KCRag Forum

Well, Ted Cruz has finally endorsed Lying Donald Trump. And the sky is not falling.

Two sides of the same coin.

Two sides of the same turd.

Vichy Republican.

FYI, absentee vote application for KCMO in Jackson County...
https://www.kceb.org/voters/absenteevoting/

How is it possible that this thread hasn't blown up today?

Been busy. Trump just issued an apology but it is rather weak. The debate, more of a town hall, Sunday should be interesting.

phuqueue wrote:How is it possible that this thread hasn't blown up today?

We're a jaded bunch.

Trump or Hillary could have been in a snuff film and their hard core supporters wouldn't care at this point.

But establishment GOP now lining up calling for him to quit race.

Hardcore supporters will never care, that's what makes them the hard core. Can't worry about trying to change the minds of the hard core, what's important is keeping people who might be on the fence from falling on the wrong side of it.

At this point not many fence sitters should be left and few likely would 'switch sides' but rather not show up to vote. The campaign strategies for both sides are at this point not about getting switch supporters but to get potential supporters for the other not to show up to vote. Hillary has the edge last couple weeks of course. If there are no new 'Hillary killer leaks' by the election, she should be able to coast through as long as she doesn't say something stupid. But her reluctant potential voters need to show up and a huge % leaning towards her are reluctant.

I'm not a Hillary supporter or DEM/GOP but have never been so motivated to vote DEM - am out of town next month and was very motivated to get absentee vote ballot. Hillary will probably screw some things up but Trump would be a disaster.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/el ... 6-forecast

Good article about Clinton's lead getting safer as more people settle on one candidate or the other.

earthling wrote:At this point not many fence sitters should be left and few likely would 'switch sides' but rather not show up to vote. The campaign strategies for both sides are at this point not about getting switch supporters but to get potential supporters for the other not to show up to vote. Hillary has the edge last couple weeks of course. If there are no new 'Hillary killer leaks' by the election, she should be able to coast through as long as she doesn't say something stupid. But her reluctant potential voters need to show up and a huge % leaning towards her are reluctant.

I'm not a Hillary supporter or DEM/GOP but have never been so motivated to vote DEM - am out of town next month and was very motivated to get absentee vote ballot. Hillary will probably screw some things up but Trump would be a disaster.

What exactly do you think the difference is between the "not many fence sitters" and the "huge %" of "reluctant" Dems that you suppose are out there (and, for that matter, reluctant Republicans that you don't even mention)?

In the context that I was referring, a reluctant supporter maybe doesn't like much about preferred candidate but would reluctantly vote for him/her vs a no vote and wouldn't switch to other candidates. A fence sitter is open to either. I see it as a distinct difference but that's fine if you disagree.

I'm reluctantly voting for Hillary. Don't like her personality and history but she is far more qualified to govern. In no way would I vote for Trump. So am reluctant but not a fence sitter, big difference.

I mean I'm the one who introduced "fence sitters" into this discussion and in the context I was using it I was referring to anybody who is not set on any particular candidate. If you're open to changing your mind you're still on the fence, even if you lean one way or another. It seems weird to me to say "there aren't many people on the fence but there are a whole lot of people who may or may not vote for Hillary, they don't really know yet."

Ah, then yeah, I see what you mean with that definition of 'fence sitting'. I was thinking of it differently.

Whats absolutely amazing to me is that we are heading into a presidential election in a month where both candidates are intensely disliked by a large majority of the people and there is no way of stalling, postponing, changing the choices, etc... We can vote for one of the (to me) equally distasteful truly right or left leaning third parties but they have zero chance of winning. I know we've had some less than compelling choices in the past but I've never seen two candidates that so many people truly hate. It's incredibly weird because the policies of the two candidates probably, in the scheme of things, aren't all that different (that is if Trump truly has a policy). A lot of the crap he says (like a wall across the border) is rhetoric that has zero chance of being implemented even if he was elected. But I suspect Trump and Clinton presidency would not be all that different - other than what national embarrassment you want to experience.

The make up of the Supreme Court would be quite different.

Highlander wrote:]But I suspect Trump and Clinton presidency would not be all that different - other than what national embarrassment you want to experience.

Clinton isn't trustworthy and may screw a few things up but hard to imagine putting a man child in charge of the red button. He is a 12 year old in a 70 year old body. They are both poor choices but he is the more dangerous one. Clinton will more likely collaborate more reasonably with others (Congress and internationally) and likely better collaboration success than Obama, can't see that at all with Trump. He is a one man-child show.

it was all i could do to finish watching that debate last night. honestly, i didn't even want to watch it to begin with, but i felt that i had to bear witness. i feel so depressed (was going to say disappointed, but it's so far beyond that now) at how low the level of discourse has become. this is supposed to be for the highest office in the land, and the person occupying it should be respectable; they should be dignified... or at the very least, have some redeemable qualities that approach those notions. the first 30 minutes of that debate were, in my opinion, the most embarrassing moments of anything i've ever seen in (american) politics in my life. i do not like hillary, but trump is a goddamn disgrace to this country, and shame on all of us for allowing it to get this far. damn us if he actually wins. i'm sure we'll get what we deserve if that happens.