Neither, i am completely mind boggled that so many people are actually taking Donny seriously as a presidential candidate.

Of course he will never ever never ever ever ever never never everrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr get the GOP nomination but one can only hope he does for the laughter to come.

Let's not get carried away here. Trump's currently wowing ~18% of national Republicans and about 10% of the wingnuts who make up the Iowa Republican party. That's only (just barely) good enough when you're running in a gaggle of 15-20 people. Sure he's receiving outsized attention, but he remains a mere punchline in a large field of jokes.

On another note, if he survives this McCain flap and Republicans everywhere are able to get up off of their fainting couches, I honestly couldn't definitively state that he can't win the nomination. He's a clown, his positions are a joke, his campaign infrastructure is non-existent, and he has no donor base outside of blood relatives, but he's an angry white male running for the Republican nomination and people would be crazy to rule even him out at this point.

This post was edited by Pollster on Jul 20 2015 01:35pm

Clinton/Bush split the vote enough that Trump wins running as an Independent candidate.

Mer'ca Wins again!

What are your thoughts on Sanders and tpp?

Sanders runs a great Senate office and he's a really interesting presidential candidate. It's just unfortunate that things sorted out in this way to where he's running in an academic primary. It would have been interesting had Obama opted not to run in 2008 and instead settled on Governor like he was originally considering, allowing Clinton to run and win then. He would have definitely ran in either 2016 or 2020, and an Obama/Sanders primary would have been much more interesting.

Time will tell on the TPP. Proposals this complex and that rely so much on things so far out of our control are impossible to evaluate so early on.



What would be really funny is if Trump really did play the Perot role, allowing a Clinton to once again throttle a Bush electorally. Except this time instead of 370-168 we'd probably get 388-150 or so. The fun part would be seeing which "red states" would give Clinton a plurality win. NC/GA/IN/AZ would be the most likely, but Montana, Missouri, and even South Carolina and Alaska would be very interesting to analyze under that hypothetical.

Guy fucking doxxed Graham today. What will we wake up to tomorrow?

Lindsey Graham? I didn't hear but if he did that's hilarious, he's going to destroy the other Gop Candidates one by one.

He refuses to play the PC game that other candidates exist in. The only thing that is going to stop him i think is when he starts to talk about social issues.

He seems pretty archaic in that regard.

In this hypothetical matchup, CNN showed that Hillary would win by a 24% margin and Fox showed that Hillary would win by a 17% margin.

Those voting for Trump in this poll are trolling, delusional, or haven't looked at polling numbers/Vegas odds.

For more matchups, look here: http://www.270towin.com/2016-polls/2016-general-election-matchups/

Polling isn't predictive this far out. It isn't the polling that makes the notion that Trump's a viable candidate a laugher, it's everything else. The guy would get absolutely dominated in the battleground states unless he planned to finance his entire run, transferring $800 million to an "independent organization."

I agree. But I will also say that polling is predictive this far out. It increases in predictive power approaching the election, yes, but it has plenty of power this far out, too.