John Kasich Will Be the Republican Nominee for President.....

TOM BROKAW: The people who are so enthusiastically for Bernie Sanders -- do they go away in the fall? Just say: 'I went out there, worked my head off. No one wanted to listen to me. I'm staying home.' That would be a disaster for the Democratic Party because they are playing to a narrower base -- of women, African-Americans, people who are out of work. They've got to get every one of them out to the polls......snip~

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...a_narrower_base_than_republicans_in_2016.html

 

The figures I use include men, women, whites, Hispanics, blacks, Asians, all combined into a neat percentage. There is always the possibility that backers of another candidate will stay home in November especially if they are peeved at the candidate who won. But so far during this primary season the Democrats have been able to remain fairly united while the GOP is in chaos.

In 2012 Gingrich after being personally pillared by Romney only gave him a tepid endorsement against Obama and then sat on his fat arse. Can Hillary persuade most of Sanders supporters to support her in November, probably. Especially if she is up against Trump who inspires hatred in Democrats.

The reverse is true for the GOP, I assume Trump will be the nominee especially with all these friendly liberal northeastern states primaries coming up later this month. Can Trump who is at war with a lot of the GOP establishment, read members of congress and party leaders, who had a blood feud with Bush, now Cruz, can Trump somehow united them to support him in November or is the blood too bad as it was for some Gingrich supporters in 2012?

The reason today Trump loses to Clinton is not independents, he splits those. It is that he has the support of only 70% give or take of Republicans vs. Clinton. Clinton has the support of 85% of Democrats who by the way have the larger base vote regardless of what brokow says.

Now I will say this, I have been thinking about coming up with a model to forecast elections with only a 45% turnout vs. one that utilizes the normal 55%. I have a feeling that this election the turn out will be below 50%. A lot of polls show with a Trump vs. Clinton match up a definite lack of enthusiasm to vote for one of two candidates most people dislike. Who would that help, a low turnout? I am not sure. Although at the moment I would say Trump since the Democrats do have the larger base vote.

That is if the Republicans regain the enthusiasm gap which they have lost. I'll have to do more thinking on this. Turnout is always the key, so too is enthusiasm. Romney lacked the enthusiasm to over come the larger Democratic base vote and that is exactly the percentage he lost by in 2012.

 

If any of the candidates go into the convention with the requisite number of delegates to win the nomination it will be deemed a legitimate and fair victory.

Now if no candidate has enough delegates to win on the first ballot then what happens and whether people think what happens is fair or not remains to be seen...but for sure if Trump goes into the convention having won fair and square the requisite number of delegates needed for the nomination but is denied the nomination then you will see a revolt....first of all they will demand Trump run as a 3rd party candidate....if he refuses to do that...then most of his supporters will just stay home rather than waste their time to go and vote for another poliitcally correct republican doomed to lose.....so many on here still fail to understand why romney and mcain lost.

The moderate/politically correct republicans have furnished the last two candidates...mccain and romney....time for the Real Conservatives to be given a chance.....especially one that has proven so popular with the grass roots and one who is very likely to garner the needed number of delegates to win the nomination....let the voters decide....not the big boys in the back room.

- - - Updated - - -

I think your forecast for a low turnout would only be accurate if
Trump is denied the nomination.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...ates-with-huge-turnouts-wide-base-of-support/

Why the GOP establishment hates trump.

http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/why-gop-establishment-hates-trump/


in a recent Rasmussen poll, which found a full 36 percent of Republicans, 33 percent of Independents and 19 percent of Democrats say they would support Trump — even if he ran third party. His threat to run as an Independent notwithstanding, that is not a bad place to start. Perhaps what the party’s establishment fears the most, then, is that either as a Republican or an Independent, Trump could actually win. And they can’t control him. - See more at: https://www.conservativereview.com/...stablishment-fears-trump#sthash.9ht5OwvA.dpuf

 

I saw that Rasmussen Report. The 36% of Republicans is just about the percentage Trump has received thus far as a total vote in the primaries. I see no reason why Trump supporters would switch just because he ran as an independent. Most of his supporters are far more loyal to him than to the Republican Party as a whole. But the 33% of independents and 19% of Democrats I highly doubt.

