I do not necessarily disagree with anything that you've said here, but I'm simply saying that IF Trump is going to have any luck with swing states, it's likely going to come behind strong debate performances or some external factor that hurts Hillary Clinton.

Speculation of how likely or unlikely those things are to occur are a slightly different discussion.

In my opinion, each are relatively unlikely to occur (and if they do occur, I think they are unlikely to change the outcome of the general election, i.e. HRC winning), but again, that's outside the scope of this particular point.

I love that the 'rigged polls' narrative has started so much earlier this election. I hope Fox is as funny as last time.

Except I have it from the horses mouth but you refuse look at it.

Haven't read any of your posts in a few days, so i guess you've got me on that one.

I'll be honest - I'd be very interersted in seeing MM's 'proof' that the polls are rigged, because I bet it's hilarious.

I'm very cautious when it comes to election analysis. I try to discourage sweeping declaration unless there's a whole lot of data to back it up, so declaring a race finished in or before August is not something you'll see me do much.

I can think of one: Trump weasels out of all but one debate without getting called out for it and he shows up and lies in circles just like Romney did in Denver, and just like Obama didn't know the proper way to deal with it Clinton also doesn't know how to respond and it allows the press to default to their favorite pre-packaged "it's a real race now" narrative, giving Trump free weeks of glowing coverage for doing nothing but lying and being a chickenshit. Combine that with the guarantee that Republicans will still be trying their voter suppression tactics in every single state that they control which means FL/OH/NC/NV/WI/IA/MI/GA/AZ. A lot of their omnibus suppression bills were thrown out because they were obviously unconstitutional, but they'll still do everything they can to cause long lines, provide few machines, move polling places around, cut hours, all the usual stuff they do. That almost was enough to flip FL in 2012, and all that has to happen is for it to flip FL/OH and 17+ other EVs, maybe PA, and Trump can win if he holds the Romney states.

Don't know how likely though. Some parts are very (weaseling, voter suppression) while others (winning FL) not so much.



What exactly do you want to know? WaPo and Politico found reports from NJ gambling regulators that showed he didn't pay any taxes for 4 years. His business ties are a lot more convoluted but they've had him on this stuff, and that was even BEFORE the NYT's bombshell yesterday that placed Manafort in the middle of an off-the-books influence peddling scheme that paid him $13 million under the table.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-income-tax-returns-once-became-public-they-showed-he-didnt-pay-a-cent/2016/05/20/ffa2f63c-1b7c-11e6-b6e0-c53b7ef63b45_story.html
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/donald-trump-no-taxes-224498
http://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-03-15/trump-s-long-romance-with-russia
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/trump-putin-yes-it-s-really-a-thing

I'm obviously not going to quote that hurr durr trash since no one gains anything from reading it twice; it's bad for the people unlucky enough who have to read it once.

"Voter suppression" is not "voter ID." They're two different things; though restrictive voter ID laws can be used as a form of voter suppression. There are many different forms of it, Republicans regularly conduct them everywhere they're in control despite the fact that there is no "illegal alien vote," or any other systemic form of "illegal" vote occurring in our elections.