Posted on 04/21/2016 8:57:16 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Donald Trump might have rolled to 60 percent of the Republican vote in New York Tuesday night, but he came in a distant third in the big scheme of things nonetheless. Keep in mind, this is the candidate and the campaign that constantly pout about one-man one-vote and popular vote totals.
They threaten to both call the lawyers about this concept and to riot in Cleveland over this. Thus, by Trump's own standards, Trump got thrashed in New York. Both Hillary and Bernie Sanders destroyed Trump in raw vote totals.
I'm not saying Trump didn't win the N.Y. Republican primary big. He did. I'm not even arguing that Trump is cheating to get 90% of the delegates with only 60% of the vote – although I could do just that, again using Trump's standards and Trump's own words and Team Trump's talking points. It would be easy. All I'm pointing out is that even in a yuuuuuuuge win, the numbers put the lie to the Donald Trump campaign. This was his best night so far, and yet the seeds of disaster are obvious for any who would but pay attention.
That popular vote total should bring the pom-pom clan back to Earth.
Remember that Trump is supposedly the man who will by his mere presence put blue states, even New York, into play. The message board trolls drone endlessly about this. As do some websites and talk show hosts – not to mention the Trump surrogates. Again, by their own self-imposed standard, Trump really got humiliated Tuesday night.
Consider: Hillary Clinton tallied over a million votes. Over three quarters of a million New York voters "felt the Bern." Trump was just over half a million. You say, "Okay okay, but it's New York."
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Why are Cruz’ records sealed? (honest question)
That’s the only question that’s ever needed an answer. Well, a honest answer.
___________________________________
There are many articles stating some of his records are sealed. Why? Why would he seal them?
If he should be the nominee, the rats will get hold of this and then what?
.
RE: And Cruz can win. Seriously.
An argument that Trump supporters often cling to is that Trump is doing better than other Republicans in the primaries, and therefore it follows that he will do better than they would in general elections.
But this doesn’t follow at all. What people fail to consider is that relatively few Americans vote in primaries, and they aren’t representative of the general voting population. The difference of scale between these two types of elections renders the primary results insignificant in divining general election results, which will depend on completely different factors.
Trump has won about 8.8 million votes right now (37.9 percent) in the GOP primaries, and he will finish this year’s primary season with something like 12 or 13 million votes. Now consider: This number represents about one-fifth of what a candidate in this year’s general election will need just to lose respectably, by a Romney-like margin. After all, about 130 million people will likely cast votes for president.
Now, there’s no reason in principle why a candidate who wins “only” 12 or 13 million votes in the primaries (or even just five or six or seven million) could not win a general election. That depends entirely on the candidate and his campaign. But the point here is that even a terrific primary performance offers zero evidence that a candidate actually can win a general election. As all of the head-to-head polling illustrates, it isn’t even a sign that that said candidate would perform better in a general election than other candidates who got fewer votes in the primaries.
This is especially true in Trump’s case. His hard-core supporters fail to comprehend just how deeply unpopular he is with everybody else outside their relatively small group. According to the last eight polls taken on the question, Trump has an unfavorable rating of between 60 and 70 percent among the general population that will vote in the 2016 election.
One can quibble with a poll here or there, but to deny that Trump would be the most unpopular person ever nominated for president requires the belief that all current polling is wrong — and not just a bit wrong (as some polls were in 2012 in 2014) but completely, uniformly and entirely wrong in a way it never has been in any modern presidential election. Yet in reality, the polls from April and even March of 2004, 2008, and 2012 were, on aggregate, reliable indicators of the eventual winner in those years.
You ask - What is sealed?
I tell you - Nothing is sealed.
So for someone to say Ted has sealed his records - they lie.
Ted has not sealed his birth records. You wanna see his birth certificate? It’s out there.
What else do you wanna know?
Hmmm. Looks more like a sulk than a zot. Oh well.
Arrogant egotist.
No kidding
JRs zot thread had them all on the run
Now they have organized again and flooded the forum as usual
They think if they can control it here thread wise maybe Trump will not get the nomination
It’s a fantasy
Exactly. Someone posted this same drivel Wednesday. A closed primary in a state with 5.7 million Dems and 2.7 million Reps.
So for someone to say Ted has sealed his records - they lie.
__________________________
ALL of the sites are lying- even the the well respected ones?
Rational reasoning does not irrational Trump hating make.
I'm glad that little pantywaist got banned from Free Republic for his mouth.
If Trump loses NY narrowly, he wins Michigan. Cruz cant’ win any midwest general states.
Everything else here on FR is sort of inconsequential until we learn why FR is being used, and why so many FR posters are being used, for the advancement of Globalism AT ALL COSTS.
Because for CEW to lay out the embarrassing truth that Cruz got less than 15% in this same primary would have shown us all Cruz is a genuinely bad candidate.
Like a lot of Cruzers, he had blinders on about that.
6 million people voted in New York in 2012 and 2008.
Your post references half that number. You can't make inferences with that data - ESPECIALLY with the NY conditionals.
right. Good post, FRiend
He would get roasTED by the Left Wing of the uni-Party. It would start as soon as the Victory Party celebrations started winding down. "Ted's dead baby!" He has joined the long list of has beens from this election, sealed/hidden past, or not! Good riddance!
So let's acknowledge this, which I think CEW would as well. It was just not a part of this article. And I also think that the "bad" is the candidate (the person), not his positions or policies. Cruz is not naturally smooth, genuine or personable. He is made for the courtroom rather than the public square, especially in this 21st century of social media and the idolization of celebrity.
But ... can we also acknowledge the point of the article? Donald Trump will not win NY against a Democrat. That is as obvious as the fact that 1.75 million > 0.5 million.
I hope CEW finally does understand that issue, I remember long ago when I pointed out his "likability" problem, he didn't see it. That was at least a month, maybe two, before I switched to preferring Trump.
One other thing: I do think it's likely Trump will put NY enough into play that they (whoever is the dem nominee) will have to spend money there to defend it.
No other candidate would force that. I'm not saying he could win, that's not it, just that he would force them to spend beaucoups de buckos for the first time since Reagan.
I kind of like that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.