(08-29-2019 01:42 PM)AppfanInCAAland Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 06:12 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  We don't even know the third party candidates yet, I don't understand this assumption that they won't get any support this time around.

Assuming there will not be third party candidate capable of garnering at least 5% of the vote, Trump will win re-election. Since the Civil War, America has re-elected a previously elected president 13 times, while voting them out only 5 (not counting Carter beating Ford, since Ford had not been elected president nor VP previously).

Of those 5 defeats, 2 were very unique circumstances not applicable as of today when Harrison beat Cleveland over a Civil War veterans' widows pension dispute and FDR beat Hoover during the Great Depression. The other 3, Wilson bearing Taft, Reagan beating Carter, and Clinton beating GHW Bush, had third party candidates with over 5%.

So history tells us if Trump is able to avoid a third party challenger (and the Great Depression and pissing off Civil War veterans' widows), he will likely win reelection.

Cleveland did win the popular vote vs. Harrison both times, so its a little different situation.

(08-29-2019 07:08 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-29-2019 01:42 PM)AppfanInCAAland Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 06:12 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  We don't even know the third party candidates yet, I don't understand this assumption that they won't get any support this time around.

Assuming there will not be third party candidate capable of garnering at least 5% of the vote, Trump will win re-election. Since the Civil War, America has re-elected a previously elected president 13 times, while voting them out only 5 (not counting Carter beating Ford, since Ford had not been elected president nor VP previously).

Of those 5 defeats, 2 were very unique circumstances not applicable as of today when Harrison beat Cleveland over a Civil War veterans' widows pension dispute and FDR beat Hoover during the Great Depression. The other 3, Wilson bearing Taft, Reagan beating Carter, and Clinton beating GHW Bush, had third party candidates with over 5%.

So history tells us if Trump is able to avoid a third party challenger (and the Great Depression and pissing off Civil War veterans' widows), he will likely win reelection.

Cleveland did win the popular vote vs. Harrison both times, so its a little different situation.

About the only thing Cleveland won till LeBron


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(08-28-2019 02:08 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 02:00 PM)bullet Wrote:  You can take Texas, Georgia and Ohio to the bank for trump.
Iowa, North Carolina, Florida and Arizona are definitely gop leaning. Certainty is from most to least. Arizona is getting to be a tossup state

What if I told you that across 4 polls thus far, Biden is +3 in Texas right now? Granted it's not a huge sample, but it's something. Still taking Texas to the bank for Trump?

Since 2016, there have been 4 more years of migration into Texas from California and New York. 4 more years of completely unchecked migration across the border. I'd compromise that I may be getting ahead of myself and that it'll be a toss up in 2020 and not lean dem just yet, but it's only a matter of time.

You just don't get it. A LARGE segment of people who will vote to re-elect Trump (just like what happened in 2016), are saying they're not going to vote for him. No one wants to be ostracized and targeted as being whatever-phobic, racist, etc., when they know that's what they'll be labeled for wanting to NOT see the country become a socialist nation. And all your polls will be wrong, and you'll be shocked that they were, until you decided some foreign nation caused him to win by interfering in the election (because you won't be able to face the truth that a lot of people who the polls say won't vote for Trump, will hold their noses and vote him in again).

(08-29-2019 09:55 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  

(08-29-2019 07:08 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-29-2019 01:42 PM)AppfanInCAAland Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 06:12 PM)wmubroncopilot Wrote:  We don't even know the third party candidates yet, I don't understand this assumption that they won't get any support this time around.

Assuming there will not be third party candidate capable of garnering at least 5% of the vote, Trump will win re-election. Since the Civil War, America has re-elected a previously elected president 13 times, while voting them out only 5 (not counting Carter beating Ford, since Ford had not been elected president nor VP previously).

Of those 5 defeats, 2 were very unique circumstances not applicable as of today when Harrison beat Cleveland over a Civil War veterans' widows pension dispute and FDR beat Hoover during the Great Depression. The other 3, Wilson bearing Taft, Reagan beating Carter, and Clinton beating GHW Bush, had third party candidates with over 5%.

So history tells us if Trump is able to avoid a third party challenger (and the Great Depression and pissing off Civil War veterans' widows), he will likely win reelection.

Cleveland did win the popular vote vs. Harrison both times, so its a little different situation.

About the only thing Cleveland won till LeBron


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I know Trump has flipped me and won my vote in 2020.

Being a born again Christian its impossible for me to vote for the left, so its Trump or sit it out again. You can argue about his tweets, but its hard to deny the results.

(08-29-2019 03:33 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  Are there still any of these Civil War vets widows still alive?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Fun fact: John Tyler, the 10th US President born in 1790, still has living grand children:

Quote:AS THE UNITED STATES celebrates Presidents Day, an historical oddity continues: President John Tyler, who served from 1841 to 1845, was born in 1790, died in 1862, still has two surviving grandsons.

Lyon Gardiner Tyler Jr. was born in 1924. Harrison Ruffin Tyler was born in 1928. They are the sons of Lyon Gardiner Tyler Sr., one of President Tyler's 15 children.

"Both my grandfather — the president — and my father, were married twice. And they had children by their first wives. And their first wives died, and they married again and had more children. And my father was 75 when I was born, his father was 63 when he was born," Harrison Tyler explained to New York Magazine in 2012.

(08-28-2019 09:29 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 05:11 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  

(08-28-2019 03:32 PM)bullet Wrote:  Dixie values are patriotism, common sense, valuing people for their performance not their credentials or birthright, and hard work. They're good ones. And Dixie is a lot more tolerant of people who don't think like them because more of them have rural backgrounds. In rural areas its not like the cities where you can lock yourself up in a bubble of common types.

