It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Matthew Dowd: Historic polling pattern points to Trump

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:55 AM
link   

One big question in the 2016 race for the White House is when -- or if -- Donald Trump’s campaign will run out of gas. Trump’s poll numbers continue to climb even as he stumbles on questions about policy, recants his past liberal leanings, and makes comments that draw the ire of women and Hispanics.

Given the conventional wisdom that Trump has so far defied some law of political gravity, eyebrows went up when ABC News analyst and GOP political consultant Matthew Dowd declared that Trump has the earmarks of a winner.

"I think Donald Trump, as of today, is the Republican nominee for president," Dowd said on ABC’s This Week on Sept. 6, 2015. "He leads nationally in every single poll for more than two months. He leads every single state, including favorite-son states like Florida, where he leads Jeb Bush. Jeb Bush is third. And any Republican that has led for two months and led every state has won the GOP nomination."
Link to article


If you're going to bet on the trend emboldened above, then it's time to put in a bet on Trump. You can currently bet on Trump to win the Republican nomination at up to 5.5-1 odds.

www.oddschecker.com...

That looks like a great bet when we're going to have to buck a long-term trend in history in order for Trump not to win the GOP nomination. It looks like one of the best bets I've ever seen considering the trend and the payout.

CNN POLL: TRUMP SOARS WITH GOP WOMEN

Trump seems to be beating logic and all reason. Whether he wins or loses, I'm sure there will be books written about his candidacy. It's a fascinating sociological/psychological study IMHO. That's why I'm paying attention to it personally.




posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

It's no different than when the Tea Party took over the GOP for those two cycles and we had crazy folks like Bachman running etc.

Although in those cases they never got the real attention from the base, Romney had that locked up from the early campaign stops.

In this case? I think you might be right. Although he won't win against either Hillary or Bernie. Once we get to the debates between the nominee's after the primaries, people will quickly see how little vision Donald has in his policy.

He keeps saying I'll hire people, I'll hire people, well sorry there Don, but you have to have some leadership and ideas in order to get those people to come up with good legislation and programs.

~Tenth
edit on 9/11/2015 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 09:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion
I can't wait until he rips into Hillary at the presidential debate.
With any luck it'll be Berny instead on stage with Trump.
It'll literally be a win win situation.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:03 AM
link   
This assumes that Trump doesn't lose interest and that he really wants to be POTUS.

I don't think he's capable of the job. And a big part of the job is sustaining focus throughout an eighteen month campaign.

EDIT: And I'm not a fan of Hillary at all but he has yet to see anything remotely close to what would be thrown at him if he goes up against the Clinton campaign machine.
edit on 11-9-2015 by DelMarvel because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:06 AM
link   
a reply to: NowWhat

Hate to say this, but both Hillary and Sanders would tear Trump to pieces in a debate. Regardless of whether you like either one, they are both very intelligent and know the ins-and-outs of policy discussion. Trump knows very little when in comes to the issues.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:22 AM
link   
The Republicans running against him are proving to be a bunch of third rate idiots as campaigners.

The base doesn't care about, for example, Trump making fun of women's looks or menstrual cycles.

They should be hitting him hard by now as an immoral New York city draft dodging trojan horse liberal. Instead they're all pussyfooting around because they're scared of offending their base.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: DelMarvel
The Republicans running against him are proving to be a bunch of third rate idiots as campaigners.

The base doesn't care about, for example, Trump making fun of women's looks or menstrual cycles.

They should be hitting him hard by now as an immoral New York city draft dodging trojan horse liberal. Instead they're all pussyfooting around because they're scared of offending their base.


We're also learning quite a bit about the base itself. What does it say about them when Trump can be and say all of the things you listed, and still be the number one candidate?



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

Isn't this just an indication that people are sick of politicians? I don't mean politicians on any side, I mean ALL politicians!



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 11:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: NowWhat

Hate to say this, but both Hillary and Sanders would tear Trump to pieces in a debate. Regardless of whether you like either one, they are both very intelligent and know the ins-and-outs of policy discussion. Trump knows very little when in comes to the issues.


I'm not so sure about that.

Although I think that Hillary or Trump would be an equal epic failure for this country , I think trump would get the upper hand in that debate. One thing Trump is extremely good at, is talking smack on the spot and making unintelligent comments sound good.

