that republicans having been smearing her for decades but she has had the same decades to reframe her image, change that brand and that is what professional politicians are supposed to be able to do. Its a huge part of her job to sell herself and her ideas to those who are NOT her base.

I don't mind superdelegates but we should cut them back by a third. they should only be a presence at the convention, not a voting block of significance. I would also insist that they take an oath not to reveal any preference or to endorse until mid April. Candidates without much name familiarity should not be dead mackerel before they even reach super-Tuesday because Superdelegates provide headlines which funding sources follow. the 'name and the endorsements ' creates the media buzz, the big name donations follow the buzz and the cycle leads to calculated decisions by good potential candidates that they cannot possibly survive super-tuesday,. then we need to rethink super-Tuesday itself. Unless you have been fundraising and campaigning non-stop for three years, to develop a presence and organisation in Iowa, New Hampshire and the super Tuesday states, you have very little hope of surviving a loss in New Hampshire and Iowa. there is simply too much ground to cover and its all about media buys to get any attention at all. Its just too top-heavy and money dependent in the early stages.

The Clintons knew the system, helped write the rules in many of the states, and had just an overwhelming advantage long before the first vote was cast. Not their fault, but bad for the party long-term. The system was not exactly 'rigged' in the narrow sense, of any unethical or covert conduct, and the Clintons sure did not do any rigging. . they just did what they did very thoroughly and well.