This explains your problem. You have no ability to reach the cities or the North.

When you defend monuments to slavery and give a pass to white nationalists. To those of us in the North and West, Dixie values means segregation and a legacy of slavery. Not that the North has a great track record, but we don't have the legacy of the "lost cause" BS to explain any "peculiar" way of life. I look at a school like Clemson and I see in a state where 29.6% of the population is African American and only 60.8% is white, but the school is over 82% White and only 6.6% Black it's obvious there are deep seated issues you are ignoring. That seems to be a manifestation of those Dixie values. Is your company management even 25% African American? When it is you can look me in the eye and say you really are more tolerant. Right now those are empty words. The facts on the ground shown them hallow.

(For a comparison, UCLA is 4% Black, 28% Hispanic, 30% White, 32% Asian, in a State 38% Hispanic, 39% White, 15% Asian, and 5% Black ... Asians are over represented, but everyone else is in proportion)

And California, seriously? Do you have any understanding of California's history? They exterminated the Indians. They stole the lands of the Mexican landholders. They used the Chinese to build and then discriminated against them and took their land and rights. They mistreated the Japanese long before WWII. The Japanese during WWII were treated far worse if they were from California. Not all Japanese got rounded up. Their treatment of Mexican Americans rivaled the Jim Crow South with Blacks. How about the Okies during the Dust Bowl who may have even been descended from some of the same people? There is no state with a worse history of bigotry than California (no slavery at least).

All of those things are true. California had the most brutal subjugation of Native Americans. Of the Indian/Mexican population of perhaps 150,000 in 1848, it is estimated that European Americans killed outright between 4,500 to 16,000 until 1870. By 1870, there were only 30,000 Indians left.


Sociologists say that Western settlement originated from 4 "cultural hearths": New England (aka Yankees), Delaware River (aka Midland), Appalachia (western PA/ West Virginia / Cumberland Gap), and the southern plantations.

Of these cultural hearths, the only one that stressed multiculturalism was the Midland culture. They had to - it was 1/3 German, 1/3 English Quakers, and 1/3 "other" from all over. Midlanders settled & dominated Ontario and the Midwest (although there was also influence from Yankees in the northern MW & Appalachians in the southern MW). Midland multiculturalism also won favor in the Mountain West and New York city (NYC was always a mix of cultures). This Midland cultural region (and NYC) absorbed the vast majority of non-British immigration before 1940, except for French Canadians in New England & Italians in upstate NY.


Nearly all settlement of California was by non-Midland groups. So it's not a surprise that they've always been hostile to outside cultures.

Most of Northern CA was settled by Appalachians. Except San Francisco, which was settled by New Englanders. The culture is a weird mix of Appalachian individuality with Yankee trust in government solutions.

Southern California was originally Californios (Christianized Indians with Mexican landlords). But when the Southern Pacific railway was finished in 1883, the population tripled in seven years. It was mostly southerners & Appalachians.

Is anyone considering this? After 3.5 years of forcing themselves to be outraged, the left is emotionally exhausted?

https://amgreatness.com/2019/08/29/the-p...exhausted/

"...To be fair, Trump’s tweets remain widely unpopular with voters, including many Republicans. But if there is exhaustion among Trump’s supporters, it is in response to the Left’s neverending assault on the president, his administration, and his voters—not because of anything the president himself has done.

It is Democrats, not Trump, who launched a destructive special counsel investigation based on manufactured evidence that divided the country for more than two years. It is Democrats, not Trump, who ridicule Republicans and Trump-supporting Americans as racist rubes who want children locked in cages and concentration camps built on the southern border.

It is Democrats, not Trump, who orchestrated the vilest attack on a Supreme Court nominee in American history. It is Democrats, not Trump, who now wish for an economic recession. It is Democrats, not Trump, who side with foreign adversaries against the best interests of the country. It is Democrats, not Trump, fomenting violence against political foes.

And all of it is amplified by a national press corps and punditry class now complaining about how tired they are. Clearly, working as de facto foot soldiers in #TheResistance after indulging in an eight-year nap has shown how badly out of shape these brave warriors have become.

There is one person, however, who doesn’t seem a bit exhausted: Donald Trump. So if the Democrats and NeverTrump Republicans want a fighting shot to take him out in 2020, they had better rest up. They’ll need all the energy they can get."

To a large majority of the American people, politics is background noise. That noise has been "outrage at Trump" nonstop for 4 years. New outrages barely even register with normal people any more; it's just more of the same background noise.

That's an overlooked downside of the Democrats' strategy. Their rhetoric against Trump has been so hyperbolic for so long that they've run out of impactful adjectives to describe Trump for the next round.

(08-31-2019 11:25 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  To a large majority of the American people, politics is background noise. That noise has been "outrage at Trump" nonstop for 4 years. New outrages barely even register with normal people any more; it's just more of the same background noise.

That's an overlooked downside of the Democrats' strategy. Their rhetoric against Trump has been so hyperbolic for so long that they've run out of impactful adjectives to describe Trump for the next round.

#abeautifulsadisticmind

ol' boy changed how they're 'ginning'...those dipshites are running on E...

nobody likes it more than this sadist...


i

The Leftists and their polls are precious. They still believe their polls even though those same polls said Trump had no chance of winning. The reality is Trump is more popular now than he was in 2016. This comes from someone who has been registering new voters for the last year.

Unless the Leftists manufacture votes by voting for the dead (an old Leftist trick here in Kentucky) or simply ignoring election laws like they are known to do as documented by Project Veritas.