Bernie I don't know to much about to comment on.



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 11:40 AM
link   
I don't get why Hilary is even a part of this conversation. Can she sign executive orders from a jail cell?



posted on Sep, 11 2015 @ 12:18 PM
link   
They are going to "Ross Perot" him eventually and he will then "willingly withdraw" from the race.

Do people really believe, that if someone like Donald Trump wins the election, that he will be able to do what he wants, as apposed to, what the "Military Industrial Complex" wants him to do?

Anyone who becomes President of the United States has to "cow tow" to the "Military Industrial Complex", even Donald Trump is not immune to a guaranteed "CIA visit" once in office.

Be assured they will pay him a visit, if he ever wins, and like Perot, Ventura, Schwarzenegger and Obama, he too will "toe the line" and "play ball", once they tell him what the real rules are. For example, why in the world did Arnold Schwarzenegger need to do ANYTHING along party lines? His fame and popularity COMPLETELY transcended political parties, yet somehow he was still "answering" to politicians who "in theory" should have had no affect on his personal life, political career or fortune, which existed prior to be elected and also COMPLETELY outside of the confines or influence of the "Military Industrial Complex".

Also consider this angle, there was a huge assets difference between Mitt Romney who has a $250 million net worth and Ross Perot with a $5 billion net worth (Donald Trump has a net worth of $4 Billion), yet someone like Romney was a shoe in for party nominations, but not Perot (this time about it will be Jeb Bush). Note, its NOT the money that matters, people like Mitt and Jeb are government insiders and both come from family that always has been, that is not the case at all with Perot or Trump.

Ross Perot dropping out of the 1992 election was not happenstance either, nor simply about his daughters wedding:

Mr. Perot offered no evidence, only quoting friends and an unidentified "top Republican." "I can't prove any of it today," he said on tonight's CBS News program "60 Minutes." "But it was a risk I did not have to take," he added, "and a risk I would not take where my daughter is concerned." Mr. Perot accused the unidentified C.I.A. employee of being hired to tap into his computerized stock trading program to prevent him from having the money to revive his campaign.

I think Ross Perot would have done a much better job than ANY of the good ol' boys we've gotten as Presidents since then. Again, Perot dropping out of the 1992 election was not happenstance, nor was it simply about his daughters wedding. Donald Trump will be no different, if he decides to run for President and if he somehow wins, best case scenario, it will be Arnold Schwarzenegger all over again.
edit on 11-9-2015 by boohoo because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 02:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: Profusion

It's no different than when the Tea Party took over the GOP for those two cycles and we had crazy folks like Bachman running etc.


Only the crazies and their supporters are left in the GOP.


Although in those cases they never got the real attention from the base, Romney had that locked up from the early campaign stops.


The fact Romeny was the best the GOP could do against a sitting president who is worse then Carter is very telling.


In this case? I think you might be right. Although he won't win against either Hillary or Bernie. Once we get to the debates between the nominee's after the primaries, people will quickly see how little vision Donald has in his policy.


The GOP may be running the 1980 presidential election over in their minds. In the years since 1980 population demographics have changed. Patriotism has gone out of vogue since it isn't seen as being politically correct. All the GOP's gross past failures including not tackling illegal immigration are coming home to roost.



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 02:16 AM
link   
One thing I want trumpeteers to answer me is how will Donald Trump get things done? Would congress work with him? Or would trumpeteers support the use of Executive orders?



posted on Sep, 13 2015 @ 02:37 AM
link   
a reply to: muse7

I'm not activity supporting Trump's candidacy. I think that Trump would take to the social media and TV air waves to communicate with the American people. He would campaign in key congressional seats in order to implement his key policy planks.

When dealing with Congress he would accept that half a loaf of bread is better then none. Like Reagan , Trump isn't a policy guy. He would be heavily reliant on his policy advisers. On the flip side Trump ensure that his immediate staff like his Chief of Staff were very effective in there roles.



posted on Sep, 24 2015 @ 03:20 PM
link   


And any Republican that has led for two months and led every state has won the GOP nomination.


That's actually pretty intriguing. Will be interesting to see if it pans out.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join