Why isnt Hillary destroying Trump in the polls?

[fskimospy]

It's not false equivalence to say both are terrible. You can make the argument that one may be more terrible-er than the other, but that's not a refutation of the less terrible one being good.

While opinions may vary on their individual merits, the post I was responding to said that they were both equally terrible, specifically because of their untrustworthiness. The two are simply not on the same planet, much less equal in that regard.

 

[hal2kilo]

Johnson beat Goldwater by about 22.6%.

Wow, I did not realize it was that big of a blow out.

 

[Blackjack200]

Trump is maybe 10x worse than Clinton, in my opinion. That isn't what I was talking about, and you know it. Both D and R voters will vote for a D or R candidate based mostly on party rather than on substance. Just look at the very common down-the-line technique. Do you really know the policies of the assistant to the secretary to the deputy of the local municipal airport authority? Or are you voting for him because of the letter next to his name?

Voting 'D' or 'R' down ticket because you're less familiar with candidates for those offices, but trust one brand over the other is a hell of a lot different than voting 'D' or 'R' because you're more loyal to your party than your country.

And I'm still not convinced that Polls are picking up all pockets of people. When you break down to specific groups...Hillary has something like 90% of all women (white women recent numbers are hard to find), and minorities and 65% of the 35 and under crowd. There's not enough old white dudes out there to make up the difference.

Clinton is not winning 90% of all women. That is simply false. She does have something like 95% of the black vote. Trump probably has about 20-30% of the Hispanic vote believe it or not.

 

[theeedude]

A lot of voting patterns are set in youth. So a lot of the idiots who sacrificed their own middle class existence at the altar of trickle-down since the 1980s because they fell for Ronald Reagan's acting are just going to keep doing so until the actuarial realities set in.
On the flip side, a lot of the young people that Republicans are now turning off will be lifelong Democrat voters, which will pay dividends for America for generations.

 

[ivwshane]

Interesting. You think a former racist (one who has publicly stated that being a member of the kkk was a regret) is the same think as someone who currently sides with a racist movement are similar.

You've never been one to do much thinking though, that's why your posts contain memes instead of your own thoughts.

Oh, btw, Trump is rayciss. And Carter was leading Reagan in the polls. Go look it up.

 

[MrSquished]

I am slightly concerned why she isn't leading by more at this point

 

[Indus]

A lot of voting patterns are set in youth. So a lot of the idiots who sacrificed their own middle class existence at the altar of trickle-down since the 1980s because they fell for Ronald Reagan's acting are just going to keep doing so until the actuarial realities set in.
On the flip side, a lot of the young people that Republicans are now turning off will be lifelong Democrat voters, which will pay dividends for America for generations.

I bought that stuff.. and voted for Dole. I couldn't stand Bill Clinton and thought NAFTA was awful even though GB enacted it. I also voted for Bush.

I didn't vote for him again because I was pissed at him for ignoring the bin laden memo on his desk and bbq'ing in texas.. that affected me personally as I had people who were my co-workers die on 9/11 and I was *luckily* on the 31st floor and able to get out.

I wasn't sold on Obama early on in 2008, preferred Hillary but I made a judgment call after the economy crashed that Obama was better. In the current form of where the parties are and their trajectory, I can't see myself ever voting for the GOP again until they atleast come back to reality of the middle class voter, health care, lbgt equality and that small business's mean 1-5 employees, not 500-1000 employees.

 

[theeedude]

The way GOP has been screwing up, they may alienate existing voters at the margin. But from what I have read, voting patterns from youth are sticky, so the core base are like slowly boiled frogs not noticing the craziness rising.

 

[yllus]

In 1975, Donald Trump and his father were sued by the federal justice department for discriminatory rental practices. They settled with a non-admission of guilt but agreed to open up its practices to be more racially neutral.

In 1975, Hillary Rodham founded the University of Arkansas School of Law Legal Clinic so that law students could help underprivileged and often minority clients with things like illegal evictions and child support cases. She also co-founded a rape crisis hotline.

