Home | About | Donate

'Terrifying' New Poll Shows Trump and Clinton Statistically Tied



More like a nightmare. The people in the US have gone off the deep end to choose such a narcissistic, bombastic person that could be the next leader of our country. Of course the alternative could have been worse. Sad times for our country to have such despicable choices for the President.


Plan b for Bernie:

Tulsi Gabbard as vice presidential running mate.




I think the polls may be underestimating the Hispanic turnout. From what I have heard there is incredible anger against Trump among Hispanics. Polls try to figure turnout from past elections but that might not be a good basis this year when it comes to Hispanic voters. I would expect that the Republicans will try to suppress the Hispanic vote as much as possible.


The red queen is far more disliked than is Trump, she keeps adding to that list by the hour. Her chances of winning the white house will look even more improbable in the event she becomes the DNC nominee. People will flock to Trump in larger numbers unless Bernie Sanders is his opponent.


The Caesars in charge want media circus to keep the masses dumb and the masses keep consuming the trash. TV addiction is a social disease in America.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


These polls seem to have no effect on Clinton supporters (i.e. the democrat establishment) whatsoever. They don't care if Bernie does better against Trump as long as Clinton can beat him even by the slimmest margin. Of course, if the polls showed Trump beating her soundly that might change some people's minds. But probably not.


Actuall, the electoral impact of a large Hispanic and black turn out has always been negligible to the democrats. Most black votes are cast in southern red states, so they might as well not even show up. The Hispanic electoral influence is also overrated as most of those votes are cast in either California or New York, both already slam dunk states for the democrats, and Texas and Arizona, both layups for the republicans. Trump and the GOP already know this. That's why nearly every GOP candidate since Goldwater has been able to successfully bad mouth all minorities during their campaigns and pay no political price.
Let me know when the growing Hispanic electorate ever swings Texas and Florida to the Blue side on a consistent basis. That will be the day that minority participation really starts to count.


Red meat for Bernie supporters. This reliance on polling is the bane of any political office seekers existence. Polls are not created equal.
What they say they are poling for is subject to their interpretation of the meaning of both their questions and the answers they receive.
The sample size and make up also can alter the outcome.
With the right massaging it is almost possible to get any poll to say whatever you want it to say. So waht else is there to do while we wait yet another week for yet a couple more primaries to happen. The only thing funnier than shifting polls is the constancy of the media's campaigning for "The Hillary" and against "The Donald" and how Bernie is making their presumptive propaganda look ridiculous.
If Bernie accomplishes nothing else, his candidacy for the Democratic nomination has served that useful goal. And what if Bernie should somehow win the nomination? What delicious irony to see the media have to dump all their pro-Hilary memes and "discover" "the new Donald Trump" in order to continue serving their patrons.


Slithytove accurately summed up the Democrats' strategy.

In addition to the dyed in the wool Democrat voters dismissing every poll since January showing Sanders beating Trump and the other GOP contenders by wider margins than Clinton the DNC's highest priority is sustaining the billion plus dollars per year the Party receives from corporations. Their second highest priority is beating the GOP in November. Although corporate cash flows in at a steady rate year after year, through tried and true ongoing fear and intimidation programs the Party gets more cash from rank and file voters when the GOP occupies the White House than they do when a Democrat occupies the White House.

Follow the money.


Just watched Thom Hartmanns show and apparently Trump has now hired two former Reagan economic advisers. Apparently his people have decided to double down on supply side economics and start trying to frame Trump as the carrier of Reagan's legacy in the 21st century.
The Democratic Party had a golden opportunity after Flint to tie neoliberalism and Reaganomics to the 21st century collapse of America's infrastructure. But in typical democratic fashion, they have squandered it. Of course, it doesn't help that the current democrat in the White House, and the front runner for this years nomination are both kindred supply-siders. Blue doggies that would take turns sucking Reagan off if he were alive today.


Recall that during his 2008 campaign Obama mentioned Raygun more than all of his Democratic Party predecessors combined. Obama even compared himself to Raygun a few times.

When Obama recently took a sip of Flint's water and assured us it was OK perhaps he was channeling Raygun ?


Yes, it is the sad truth, we are so easily brainwashed..


Every week she say's something nutty. :wine_glass:


The more Killary campaigns the more people dislike her. Which makes sense. They see who she really is. Conniving. Mean-spirited. Cynically opportunistic.
(Oh! I'm in West Virginia! Now I feel the coal miners' pain!)
Drop Out Hillary!


What the hell does that say about the popularity of Hillary? Can't even hold up against Trump. The discontent with the establishment from both the right and left is growing. What does Hillary represent? More of the same.


...And yes, if Killary is the nominee, we Sanders supporters are going to stand by and watch her go down in flames in November, like she so richly deserves to have happen for her continual lying about Bernie and his record. I hate the Clintons, and the way they have played the American people for the last 25 years. I regret voting for Bill twice. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. Won't get fooled again, YEAAAAA! (Apologies to The Who).


:rotating_light: Careful there! There's a couple of folks here that'll go bat-shit crazy on your ass talking like that! And I ain't naming names either!


A lot of folks seem to believe that super delegates were created to prevent McGovern from running in '68. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it used to be ALL super delegates prior to '68, so the current system is more democratic than is used to be. The old system elected Humphrey which voters did not want, who then lost to Nixon. So, for the current super delegates to vote outside the popular vote, while it hasn't been done, seems to be within reason. I think this is what Weaver is saying.
Now, if Bernie somehow gets the majority of non-super delegates, the Clinton camp will cry: "screw popular vote, the super delegates were already committed, and Shillary is better anyway" (which is the opposite of what they are saying now...)