US Politics

[JanjaWeed]

US election: Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort quits

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37134440

Trump in deep trouble. Polls also not looking good. He is desperate.

That's a yoooooj setback for Trump campaign!

 

[CBU-105]

Trump makes a big pitch to minority voters, good speech.

 

[RabzonKhan]

POLL CHART
2016 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton

Currently tracking 285 polls from 42 pollsters. Updated about 10 hours ago

This chart combines the latest opinion polls into trendlines using a poll-tracking model and is updated whenever a new poll is released. Link

Election on November 8, 2016

 

[CBU-105]

La Times Tracking Poll – Trump Regains Lead Over Crooked Hillary

http://www.latimes.com/politics/

 

[RabzonKhan]

yup, they probably had a better chance with comrade Bernie, crooked hillary is so unlikeable, I cant imagine anyone apart from the most insane feminists, the most clueless gays and terrorist jihadis themselves supporting crooked hillary clinton.

nice, looking fwd to it.


and I have to say, I find it hard to believe you actually like crooked hillary even if your hatred for Trump and some of the things he's said is completely understandable.

Okay, I’ll try to keep it short, this is a very important issue and very close to my heart, even though I was little offended the way you generalized Hillary’s supporters, but its okay, its politics. I have been on the Internet since 2004 and you can check my posts, trust me, I’m not “clueless gay” or a “terrorist jihadist”. I’m very liberal guy when it comes to social issues, but the daddy of all hawks, when it comes to war on terror and stopping Putin from his dangerous dirty games.

And that’s why I support Hillary for three main policy reasons, her foreign policy, position on social issues, and economic plan.

1. Foreign policy, she is a hawk, as she said "This is a time for America to lead, not to cower. And we will lead, and we will defeat terrorists that threaten our friends and allies,", and has a very comprehensive plan to defeat the Isis, “we have to break the group’s momentum and then it’s back. Our goal is not to deter or contain Isis, but to defeat and destroy” Link

And unlike her opponent who keeps bickering about some NATO members are not paying their dues and gives the impression that NATO is not that important(Trump and Putin have similar views on NATO), she, on the other hand, understands the importance of NATO.

Even though I’m a liberal, but there are times you have to take a stand, we must work with our allies to totally defeat religious terrorists, and we also have to take a strong stand against Putin’s plan to revive the evil Empire.

And I believe only Hillary can achieve those goals, and that’s why many high level Republican security experts (Richard Armitage, Brent Scowcroft and Henry Paulson, to name a few) are supporting her.

2. On social issues, she has come a long way, today she fully supports the rights of LGBT community and women’s issues. Unlike her demagogue opponent, she’ll be the president of all Americans.

Here is a small sample of Hillary’s supporters:

Aug 18 2016
There continue to be stark differences in candidate support across demographic groups. Women back Clinton over Trump by a wide 49% to 30% margin, while men support Trump by 45% to 33%. And there remain pronounced educational divides: Those with postgraduate degrees back Clinton by about three-to-one (59% vs. 21%); among those with some or no college experience, preferences are divided (41% back Trump, 36% Clinton, 9% Johnson and 5% Stein). Link


https://morningconsult.com/2016/07/28/poll-educated-voters-favor-clinton-trump/
The survey, which interviewed more than 23,000 registered voters from June 1 through July 14, found Clinton with a 17-point lead over Trump, 51 percent to 34 percent, among voters with post-graduate degrees.


http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-07-12/college-poll
White voters with at least a college degree—a group that represented more than a third of the 2012 electorate—back Clinton over Trump 48 percent to 37 percent, the latest Purple Slice online poll for Bloomberg Politics shows. Romney won that group by 14 percentage points, according to exit polls.

Among all college-educated likely voters, including those with post-graduate degrees, Clinton leads 54 percent to 32 percent, a much bigger margin than President Barack Obama’s 2-point advantage with a group that represented 47 percent of the electorate in 2012. Among voters with just a college degree and no post-graduate degree, another subgroup Romney won in 2012, Clinton is ahead 48 percent to 37 percent.