Their two paths, stories and legacies couldn't be more different. If you're trumpeting that they're the same, you've fallen prey to the old adage that if you repeat a lie (or smear) often enough, it becomes the truth.

 

[feralkid]

Because all people aren't that stupid. Both candidates suck ass for mostly different reasons, equally bad to me. She's a lying piece of shit, who is extremely untruthful. He's no better.

Liars AND untruthful?

What a combination!

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Liars AND untruthful?

What a combination!

she is the untruthiest!

 

[Texashiker]

she only leads him by single digits?!?!
would have thought 20point lead minimum.

wtf tight race?

Because everyone knows hillary can not be trusted. She is a corporate shill where everything is for sale.

What baffles me is why anyone would vote for hillary.

 

[chowderhead]

I bought that stuff.. and voted for Dole. I couldn't stand Bill Clinton and thought NAFTA was awful even though GB enacted it. I also voted for Bush.

I didn't vote for him again because I was pissed at him for ignoring the bin laden memo on his desk and bbq'ing in texas.. that affected me personally as I had people who were my co-workers die on 9/11 and I was *luckily* on the 31st floor and able to get out.

I wasn't sold on Obama early on in 2008, preferred Hillary but I made a judgment call after the economy crashed that Obama was better. In the current form of where the parties are and their trajectory, I can't see myself ever voting for the GOP again until they atleast come back to reality of the middle class voter, health care, lbgt equality and that small business's mean 1-5 employees, not 500-1000 employees.

there is a political theory that if you can get someone to vote for one political party for 3 straight Presidential elections (12 years), that person's voting pattern is fairly set and s/he will most likely vote for that party for their life. That is why Republicans are in a dire situation with Hispanics and other minorities who tend to be younger. They could lose a generation of voters and always be underdogs in Presidential races.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Because everyone knows hillary can not be trusted. She is a corporate shill where everything is for sale.

What baffles me is why anyone would vote for hillary.

I think a lot of things baffle you, like where the sun goes at night, if the earth isn't flat, why is the horizon flat, etc...

 

[BxgJ]

I think a lot of things baffle you, like where the sun goes at night, if the earth isn't flat, why is the horizon flat, etc...

Beat me to it!

 

[Starbuck1975]

A lot of voting patterns are set in youth. So a lot of the idiots who sacrificed their own middle class existence at the altar of trickle-down since the 1980s because they fell for Ronald Reagan's acting are just going to keep doing so until the actuarial realities set in.
On the flip side, a lot of the young people that Republicans are now turning off will be lifelong Democrat voters, which will pay dividends for America for generations.

What it means to be a Democrat will change as the right wing or #alt whatever fades into obscurity. The Democrat coalition will begin to splinter more along socio economic or even geographic lines once that occurs. Most of the LBGT people I know have widely different views on immigration, global intervention and other economic issues. Similarly, hispanic or other immigrant families well established in the American societal fabric are not unlike the immigrant waves that came before them, particularly those that are Catholic.

Regardless, the brand of politics represented by both Trump and Clinton will only further create political apathy and frustration. There is nothing inspiring about either outcome.

 

[HTFOff]

Interesting. You think a former racist (one who has publicly stated that being a member of the kkk was a regret) is the same think as someone who currently sides with a racist movement are similar.

Wow.

The man organized for and was a member of the kkk, literally wore the hood. I like how you mentioned his "my bad" apology in passing though. Way to correct the record I guess. LOL

Ah, the perks of being a democrat.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Because everyone knows hillary can not be trusted. She is a corporate shill where everything is for sale.

What baffles me is why anyone would vote for hillary.

You are not alone in that sentiment, don't let the cheerleaders dissuade you. It is unfortunate our only alternative is Trump, because she is a very vulnerable candidate. I hope Johnson polls strong enough to enter the debates as Trump schtick won't work in the general and similarly Clinton wont have the DNC to provide her with home field advantage

 

[fskimospy]

Because everyone knows hillary can not be trusted. She is a corporate shill where everything is for sale.

