jerseyhoya wrote:The idea that saying Hillary would be at 5% if she wasn't a woman is laughable and insulting, and you look at Mary Pat Christie's face standing up there, I am highly skeptical this is some masterstroke. He's going to lose the female vote by a shocking margin if he's the nominee.

JUburton wrote:

The Nightman Cometh wrote:

Monkeyboy wrote:so hillary will be the nominee. There goes any chance of stealing the Senate.

This is so wrong.

Seriously. So many people going to walk in the voting booth, smash the D button and walk out.

jerseyhoya wrote:I don't know why/how I let this happen still, but I continue to be surprised and depressed by almost every twist and turn in this race

Monkeyboy wrote:

JUburton wrote:

The Nightman Cometh wrote:

Monkeyboy wrote:so hillary will be the nominee. There goes any chance of stealing the Senate.

This is so wrong.

Seriously. So many people going to walk in the voting booth, smash the D button and walk out.

This is my thinking: It will be very hard for the dems to win the senate given the number of seats they'd need to pick up. The only way I can imagine them doing it is if people are excited to come out and vote, even if the polls are showing it as a blowout (any chance of getting the senate will probably be a known blowout before the vote). I feel like there's an enthusiasm gap between Sanders and Clinton, with Sanders' supporters more likely to come out. Maybe I'm wrong, but I see a lot more Clinton supporters staying home if the polls are showing her a definite winner.

So it may not be that undecided voters are gravitating to Trump so much as anti-Trump Republicans are discouraged. Trump faces unusually high levels of intraparty opposition for a front-runner — or at least he had seemed to until the past two weeks. But Kasich and Ted Cruz are also deeply flawed, and somewhat factional, candidates. It’s asking a lot of voters to cast a tactical vote against Trump when that tactic requires (i) going to a contested convention in order to (ii) deny the candidate with the plurality of votes and delegates the nomination in order to (iii) give the nomination to a candidate they don’t particularly like anyway. The #NeverTrump voters might not be voting for Trump, but they might be staying at home.

I mostly buy this argument — I’m as optimistic about Trump’s chances as at any point in the election cycle. (Granted, that isn’t saying that much given that I spent much of last year being highly skeptical of Trump’s chances.)

CalvinBall wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:I don't know why/how I let this happen still, but I continue to be surprised and depressed by almost every twist and turn in this race

which one has you down now? still reeling from last night?

The Crimson Cyclone wrote:

Monkeyboy wrote:

JUburton wrote:

The Nightman Cometh wrote:

Monkeyboy wrote:so hillary will be the nominee. There goes any chance of stealing the Senate.

This is so wrong.

Seriously. So many people going to walk in the voting booth, smash the D button and walk out.

This is my thinking: It will be very hard for the dems to win the senate given the number of seats they'd need to pick up. The only way I can imagine them doing it is if people are excited to come out and vote, even if the polls are showing it as a blowout (any chance of getting the senate will probably be a known blowout before the vote). I feel like there's an enthusiasm gap between Sanders and Clinton, with Sanders' supporters more likely to come out. Maybe I'm wrong, but I see a lot more Clinton supporters staying home if the polls are showing her a definite winner.

if anything the enthusiasm gap will come from the mainstream republican voters if Trump is the candidate

Nate Silver is already postulating as why Donald won with such big margins the past 6 states is due to the mainstream/establishment GOP voter feeling discouraged at this point of the race

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/its ... n-to-lose/

So it may not be that undecided voters are gravitating to Trump so much as anti-Trump Republicans are discouraged. Trump faces unusually high levels of intraparty opposition for a front-runner — or at least he had seemed to until the past two weeks. But Kasich and Ted Cruz are also deeply flawed, and somewhat factional, candidates. It’s asking a lot of voters to cast a tactical vote against Trump when that tactic requires (i) going to a contested convention in order to (ii) deny the candidate with the plurality of votes and delegates the nomination in order to (iii) give the nomination to a candidate they don’t particularly like anyway. The #NeverTrump voters might not be voting for Trump, but they might be staying at home.

I mostly buy this argument — I’m as optimistic about Trump’s chances as at any point in the election cycle. (Granted, that isn’t saying that much given that I spent much of last year being highly skeptical of Trump’s chances.)

(he does add some points of caution this however)

so it's really not a stretch to see a decent chunk of the GOP voter abstaining come November

(as opposed to JH who will do the civic duty of voting Red in everything but leaving his presidential vote blank)

jerseyhoya wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:I don't know why/how I let this happen still, but I continue to be surprised and depressed by almost every twist and turn in this race

which one has you down now? still reeling from last night?

Fiorina is such a lame pick for VP.