3. Economic plan, she wants to raise the federal minimum wage from $7.25 to $12. and will encourage more prosperous states to increase it to $15. Trump on the other hand, first was against the increase, and then said he will encourage states to increase it or something of that sort.

Hillary’s tax plan is far better than Trump’s, it’s high time the filthy rich like Trump start paying their fair share:

The Tax Policy Center estimates that the proposals would increase federal revenue by $1.1 trillion over the first decade and an additional $2.1 trillion over the subsequent 10 years, before considering macroeconomic feedback effects.1 Most of the revenue gain would come from individual income tax changes that affect high income taxpayers. The top 1 percent of households would pay more than three-fourths of Clinton’s total tax increases. Link

Trump’s plan proposal would cut taxes at all income levels, although the largest benefits, in dollar and percentage terms, would go to the highest-income households. The plan would reduce federal revenues by $9.5 trillion over its first decade. Link

Hillary also has a comprehensive plan to upgrade and rebuild the infrastructure, "A big part of our plan will be unleashing the power of the private sector to create more jobs at higher pay. And that means for us, creating an infrastructure bank to get private funds off the sidelines and complement our public investments. $25 billion in government seed funding could unlock more than $250 billion.

Trump also has a plan to invest $500 billion and rebuilding the infrastructure, but guess what, it will be entirely funded by the federal government, in other words, more freaking debt.

Cheers!

 

[LA se Karachi]

Hillary’s tax plan is far better than Trump’s, it’s high time the filthy rich like Trump start paying their fair share:

Filthy rich people like the Clintons should start paying their taxes too instead of using tax loopholes:

"While the two leading candidates for the presidency, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, have indeed suggested cosmetic fixes for a situation that only grows more extreme with the passage of time, they have themselves taken advantage of numerous tax “efficiency” strategies that make money evaporate. Of course, you shouldn’t doubt for a second that they’ll change their ways once in the Oval Office."

https://www.thenation.com/article/w...and-hillary-clinton-have-one-thing-in-common/

You conveniently seem to leave out the fact that the Clintons are filthy rich while mentioning Trump. They have no issue when it comes to avoiding taxes either.

 

[LA se Karachi]

Let me know when Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump decide they aren't running for President.

It's sad isn't it? Two of the most disliked Presidential candidates are running against each other this year:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features...or-both-trump-and-clinton-is-record-breaking/


And yet both of their supporters seem to brag about them. One can't help but chuckle...

Both parties voted for the least likable and least electable candidates that were running (although Sanders did win something like 45% of elected delegates) --- with turnout below 30% among all voters. Turnout in the general election will likely be low this year as a result. Hopefully, next time both parties won't choose terrible nominees. One can only hope that more people will turnout to vote in the primaries.

 

[CBU-105]

Okay, I’ll try to keep it short, this is a very important issue and very close to my heart, even though I was little offended the way you generalized Hillary’s supporters, but its okay, its politics.

hey, I meant absolutely no offence to you personally, and you're right, it is just politics, we're just having a bit of fun and hopefully a meaningful debate on a US election like none other.

That said, I'm not a citizen of the US and don't live there, stuff like socialized healthcare and gun rights etc are really of no concern to me so I'd like to stick to just the foreign policy implications of a possible Trump or Clinton administration.

And that’s why I support Hillary for three main policy reasons, her foreign policy, position on social issues, and economic plan.

1. Foreign policy, she is a hawk, as she said "This is a time for America to lead, not to cower. And we will lead, and we will defeat terrorists that threaten our friends and allies,", and has a very comprehensive plan to defeat the Isis, “we have to break the group’s momentum and then it’s back. Our goal is not to deter or contain Isis, but to defeat and destroy” Link

she is indeed a hawk, but in a neocon sense of the word, and I think that makes her dangerous. She voted for the war in Iraq, she orchestrated the whole Libyan regime change fiasco, I'm sure you've seen her "we came , we saw... muahaha" video on Gaddafi.

and she has no plan for defeating ISIS, she's going to continue Obama's imaginary coalition of "64 nations" battling the Islamic State. All she does is talk about her Arab sunni allies in the region, none of which are democracies and the first in that list is the kingdom of Saudi Arabia where they treat their minorities like dirt, execute gays and lesbians, and where women have no rights on top of funding terrorist groups in Syria.