Even in head to head match ups between Trump as a Republican vs. Hillary Clinton as a Democrat. shows 90% of Democrats voting for Clinton while only 7% for Trump while Trump gathers 81% of the Republican vote vs.12% for Clinton. Independents going for Clinton 44-41 over Trump. But Marist didn't include the will not vote or vote for someone else category.

http://maristpoll.marist.edu/wp-con...ature of the Sample and Tables_April 2016.pdf

The IBD polls shows Trump getting 69% of Republicans to Clinton's 9% with 10% of Republicans voting for someone else. Clinton gets 84% of the Democratic vote vs. 8% for Trump and 4% voting for someone else. Independents go 41 to 35 for Clinton with 12% voting for someone else.

http://www.investors.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Tables_Apr2016_Posting-1.pdf

If you go here there are a lot of other polls which you can go inside of them and have a look.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...s/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

The thing is none of those polls show Trump getting any near the percentage Rasmussen states from Democrats and independents as a Republican let alone running as an independent. Now Quinnipiac includes the category vote for someone else and will not vote.

https://www.qu.edu/images/polling/us/us03232016_Umk53pw.pdf

That is listed in question 3. 17% of independents state they would not vote or vote for someone else if their November choice is between Trump and Clinton. That number has been as high as 20%. This is one reason I think there will be a low turnout come November. The majority of Americans dislike both Clinton and Trump and I feel a lot of voters will refuse to make the choice of whom they dislike the least and just stay home.

 

Thanks for your response. I really appreciate it.

 

Past elections are irrelevant with respect to voter turnout. Voter turnout is impossible to predict. It is a product of voter enthusiasm and the success of get-out-the-vote efforts on the ground. Even the weather on election day can have a huge effect on voter turnout. Obama beat Romney because of superior ground organization to get-out-the-vote, and a lack of enthusiasm for Romney among Republican voters.

 

You got it.....the pundits on this board leave much to be desired.....among the worst I have seen on any board. This was a good board at one time then things happened aka too much control was exerted and too many of the good ones left or were banned.

 

A backhanded shot at the moderators and admins? Bad form.

Anybody, at a place like that this, that can't keep their posts within the rules deserves to be banned.

Internet "pundits" (at a place like this) are a dime a dozen.

Oh, and back on topic, I don't see Kasich getting the nomination.

The GOP seems intent on a nominating a candidate that will guarantee a smashing electoral defeat.

 

We have decent Mod's here and anyone who has been banned at least those I have seen banned deserved it.

AA

 

Seconded.

Very fair moderators here.

 

It is not a terribly unexpected thing, but Republicans really underestimate how strong a candidate Barack Obama was in 2008, and 2012. They view him through a Republican lens, and understandably arrive at the conclusion that his ideology is misguided, and his performance sub par.

Perhaps the Republican perspective on Obama is correct, but importantly in an election sense, the Republican perspective was not the popular one.

This underestimation of Obama as a candidate has led some posters to erroneous conclusions regarding the strength of McCain and Romney as Republican nominees. If Obama was a weak candidate, than Romney and McCain must have been weaker. It is then assumed from this that Romney and McCain's 'moderate' stance is the reason they were so weak. And finally, it is concluded that a different type of candidate is needed for the Republicans to defeat the Democrats in 2016.

Of course, Barack Obama was a tremendously strong candidate president for 2008. I think he was one of the strongest presidential candidates ever. Not because of policy or philosophical leaning, but simply because of the dynamic of that election year. The Republicans controlled the white house for two terms, and there is usually a switch in party after this. Obama being a Democrat, was already advantaged. Further, a majority of Americans were deeply upset with Bush's presidency. On top of this, Obama was black. He inspired a record turnout of black voters, and he earned the highest ever share of black voters.

In 2012, Obama was still very strong. He had decent favorability ratings after his first term, and he had the natural advantage of being the incumbent contender. He was still black, and that was still a huge advantage.

Now, the takeaway from 2008, and 2012 shouldn't be how weak McCain and Romney were, but how truly strong a candidate Obama was.

In 2016, the Democrats are poised to present a very weak candidate. Clinton's unfavorable ratings are monstrous, and they are still trending downwards. 2008, and 2012 are the only two presidential elections on record where blacks outvoted whites relatively speaking. That will not happen again.

The Republicans need to put forward a generic candidate. There is nothing to gain in electability by putting forward a candidate that somehow has worse favorable ratings than Clinton.