Bombshell: 20% of Republicans will vote for Clinton if Trump is the GOP nominee

This should be a historic election for the libertarian party. 5% is all they need and it looks like they may get far more than the 5%. Break the two party system by legitimizing a 3rd party.

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: muse7

This 40% of Republicans polled that said that they would not support the party’s nominee if Donald Trump wins should actually vote for Bernie because it still may very well be that Hillary is out of the race dealing with her busy schedule of court hearings and avoiding jail.

As indicated by House majority leader DeLay, she is facing a possibility of indictment by the FBI for her use of a private server to conduct confidential government business while she was secretary of state so maybe the poll should have included this question to those anti-Trump renegade Republicans who would vote Hillary if they don't get their way.

Still praying to that "email scandal" fairy I see.

DeLay is a joke by the way. I wouldn't put any stock into what he says.

Tom Delay and 40 others write letter to court saying Hastert gets 'integrity and values' from God

Hastert is a pedophile.

originally posted by: onequestion
Not buying it I know people all over the country who are voting for Trump.

Trump brought millions of voters ibto the Republican party.

..
its McCain/Palin all over again.

avoid the polls, avoid reality, I know a guy therefore polling is wrong...cheeseus gripes! sing a new tune already...accept there is a very large problem and instead of the standard stick head in sand then demand shenanigans happened when the results match the data.

Here is an idea..maybe Trump, being the hard right libertarian candidate, isn't as loved once you move out of the hard right libertarian sphere. Having a super popular champion of any specific sides fringe element (kkk) is a sign not of success but of extremism..and people dislike extremists on any side.

Personally I think Trump has a lot of ideas and views with merit, but to the general public, his image is about as friendly as everyones embarassment Uncle Cleetus that shows up at family reunions discussing in colorful language why nobody in the family should consider marrying anyone other than someone of your own specific genetic heritage (replace Cleetus with Jamel, Paco, Takayoshi, etc as relevant)

a reply to: muse7

The wording here sounds to me like 19% of the 40% that are #NeverTrump would stick to their word. That's only 7.6% of Republicans and somewhere around 3% of total voters. Seems like a pretty small amount.

And trump already has two million more votes than Romney had in all of 2012.

townhall.com...


Better get ready for president trump.

originally posted by: muse7

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: muse7

This 40% of Republicans polled that said that they would not support the party’s nominee if Donald Trump wins should actually vote for Bernie because it still may very well be that Hillary is out of the race dealing with her busy schedule of court hearings and avoiding jail.

As indicated by House majority leader DeLay, she is facing a possibility of indictment by the FBI for her use of a private server to conduct confidential government business while she was secretary of state so maybe the poll should have included this question to those anti-Trump renegade Republicans who would vote Hillary if they don't get their way.

Still praying to that "email scandal" fairy I see.

Your unwavering allegiance to the Democratic establishment cause is well noted and imo is a shining example of how relentless propaganda yields it's results in the minds of some voters.

I'll stick with my fairy tale thanks, it's just getting to the good bit.

a reply to: muse7

All these polls. Perhaps we should examine how accurate April polls are historically?

I'd be curious to see how many people decide on Trump after watching protesters destroy property and carry on like criminals. That would be an interesting number. Then imagine these protests going on for another 6 months.

I suggest everybody go find a gambling site and put their life savings on Hillary to win. It's so certain because... polls.

It really dosen't matter what the Republicans do. They are the minority party.
Trump has already alienated most of the women and minorities; and with out them he can't win the general election.

His conservative base is solid and vocal but just not a big enough demographic to pull off a win.

Actually the GOP had a fair chance but Trump ruined it for them with his goofy extremism.

The Libertarians will pull a lot of votes from the GOP, that would have gone to a more moderate candidate but Trump blew that for them.






The Democrats won't win this election but the GOP will lose and they can place the blame squarely on Trump.

Maybe that is the game, destroy the GOP so we can move closer to socialism under Bernie or Clinton..

What if Trump wins the popular vote, and Hillary wins the electoral college?

What if it is the opposite, and Hillary gets the popular, but Trump gets the EC?

The real question is.... Will whom-ever wins, do what they said they would, or will it be their own agenda, and not the will of the people?

Ah, what a production this is turning out to be, like a poorly written suspense novel with low-end budget actors.

However, I wonder how much rioting and such will ensue if Trump wins...

-Cyg
Trump2016! (Just 'cuz I wanna see people loose their minds, and I like Trump's 2A policy)

originally posted by: Ksihkehe
a reply to: muse7

All these polls. Perhaps we should examine how accurate April polls are historically?

Polls can be accurate, but this one is getting too specific. The problem is that the more specific you make them, the greater the likelyhood you're going to fall victim to the margin of error. In this case it's trying make a statement about a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of the voters but it does so with low accuracy because it's such a small amount. I wouldn't put too much faith in this one.

Looking it over, it looks like they polled 1000 people, of those 292 identified as Republicans. Of those, 40% or 117 agreed with the idea of anyone but Trump and of that 19% or 22 people said they would vote for Hillary. The numbers just don't seem to be there to identify larger trends. Actually, it's even less relevant than that because the same questions were repeated over several samples, but this story is based off of a single outlier.

At this point, what needs to happen is a four way race in November.
Hillary, Sanders, Trump and whatever chump the Republicans nominate at the convention.
If we are going to have crap choices, as least give us twice as many pieces of poo to choose from.

I like the one with corn in it.

a reply to: butcherguy

If we are going to have crap choices, as least give us twice as many pieces of poo to choose from.

Yeah. Well. It's states that actually do the voting for President. It's in the Constitution.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: butcherguy

If we are going to have crap choices, as least give us twice as many pieces of poo to choose from.

Yeah. Well. It's states that actually do the voting for President. It's in the Constitution.

Yes.
I suppose that it is just a coincidence that the popular vote has matched the vote by the states almost every time?

a reply to: butcherguy

I suppose that it is just a coincidence that the popular vote has matched the vote by the states almost every time?

I'm not sure what you mean by "matched." Do you mean the winner of the popular vote was also the winner of the electoral vote, or that the proportion of the two was the same?

If the latter it would seem the system is effective. The former may require some deeper analysis.

a reply to: Phage
I mean this:
How many times has the winner in the Electoral College not matched the winner of the popular vote?

a reply to: butcherguy

How many times has the winner in the Electoral College not matched the winner of the popular vote.

Ah. Give me a minute. Be right back.

Back.
4 times the winner of the electoral vote did not reflect the popular vote.

a reply to: Phage
Correct.
The voters don't like it when those two don't match.
I still see posts here referring to the fact that GW Bush did not win the popular vote.

a reply to: butcherguy

The voters don't like it when those two don't match.

Which ones?
Voters, I mean.

I still see posts here referring to the fact that GW Bush did not win the popular vote.

I guess they've gotten over the others.


The fact, actual fact, is that the Constitution says that states elect the President. Nothing about the people being involved at all.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
This should be a historic election for the libertarian party. 5% is all they need and it looks like they may get far more than the 5%. Break the two party system by legitimizing a 3rd party.

An Opposition party party to counter the corruption of left and right wings in Washington would be wonderful.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: butcherguy

The voters don't like it when those two don't match.

Which ones?
Voters, I mean.

I still see posts here referring to the fact that GW Bush did not win the popular vote.

I guess they've gotten over the others.


The fact, actual fact, is that the Constitution says that states elect the President. Nothing about the people being involved at all.

Did you read the OP?
Is it about the Electoral College?
Maybe you should have jumped the OP about how the subject (people being polled) has nothing to do with the election of the POTUS.