What baffles me is why anyone would vote for hillary.

I think Mike Bloomberg said it best, that we need to elect a 'sane and competent' person as the president. Trump is neither sane nor competent, and he's the only other person who stands a realistic chance of victory. Therefore, Clinton.

 

[sportage]

Well, she does need to earn it, after all.
The convention put her in front and she has stayed there, at least.
I count on the debates to give her another boost. The final boost she needs.

What worries me, peoples attention spans are about three days.
As great as she did at her convention, some people are forgetting that and back to "maybe" or "undecided".

And last but not least, she is a woman.
The woman thing helped her a lot with some, but really hurts her with others.
I know many MANY tough gun hunting pound the chest like Tarzan men that absolutely HATE the thought of any woman thinking she can hold the highest office. And they also hated Obama, by the way.
Hate simply because Obama was black, and Hillary is female.
And I know a lot of women that are all for women's rights but that stops at the oval office.
They still believe only men, and only white men, should even dare run for president.

CEO or department head, fine. Go lady go.
But president of the US? No way lady.
And how dare you woman, is how they believe,

 

[Starbuck1975]

Well, she does need to earn it, after all.
The convention put her in front and she has stayed there, at least.
I count on the debates to give her another boost. The final boost she needs.

What worries me, peoples attention spans are about three days.
As great as she did at her convention, some people are forgetting that and back to "maybe" or "undecided".

And last but not least, she is a woman.
The woman thing helped her a lot with some, but really hurts her with others.
I know many MANY tough gun hunting pound the chest like Tarzan men that absolutely HATE the thought of any woman thinking she can hold the highest office. And they also hated Obama, by the way.
Hate simply because Obama was black, and Hillary is female.
And I know a lot of women that are all for women's rights but that stops at the oval office.
They still believe only men, and only white men, should even dare run for president.

CEO or department head, fine. Go lady go.
But president of the US? No way lady.
And how dare you woman, is how they believe,

Its all a matter of perspective. As a child of the 80s, I've never known a world where women weren't in the workforce. Most of my managers have been women. I am quite comfortable with women in positions of power. The gender glass ceiling of the Presidency seems irrelevant at this point.

Similarly I know many Baby Boomer 2nd wave feminists who dont care for Obama, are more libertarian than liberal and yet are enthusiastic Hillary supporters solely based on gender.

I just find the whole concept of identity politics juvenile. I found it encouraging that many millenial females broke from Hillary in favor of Sanders, and evaluated her on the merits of her candidacy instead of her gender

 

[theeedude]

What it means to be a Democrat will change as the right wing or #alt whatever fades into obscurity.

That won't happen for a very long time. That's the trap GOP is in. They can't win with in general with these people, but they can't win primaries without them.

 

[Texashiker]

In 1975, Hillary Rodham founded the University of Arkansas School of Law Legal Clinic so that law students could help underprivileged and often minority clients with things like illegal evictions and child support cases. She also co-founded a rape crisis hotline.

The hillary from then is not the same one today.

If hillary showed any indication she believed in civil rights and was a true champion of the weak, I would vote for her.

At it stands, her response during the recent floods shows what kind of person she is.

 

[MrA79]

I think a lot of things baffle you, like where the sun goes at night, if the earth isn't flat, why is the horizon flat, etc...

You lefties sure do seem to play fast and loose with the 'no personal attacks' rule this forum purportedly has.

 

[Jaskalas]

I think Mike Bloomberg said it best, that we need to elect a 'sane and competent' person as the president. Trump is neither sane nor competent, and he's the only other person who stands a realistic chance of victory. Therefore, Clinton.

A Neocon with a pattern of regime change in the Middle East is neither sane nor competent.
By the Bloomberg standard neither one of them is fit to be President.