No, Trump can't win

The Washington Examiner ^ | April 11, 2016 | Timothy P. Carney

[dp0622]

Maybe we’ll pull 40 percent this time. Would help in NY and FL.

[The Iceman Cometh]

I'm voting for Trump.

Ditto. After 30 years as a Republican, Ted Cruz has caused me to leave the party.

[smoothsailing]

If he’s the nominee, expect Trump to be relentless in elevating Clinton’s negatives. It will be brutal. All the polling cited in this article will be irrelevant.

[dead]

I live in north Jersey and work in Manhattan. I know literally hundreds of liberals. Just about all of them dislike Cruz intensely. But Trump literally makes them struggle not to cry and they believe we will all die in a nuclear furnace of hatred if he prevails.

They like Kasich, but in the way they like McCain - they would never ever in a million billion years vote for him, but he isn't the very worst person who ever lived.

People who imagine Trump will win over some liberals are just your typical disfunctional Trump bronies, with weird orange unicorn fantasies.

Liberals won't vote for Cruz either, but nobody in the Cruz camp imagines they will.

[LibFreeUSA]

2ndDivisonVet a CRUZBOT, who has no qualms relying on "Timothy P Carney", an avowed conservative trasher, as well as anti-TRUMP and anti-Reagan mouthpiece, who co-wrote a ANTI-TRUMP article for the NY Times .... "Donald Trump's America"

TIMOTHY P CARNEY:

"Donald J. Trump's calls for barring Muslims from entering the United States and for rounding up and throwing out millions of immigrants (whom he called "rapists"), as well as his frequent falsehoods and his saying that a protester beaten at one of his rallies "should have been roughed up," have drawn comparisons to the days of Hitler and Mussolini. How can a man of such extreme views be the leading Republican candidate in the polls? What does Mr. Trump's popularity say about his supporters, and America?"

"Foot soldiers in an army formed by Reagan"

"The spectacle of hate-mongering unleashed by Donald Trump may be shocking, but it's merely a result of the natural evolution of the modern American right that drove the election of Ronald Reagan 35 years ago.

[central_va]

Hillary is gong to look like the old hag she really is next to Trump. No kid gloves this time because Trump will really go after her.

[JoSixChip]

Many others just consider him a goofy childish clown.

And many consider you an ignorant POS.

[Maurice Tift]

  Trump is actually the first candidate since Reagan that I really like. In 1980, I was a delegate supporting Reagan at the State convention in Georgia and I could see the way he upset the moderates (Bush supporters)(we just call them 'establishment' now). Anyway, Trump is making the establishment reveal themselves and for me, it's a blast to see it happening again and it's more public this time. You don't have to be an insider to see the establishment crackup, so - yes - from my point of view, this is exciting.

Reagan Can't Win - Ford Says (March 1980)

[Chainmail]

Cruz also espouses creepy opportunism, big-buck donors, and DNC tactics.
Time to repatriate him.

[XEHRpa]

But it’s not only my braindeaded liberal friends who prefer Trump to Cruz as the nominee. It is the Republican voters, as well. This notion that Cruz is better situated to take the general election is a pipe dream, even if he were to take the nomination uncontested. But since that is not the case, sticking to Cruz after he loses a numerical path to uncontested nomination next Tuesday is equivalent to advocating for President Hillary. Because the only contested nominee (of 8) to defeat an uncontested nominee in the last 100 years was FDR in 1932 (aftermath of the stock market crash).

[fr_freak]

The very nature of articles such as these is quite a bit underhanded. The author here, and every author of such things, isn't trying to convince anyone of the worth of the candidate as he might perform in office, but is instead simply trying to demoralize the candidate's supporters by saying that none of the cool kids will vote for him. To me that is a highly manipulative tactic, although a common one. It is the same tactic used when people say things like "Stop fighting gay marriage - it's inevitable. You're on the wrong side of history."

If something is right, it is right, whether you believe it will win or not. And if a candidate is the right one - he is the right one, whether you believe he can win or not. Is there any rational point in voting for a wrong candidate just because "he can win"? What have you gained from that?

