LogFAQs > #889789651

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, Database 2 ( 09.16.2017-02.21.2018 ), DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Who will win in 2020?
Rasmoh 11/05/17 3:27:48 AM #74:	shadestreet posted... 1988 isn't that long ago. That isn't that impressive. Shouldn't even count 1992 and 1996 elections, everyone voted for Bill Clinton. Trump didn't turn any democrats into republicans. I don't know where you get this notion that he got all of these people to convert to Republicans. How is it not impressive? How in denial are you? If 28 years of regular Republican sentiment couldn't flip those states, why would anything change with Republican candidates who looked like an even more washed-out shade of outdated and boring? Do you genuinely believe that Kasich, Rubio, or Cruz would have gotten asses out of seats? There's a reason every one of these fuckwits lost to a real estate salesman with zero political experience. I'm not saying he converted people, I'm saying he energized people who wouldn't normally vote for a Republican candidate. How to you see that data, and say to yourself "huh, a run of the mill republican would have done even worse against Hillary? Because each and every run-of-the-mill Republican that ran against Trump couldn't even sniff his jock in this election. His biggest competition ended up being Ted Cruz, who literally no one had a shred of enthusiasm about. Honestly, why would you think more of the same old Republican shtick that has failed for past 6 elections somehow suddenly flip these states? Obviously the clearly liberal media outlets like MSNBC would have played the narrative of Kasich being the worse choice. Most media outlets are liberal. No Republican candidate could ever have hoped to have the media and cultural backing that Hillary did. Maybe one or two sources wouldn't have been so anti-Republican, but most of them would have pushed the same tired message that the Republican candidate was boring and stagnant while Hillary was exciting and progressive. --- Miami Dolphins \| Portland Trailblazers \| San Francisco Giants I won't say a thing, because the one who knows best is you. <cite>Rasmoh posted [p:889789651] in Who will w... [t:75949318]...</cite> <quote><cite>shadestreet posted...</cite> <quote>1988 isn't that long ago. That isn't that impressive. Shouldn't even count 1992 and 1996 elections, everyone voted for Bill Clinton. Trump didn't turn any democrats into republicans. I don't know where you get this notion that he got all of these people to convert to Republicans. </quote> How is it not impressive? How in denial are you? If 28 years of regular Republican sentiment couldn't flip those states, why would anything change with Republican candidates who looked like an even more washed-out shade of outdated and boring? Do you genuinely believe that Kasich, Rubio, or Cruz would have gotten asses out of seats? There's a reason every one of these fuckwits lost to a real estate salesman with zero political experience. I'm not saying he converted people, I'm saying he energized people who wouldn't normally vote for a Republican candidate. <quote>How to you see that data, and say to yourself "huh, a run of the mill republican would have done even worse against Hillary?</quote> Because each and every run-of-the-mill Republican that ran against Trump couldn't even sniff his jock in this election. His biggest competition ended up being Ted Cruz, who literally no one had a shred of enthusiasm about. Honestly, why would you think more of the same old Republican shtick that has failed for past 6 elections somehow suddenly flip these states? <quote>Obviously the clearly liberal media outlets like MSNBC would have played the narrative of Kasich being the worse choice. </quote> Most media outlets are liberal. No Republican candidate could ever have hoped to have the media and cultural backing that Hillary did. Maybe one or two sources wouldn't have been so anti-Republican, but most of them would have pushed the same tired message that the Republican candidate was boring and stagnant while Hillary was exciting and progressive. --- Miami Dolphins \| Portland Trailblazers \| San Francisco Giants I won't say a thing, because the one who knows best is you.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1