Think logically, even from an operational standpoint, Iraq is a Shi'ite majority democracy, a system of government she helped put in place, and now you want a post-Saddam democratic sovereign Iraq to be invaded by the Saudis and others ?

Syria is a complicated situation too, which is a whole another discussion, but Trump is on record saying he would not support the so called rebels with US taxpayer money.

Hillary says she'll support the rebels and shoot down Russian jets by imposing a no-fly zone, ww3 essentially.

Trump says he wants a détente/negotiations with Russia on Syria. "wouldn't it be nice if we could get along with Russia ?"

and defeat a common enemy in ISIS and al-Qaeda etc ?

And unlike her opponent who keeps bickering about some NATO members are not paying their dues and gives the impression that NATO is not that important(Trump and Putin have similar views on NATO), she, on the other hand, understands the importance of NATO.

he's not 'bickering' about anything, who with ? or did you mean bitching ? which would be a somewhat more accurate description but it's not that either.

Trump is smart, at this stage he knows he has a 50% chance of becoming the next president of the US. What he's doing now with his "they gotta pay up" rhetoric is setting the bar really high for negotiations with those 23 countries that are actually not honouring their NATO commitment by not even spending 2% of their GDP on defence. Guess who's picking up the slack ? you, Rabzon, aka, the US taxpayer.

The US is 20 odd trillion in debt, what's so wrong if he wants your allies to start paying their own way ?

and NATO, when it was conceived, was set up to prevent the spread of the communist ideology of the Soviet Union which has been gone for 9006 days, or 24 years, 7 months and 27 days as of today !

and do you not find it ironic that your "hawk", crooked Hillary, is the standard bearer of a left wing political party, whose ideological fringe is essentially.... communist ?

here is what General Hastings Lionel Ismay, the first secretary General of NATO had to say about the role of NATO:

"to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down"

Even though I’m a liberal, but there are times you have to take a stand, we must work with our allies to totally defeat religious terrorists, and we also have to take a strong stand against Putin’s plan to revive the evil Empire.

And I believe only Hillary can achieve those goals, and that’s why many high level Republican security experts (Richard Armitage, Brent Scowcroft and Henry Paulson, to name a few) are supporting her.

what evil empire, why you invoking Ronaldus Maximus, liberal ?

Putin has zero plans to revive a communist union, all he's looking for is a bit of influence on bordering states, which is about par for course for any great regional power.

and you're seriously going to Trumpet neocons like Armitage, Snowcroft and Paulson to make a "national security and foreign policy" case for Hillary Clinton ?

give me a break

2. On social issues, she has come a long way, today she fully supports the rights of LGBT community and women’s issues. Unlike her demagogue opponent, she’ll be the president of all Americans.

how do you explain the donations from Saudis and other fundamentalist Islamic regimes to her foundation then ?

watch

Donald Trump on the LGBTQ community:

 

[Nilgiri]

Heres the polling bias situation that I talked about earlier summarised into a video:

Watch at least the first 10 - 15 minutes for a synopsis.

@Desert Fox

 

[Nilgiri]

Did any MSM outlet pick this up? I couldn't find one

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...l_for_immigration_restrictions_screening_test

Most Support Trump’s Call for Immigration Restrictions, Screening Test

Friday, August 19, 2016

Most voters support Donald Trump’s plan for temporarily restricting immigration from countries with a history of terrorism and for testing to screen out newcomers who don’t share America’s values. Most also agree that such a test is likely to reduce the number of terrorists entering the United States.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey find that 59% of Likely U.S. Voters favor a temporary ban on immigration into the United States from "the most dangerous and volatile regions of the world that have a history of exporting terrorism” until the federal government improves its ability to screen out potential terrorists from coming here. Thirty-two percent (32%) oppose such a ban, while 10% are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Seventy-three percent (73%) agree with the Republican presidential nominee’s call for a government screening test for those looking to enter the country that determines whether they have hostile attitudes towards the United States and its constitutional freedoms. Only 18% are opposed to this kind of test.

