Why is Trump rebounding slowly? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2024, 09:02:26 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Why is Trump rebounding slowly? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Why is Trump rebounding slowly?  (Read 1800 times)
Fuzzy Bear
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,738
United States


WWW
« on: August 28, 2016, 05:25:35 PM »

The Khan fiasco hurt him a lot given he was actually tied or ahead in most polls prior.

His new campaign team seems to be keeping him on a shorter leash, and he's strangely pivoting to make his positions seem not as crazy, not that I believe Trump has any actual policy planks.

The advantage he has is Hillary is really unlikeable and there are plenty of people supporting her because they feel like there is no other option. I think Trump will continue to pull closer until he makes another gaffe, but who knows.

We may not see much movement in the polls until the first debate.

This.  For the most part.  I think the underlined paragraph is the "for now" bottom line.

Hillary's not popular.  And with good reason; she got rich in office.  People don't like that.  And she violated rules to conceal the relationship between becoming wealthy and being in high office.  People have concluded the connection between the two, and can't be talked out of it. 

People have concluded that Hillary gave access to rich Clinton Foundation donors while Secretary of State and benefitted greatly from this.  There is debate as to whether or not she committed a crime, and I'm not one of the "Hillary for Prison" crowd.  But there's no debate that she lied about pertinent facts surrounding her e-mails to the FBI, possibly to Congress, and, certainly, to the American Public.  And they don't like it.

The e-mails dwarf Benghazi.  There is much debate about how responsible Hillary is, or should be, for the deaths of the men there.  The House investigation was soiled with partisanship.  But even in this, the facts reveal that Hillary Clinton acted with one eye on 2016 at all times.  And this required buying into the Obama Narrative of "a movie" sparking a riot, and not a "terrorist attack".  Benghazi has become "one more lie" Hillary has told, and while "telling the truth" may not have prevented the deaths of our men there, being complicit in a lie about such an event is something many non-political folks (like my wife, a two-time Obama voter now supporting Trump) find reprehensible.  My wife's a good barometer; she used to like Hillary, but after researching what happened in Benghazi, concluded that "she just let those men die".  I think millions of non-partisan folks who aren't overly partisan have concluded this as well.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.018 seconds with 13 queries.