With that in mind, this author fails on three levels:

1) He is starting with a useless, irrational, and manipulative argument

2) He is claiming to know something he can't possibly know so far in advance of the election

3) He is implying that, since this frontrunner is unelectable, you must vote for the other frontrunner, failing to take into account completely the fact that the other frontrunner is likely less electable than Trump.

[bobby.223]

I had not seen those! Holy cow!

[Defiant]

Slimey Ted can't win. No one likes him.

Trump will win in a landslide.

[JPJones]

“A very astute analysis.”

Thank you, I’ve been looking at RCP and 270towin for a long time.

” How does Cruz, limping out of a contested convention, then win over the voters of the four purple states Romney and McCain both lost, and which Cruz will absolutely have to win to beat Hillary?”

He can’t. He has little or no appeal to northern working class.

“Cruz came in a distant third in OH, FL, NV and VA.”

Cruz can’t win FL. So if he’s the nominee, it will be over real quick, Hillary will be announced president-elect at about 6pm election night.

“Even under the best of conditions it would be an uphill climb for Cruz to win them. But Cruz will not have the best of conditions. He will be the winner of a contested convention, something that current polling isn’t taking into consideration. After the damage inflicted by the contested convention process, it will only take a few percent of disgruntled Trump voters in those four states to stay home and Cruz has no path to 270.”

Yup, as soon as Cruz is nominated, Hillary has automatically won 254 electoral votes, she only needs to campaign in and win one more state: NC. Easy-peezy for her.

[kabar]

He's ahead in delegates, but less than 200 hardly qualifies as "by far" when he need 1237. It's a lead though, for now.

200 plus (not less than 200) delegates represents 31% of all the delegates awarded to date and 37% of the votes cast compared to 28% for Cruz.

The lead will grow significantly when voters go to the polls in NY (95 delegates) on April 19. April 26 will see primaries in CT, PA, DE, MD, and RI with a total of 172 delegates at stake. Trump holds a commanding lead in all of these races. By April 26 Cruz will be mathematically eliminated from reaching 1,237. Trump will be the only candidate left with a shot at 1,237.

Might not hold up if the delegates go to a second ballot though, in accordance with the established rules.

That is the only shot for Cruz and Kasich. And if you take Paul Ryan's statement as gospel, the guy in charge of the convention, he indicated that any of the 17 who participated in the process would be eligible including Jeb and Marco.

[XEHRpa]

An interesting statistic will be the raw vote tallies coming out of NY City next week. I don’t know NY politics, except by its ultra-liberal reputation, but perhaps insights can be gleaned by looking at the Clinton, Trump, Cruz, Sanders vote tallies, compared with the registration tally.

[true believer forever]

Feel free to refute it point-by-point, if you are able.

I am violating my lifelong principle never to engage with stupid people but it is an election season, and you seem very very lost and in need of help. I included nice shiny pictures with happy colors and pretty numbers, I am not sure what your reading skills are.

From your usually dubious posting:

1 The three factors for judging a candidate's strength are: the polls, the candidate's political skills and campaign cash. If Trump is flailing in national polls, state polls ...

WOW! Trump’s Lead Surges to 60% in New York State – Tops Ted Cruz by 46 Points! http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/04/wow-trumps-lead-new-york-surges-60-leads-ted-cruz-46-vote/

/>

2)That's why Clinton leads Trump by double digits in most recent polls ...

Latest NBC poll Apr 12 2016, 6:07 am ET Poll: Voters Split Between Clinton and Trump in Hypothetical November Matchup

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/poll-voters-split-between-clinton-trump-hypothetical-november-matchup-n554306

[disndat]

But Trump literally makes them struggle not to cry and they believe we will all die in a nuclear furnace of hatred if he prevails.

That is IT! dead is RIGHT! We all get to be the SAME! LOOK OUT dead. Here come the dead! GO TRUMP!

[Lurker]

You go right on telling yourself that.

Please.

L

[Conservative Gato]

Thanks for posting that. I like to call all this for what it is and that is propaganda. It’s amazing to see a few of these Freepers fall for it.

CGato