While Democrats by a 52% to 38% margin oppose the temporary ban on immigrants from countries with a history of terrorism, most voters in Hillary Clinton’s party (57%) agree with the use of a government screening test. Eighty-nine percent (89%) of Republicans and 74% of voters not affiliated with either major party support such a test. But 81% of GOP voters and 59% of unaffiliateds also agree with a temporary ban on those coming from countries with a history of terrorism.

Sixty-one percent (61%) of all voters believe an ideological screening test for immigrants to the United States would decrease the number of potential terrorists entering this country, but that includes only 27% who say it is Very Likely to do so. Thirty-four percent (34%) think the screening test is unlikely to reduce the number of potential terrorists getting into America, although just 10% say it’s Not At All Likely to work.

(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.

The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on August 17-18, 2016 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. See methodology.

Fifty-two percent (52%) of voters believe the federal government does not focus enough on the threat of domestic Islamic terrorism. Just 26% now think the country is safer than it was before the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the lowest level of confidence ever.

Sizable majorities across nearly all demographic categories support Trump’s proposed screening test to determine whether potential newcomers are hostile to America and its basic freedoms. But voters are more divided over his call for a temporary immigration ban from areas with a history of terrorism.

Most voters of all ages support such a ban, but the older the voter, the more likely he or she is to favor it. Only 44% of blacks support putting a temporary hold on immigration from terrorist countries, compared to 61% of whites and 59% of other minority voters.

Self-described politically liberal voters are much less supportive of both the temporary ban and the screening test than conservatives and moderates are.

Republicans believe more strongly than Democrats and unaffiliated voters do that the screening test is likely to reduce the potential for domestic terrorism.

Among voters who favor the ideological screening test, 76% say it is likely to decrease the number of potential terrorists entering the country. Eighty-one percent (81%) of those opposed to the test say it is unlikely to reduce the domestic terrorist threat.

President Obama and Hillary Clinton still won't say it, but most voters continue to believe the United States is at war with radical Islamic terrorism.

In late March, voters were closely divided over Trump’s call for a temporary ban on all Muslims entering the United States until the federal government improves its ability to screen out potential terrorists from coming here.

Following the massacre at an Orlando nightclub in June, most voters think the government won't be able to stop further terrorist attacks on the homeland and say the country’s Islamic community should be doing more to condemn such violence.

A government report earlier this year said over 500,000 visitors to the United States overstayed their legal visas in 2015 and didn’t go home. Most voters think those who overstay their visas are a serious national security threat and that the feds need to take stronger steps to deport them.

Additional information from this survey and a full demographic breakdown are available to Platinum Members only.

Please sign up for the Rasmussen Reports daily email update (it’s free) or follow us on Twitter or Facebook. Let us keep you up to date with the latest public opinion news.

 

[Devil Soul]

Trump campaign signals possible shift on immigration stance
Home / World / Trump campaign signals possible shift on immigration stance
By REUTERS
August 22, 2016
Latest : World

• 0
• 0

WASHINGTON: A senior aide to U.S. Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump signaled a possible shift in his hardline immigration policies on Sunday, saying his plans to deport 11 million people who are in the country illegally were under review.

Trump has put his vow to toughen the country's immigration policies at the center of his campaign. He has promised to carry out mass deportations and build a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border, proposals that critics have assailed as inhumane and too costly and unrealistic to achieve.

Trailing Democrat Hillary Clinton in opinion polls for the Nov. 8 election and struggling to broaden his support beyond the white working-class voters who have been his base of support, the New York businessman has reached out in recent days to black and Hispanic voters.

On Sunday, his new campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, told CNN that Trump was committed to a "fair and humane" approach to those living in the country illegally.

"What he supports is to make sure we enforce the law, we are respectful of those Americans who are looking for well-paying jobs and that we are fair and humane to those who live among us in this country," Conway said on "State of the Union."

Pressed on whether Trump's plans would include a "deportation force" that the candidate previously pledged to set up, she replied: "To be determined."

