http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/07/...t-21-year/
Not only did Trump set the record, but Republicans actually had more people come out than Democrats (31Mil vs 30 mil). This is the reason Democrats will lose in November. They had a larger party base and still had a smaller showing in a very competitive primary. Hillary may have weaseled out of the emails, but it doesn't seem like she will be able to win anyway.
Edit: I don't know when the last time Repubs had a greater number of people vote in the primaries than Democrats (in a non-incumbent year for my implication challenged friends). When was the last time this happened?
Just the fact that Hildabeast is on the Ballot will bring the repubs out in droves........
I think there are alot of threads to pull on that sweater...
I think a lot of Dems were pretty discouraged by the apparent "rigging" of the primaries in Clinton's favor. There were countless cases of voter suppression, especially for Bernie supporters. Let alone sketchy results counting in many states.
Quote:2012
Oooooh. What happened. Did they win?
Seriously, though, the current advantage Clinton has is in organization. Boots on the ground. Which translates into the ability to get your voters to the polls. I have read a lot of articles that say there are a lot of Republicans who are very unhappy with the way Trump has neglected to set up the kind of infrastructure that can drive turnout. Turnout is what got Obama elected and reelected. The Dems had a massive database which listed people who were democrats but unlikely to bother to vote, and they got those people to the polls.
When the country is polarized to the point where 9 out of 10 people are not going to change their mind no matter what, turnout wins the election, and that means organization- getting people registered, calling them on Election Day, giving them a ride to the polls if necessary. It means greasing some palms and getting community leaders involved. When the country is 13% Hispanic, 12% black, 51% female, 5 to 10% gay, add in the college students, and you can see, all the democrats need to win is TURNOUT.
Quote:2012
Ha...ha.
Let me clarify. in a 'non-incumbent' year for both parties.
Quote:Oooooh. What happened. Did they win?
Haha, you guys are funny.
Seriously, though, the current advantage Clinton has is in organization. Boots on the ground. Which translates into the ability to get your voters to the polls. I have read a lot of articles that say there are a lot of Republicans who are very unhappy with the way Trump has neglected to set up the kind of infrastructure that can drive turnout. Turnout is what got Obama elected and reelected. The Dems had a massive database which listed people who were democrats but unlikely to bother to vote, and they got those people to the polls.
When the country is polarized to the point where 9 out of 10 people are not going to change their mind no matter what, turnout wins the election, and that means organization- getting people registered, calling them on Election Day, giving them a ride to the polls if necessary. It means greasing some palms and getting community leaders involved. When the country is 13% Hispanic, 12% black, 51% female, 5 to 10% gay, add in the college students, and you can see, all the democrats need to win is TURNOUT.
And they are losing turnout big time. They are down in the primaries. Plus like it or not, Trump does actually steal some of the traditional Dem votes. Hes not Romney, union members, gays, and black will all see a greater percentage goto Donald over what Romney had. I wouldn't count on the college kids if I was Hillary either. She has taken the wind out of their sails by betting out their preferred candidate Bernie (and then the scandal doesn't increase enthusiasm either).
Hilliary will steal very few republican votes. Bernie would have stole some, but ol' Hildog, no chance. Other than outright manipulation I don't see how Hilliary could win at this point, but things can always change. I feel much better about Trumps chances than I ever did for Romney. You knew he was a bad choice from the outset (Romney). He really was 'born to lose.'
Quote:And they are losing turnout big time. They are down in the primaries. Plus like it or not, Trump does actually steal some of the traditional Dem votes. Hes not Romney, union members, gays, and black will all see a greater percentage goto Donald over what Romney had.
There is zero evidence to show Trump will get anything close to the support from black voters that McCain or Romney had. Both had around 5% against a black candidate. Trump is hovering around 1%.
He is also polling lower among gay voters than Romney did.
Quote:There is zero evidence to show Trump will get anything close to the support from black voters that McCain or Romney had. Both had around 5% against a black candidate. Trump is hovering around 1%.
He is also polling lower among gay voters than Romney did.
I'd like to see that source if you have it. That is really opposite what conventional wisdom would say. Trump is far more pro-gays than Romney or McCain was (hence why he should do better there), and the fact that Hillary is so distrusted ought to give her a drop even among the most loyal democrat voters (Blacks followed by Catholics). Plus Trumps economic policy would disproportionately help Black people, as they are hit harder than whites on average by low wage imports due to lower education level etc. Either way, I would be shocked if Hillary can get 99% of the Black vote when Obama didn't even get that.
Quote:There is zero evidence to show Trump will get anything close to the support from black voters that McCain or Romney had. Both had around 5% against a black candidate. Trump is hovering around 1%.
He is also polling lower among gay voters than Romney did.
http://rare.us/story/new-poll-has-good-n...inorities/
Whelp this is what I found, and it is not a pro-trump poll at all but it still says 5% of Blacks, 20% of hispanics. And this is a democrat released poll, so almost certainly biased (methodology not told, so we just get what the article says).
Heres another one I found, its non partisan, and is some sort of data-mining by Harvard (done over the Month of June), the methodology explanation is a bit vague, but it appears that it accurately predicted the republican primary:
http://culturintel.tumblr.com/post/14551...rise-at-37
Trump at 37% amount Hispanics, and 26% among Blacks.
He would kill Hillary with those numbers. What I didn't find was the 1% you quoted. If a Democrat hit poll says 5%, you better believe that's the floor. I did notice that LGBT support was not listed there at all.
Now I took a look at real clear politics to find a breakdown by demographic, but didn't see anything dividing by race or sexual orientation. Howerver, when I looked into yougov's polls tho, I found major sources of bias. For instance, the July 6th yougov poll was composed of only 51% Christians (if you count Catholics/mormans as Christian), when they make up 70% of the general population in the US. Somehow 23% were 'nothing in particular' and another 9% where of a religion that is not Muslim, Hindu, Protestant, Morman, Jewish, or Catholic. 5.9% were atheist, and 7% Agnostic. When 70% of Americans identify themselves as Christians they shouldn't make up only 51% of your poll. This is why the polls keep miss-predicting. I wonder how many of the other realclearpolitic polls suffer from this sample bias as well?