Democrats are surprisingly NOT dependent on minority votes to win

[Ljube]

lol

[Ljube]

Black voters are going to make the difference in FL, OH, VA and PA if Clinton wins. And Hispanic voters will make the difference in NV, CO and NM. To say that Clinton is not dependent on minority voters is ridiculous. But then again, "Angrie" is probably one of those NH Democrats who wants the Democratic party to be a "White women only" party. That's why you support Climbing Maggie, right, Angrie?

Yes, supporting Climbing Maggie is a disqualifier in my book too.

[Ljube]

The 538 calculator is a tool that describes the Obama vs Romney election well, but is not applicable to a Clinton vs Trump election.

We’ve already discussed this at length. You are new to the site and haven’t seen previous threads about that junky tool.

[Ljube]

Angrie NEVER claimed Democrats can win with ZERO minroity votes.

Republicans are already close to maxed out on white support from 2012 levels

While Republicans have certainly maxed out the White vote in the South, they definitely haven't in the Midwest and in PA. I agree that Trump has serious problems with White women and minorities that he needs to overcome, though.

Don't try to argue with Badger or convince him of anything. He is the worst kind of Dem hack there is: Hillbot concealed behind a blue avatar.

[Ljube]

Angrie NEVER claimed Democrats can win with ZERO minroity votes.

Republicans are already close to maxed out on white support from 2012 levels

While Republicans have certainly maxed out the White vote in the South, they definitely haven't in the Midwest and in PA. I agree that Trump has serious problems with White women and minorities that he needs to overcome, though.

Don't try to argue with Badger or convince him of anything. He is the worst kind of Dem hack there is: Hillbot concealed behind a blue avatar.

First off, yesterday this "Dem hack Hillbot" and his Republican wife together knocked on dozens of doors in the rain AND made almost 300 phone calls for the GOP, plus turned out a couple volunteers we recruited earlier this week to do likewise, all while taking care of the house landscaping, a bit of work for my job, and taking care of our two young boys. How many doors or phones have you reached this week? This month?

In this past year I've served on my county GOP's Executive and Central Committee's, donated a few hundred dollars either in contributons or sponsering/attending several party funraisers, and my wife is under serious consideration to be hired as a full time field organizer. What have you offered the Party beyond your impressive keyboard-fu warrior skills?

Compare our respective levels of involvement and commitment (or lack thereof) to the Republican Party, and you STILL want to call me a "Dem hack Hillbot"? Just because like most Republicans I've correctly pointed out how we've chosen the weakest possible nominee because Trump's patently unsuitable temperment is obvious to most swing voters, as well as both the folly and uglliness of Trump's "white power" electoral strategy??

Yeah, I didn't think so.

I'm now going to respond to TN Volunteer's post myself, only cogently. Though if you ever need me to pimp slap you with another dose of reality like this again, just say the word.

Thanks for your reply!
Sorry about my previous posts/provocations.

Just try to point out the strengths of our nominee and not only his weaknesses. Everybody has weaknesses.

Objectively speaking, any Republican candidate would be the underdog in 2016. Trump has the best chance because he can appeal to the working class Dems. If only he can unite the party behind him, no matter if the party really loves him, he will be victorious.

[Ljube]

Yes, trade is the issue and to a lesser extent, immigration, but linked with trade and with jobs.

Romney was despised by the working class as the vulture capitalist (jobs destroyer).
Trump is liked as the real estate developer (jobs creator).

Yes, Trump is Perot 2.0 as a Republican nominee. That's why I think he has a chance where the others wouldn't have.

The women he alienated, he can win back. There is plenty of time for that in the next five months.
.

[Ljube]

One more thing. Remember Romney's 47%? That effectively buried Romney.

Trump won't have a gaffe like that and even if he did, he would explain it away, since he is already gaffe prone.


Come to think of it, i remember that that 47% video was secretly recorder. Who knows what kind of riches Trump might be hiding, waiting for Hillary to become the nominee before unveiling them. A secret video of one of her Goldman Sachs speeches? That would bury her with the working class.