Republican Senator Jeff Sessions, a close ally of Trump, told CBS's "Face the Nation" that Trump was still working through his plans for deportations should he win the White House.

"He's wrestling with how to do that. People that are here unlawfully, came into the country against our laws, are subject to being removed. That's just plain fact," the Alabama lawmaker said. "He's thinking that through."

Trump has also been rebuked by opponents for his proposal to impose a temporary "total and complete shutdown" of Muslims seeking to enter the country, later rolled back to focus on countries with "a proven history of terrorism."

Clinton has accused Trump of sowing divisiveness and said she would propose a path to citizenship for some migrants living in the United States illegally. The former secretary of state has said that militant groups like Islamic State have begun using Trump's proposed Muslim ban as a recruitment tool.

CAMPAIGN SHAKE-UP

Conway's comments came after Trump announced last week a major reshuffling of his campaign. Trump promoted Conway, who had been a senior adviser, to the role of campaign manager and hired Stephen Bannon, head of the Breitbart News website, as campaign chief executive.

The Trump campaign said on Friday that campaign chairman Paul Manafort was resigning.

The campaign's new leadership combines Bannon, a combative conservative, with Conway, a data-driven analyst who has been trying to broaden Trump's appeal to women and independent voters.

Trump's support has slumped in national polls in recent weeks and surveys in pivotal states such as Pennsylvania and New Hampshire have shown a widening lead for Clinton.

A Reuters/Ipsos survey released on Friday showed Clinton leading Trump nationally by 8 percentage points, 42 percent to 34 percent.

Trump vowed at a campaign rally in Fredericksburg, Virginia, on Saturday to return the Republican Party to the values of President Abraham Lincoln, who issued the Emancipation Proclamation and championed the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution during the U.S. Civil War that led to the abolition of slavery in 1865.

Earlier on Saturday, Trump met with a group of Hispanic leaders as part of a new National Hispanic Advisory Council to the campaign.

 

[Anubis]

The best projection out there is Sabato's Crystal ball...no bias...they are equally praised by both left and right wing media.
Here there projection.

They give Clinton a clear majority.

Their projections for the previous elections were 97-100% accurate.

 

[cloud4000]

The best projection out there is Sabato's Crystal ball...no bias...they are equally praised by both left and right wing media.
Here there projection.

They give Clinton a clear majority.

Their projections for the previous elections were 97-100% accurate.

Regardless of what the polls state, regardless who wins in November, America will get the leader it deserves.

 

[Anubis]

Regardless of what the polls state, regardless who wins in November, America will get the leader it deserves.

Lol...the politicians are only as good as the people....they are reflections of our national character.

 

[cloud4000]

http://www.wsj.com/articles/in-clinton-vs-trump-the-quiet-impact-of-asian-americans-1471886892

In Clinton vs. Trump, the Quiet Impact of Asian-Americans
Republican nominee tries to court blacks and Hispanics, but another group that leans Democratic gets less attention

ENLARGE
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump hasn’t had much success attracting support from Asian-Americans. PHOTO: GERALD HERBERT/ASSOCIATED PRESS

By
GERALD F. SEIB
Aug. 22, 2016 1:28 p.m. ET
45 COMMENTS

Donald Trump has made overtures in the last few days to Hispanic and African-American voters, trying to whittle away at the giant advantages Hillary Clinton enjoys among them.

There is a third group that gets less attention, but one that provides Democrats a similar strategic edge: Asian-Americans.

Asian-Americans are the fastest-growing racial group in the nation. More than nine million of them will be eligible to vote in November, an increase of 16% from four years ago.

The bad news for Republicans is that this growth in the Asian-American electorate appears to be accompanied by an increasing tilt toward the Democrats. One national poll of Asian-American voters earlier this year found a 12-point increase in those who identify as Democrats since 2012, to 47% from 35%.

Can that matter? Ask Democratic Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia. He won re-election two years ago by the narrowest of margins, defeating Republican Ed Gillespie by fewer than 18,000 votes out of 2.18 million cast. Virginia’s large population of Asian-Americans likely provided the difference. They make up 5% of the state’s electorate, and a pre-election poll showed them going for Mr. Warner by a 2-to-1 margin.

For Mr. Trump and his party, Asian-Americans are another example of how his get-tough stance on immigration represents a two-edged sword. It has helped galvanize support and drive up enthusiasm among working-class whites, many of whom think immigration has damaged them economically and undermined the American culture they have known.

Meanwhile, on the sliding scale of the diverse American electorate, votes gained there are offset by votes lost to groups who hear chants of “build that wall” as an ominous sign.

Mr. Trump and his supporters insist that his policies are directed not at immigration generally but at illegal immigration specifically, but they have had a hard time getting that message across. Over the weekend, his campaign appeared to begin softening its tone; his new campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, said Mr. Trump wouldn’t necessarily stick with his pledge to seek deportation of 11 million undocumented aliens.

Still, the hole he and his party faces appears to be deep, including with Asian-American voters.

A survey earlier this year by the Asian and Pacific Islander American Vote project, a nonpartisan organization that works to mobilize voters of Asian heritage, found that 61% of Asian-American registered voters held an unfavorable view of Mr. Trump, while a nearly identical share held a favorable view of Mrs. Clinton. The same survey found that 40% said they would vote against a candidate who expressed “strongly anti-immigrant views,” even if they agreed with that candidate on other issues.

Such readings frustrate Republicans who think Asian-Americans ought to have a more natural affinity with the GOP. While Asian-Americans are hardly monolithic—they include those with roots in the Philippines, Korea, China and Vietnam as well in the Asian subcontinent countries of India and Pakistan—many have a wide entrepreneurial streak that would seem in sync with Republican policies.

Surveys suggest they aren’t strongly rooted in either party, and aren’t especially liberal. The APIAVote survey showed 23% called themselves liberal, 19% conservative and a whopping 48% moderate.

But many of these Asian-Americans also are making their marks in the high-tech world, where Mr. Trump’s immigration policies are unpopular. Moreover, there are signs that Democratic outreach to Asian-Americans has simply been better than that of the Republicans.

So what difference does all this make, now and in the future? Nationally, the impact of Asian-Americans isn’t huge. They make up only about 4% of eligible voters.

But in some key battleground states their impact will be significantly larger than that. In addition to Virginia, Asian-Americans make up 9% of the electorate in Nevada, 7% in New Jersey and 3.1% in Minnesota. In California, they make up almost 15% of the electorate.

Like Hispanics, Asian-Americans’ political activism hasn’t always matched their numbers, but that may be changing. The number of Asian-Americans running for Congress rose to 40 this year from eight just eight years ago. In one of the nation’s most prominent Senate races, Democratic Rep. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, an Asian-American fluent in Thai and Indonesian, is seeking to knock off Republican Sen. Mark Kirk.

Long-term trends mean the impact of Asian-Americans will only rise. Immigration from Asia is rapidly overtaking immigration from Latin America as the largest source of new arrivals. The Pew Research Center says that Asians already outnumber Hispanics among immigrants who have arrived in the last five years, partly because of a sharp drop in immigration from Mexico. By 2065, a Pew study says, Asians will outnumber Hispanics among all immigrants.

That’s the real reason Republicans ought to be worried about their standing with Asian-Americans. They are arriving as a full-fledged political force, and 2016 is only the start.

Write to Gerald F. Seib at jerry.seib@wsj.com

Long-term trends mean the impact of Asian-Americans will only rise. Immigration from Asia is rapidly overtaking immigration from Latin America as the largest source of new arrivals. The Pew Research Center says that Asians already outnumber Hispanics among immigrants who have arrived in the last five years, partly because of a sharp drop in immigration from Mexico. By 2065, a Pew study says, Asians will outnumber Hispanics among all immigrants.

That’s the real reason Republicans ought to be worried about their standing with Asian-Americans. They are arriving as a full-fledged political force, and 2016 is only the start.

Write to Gerald F. Seib at jerry.seib@wsj.com

Republicans are ignoring immigrants at their own peril. Many immigrants are conservative, hard-working folks who would make them natural Republicans, but the GOP, in its current form, doesn't want them.