WWTBAM Bored

Just came to my office and said, "Well, now that Sarah Palin has endorsed Trump, it's a slam dunk."

I asked, "What's a slam dunk?"

"Trump is going to win every state."

After not being able to control my laughter, I said, "You've got to be kidding."

"I'll bet you", and slammed his hand in my face. "$2,000, right now," he demanded.

My reply, "I'll give you 10-1 odds. You win, I give you $10, you lose you pay me $1."

He didn't like that. Said it wasn't worth his time.

He's a fucking idiot on both parts !!

Im_Ace wrote:Just came to my office and said, "Well, now that Sarah Palin has endorsed Trump, it's a slam dunk."

I asked, "What's a slam dunk?"

"Trump is going to win every state."

After not being able to control my laughter, I said, "You've got to be kidding."

"I'll bet you", and slammed his hand in my face. "$2,000, right now," he demanded.

My reply, "I'll give you 10-1 odds. You win, I give you $10, you lose you pay me $1."

He didn't like that. Said it wasn't worth his time.

He's a fucking idiot on both parts !!

He was talking about the primary, right? Or does he think that in a general election Trump will carry Hawaii? California? New York? --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:He was talking about the primary, right? Or does he think that in a general election Trump will carry Hawaii? California? New York? --Bob

And it'll be Sarah Freakin' Palin that'll get him those states.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkz_QYV7USg

Trump does have a secret army of support.

I predict that if Trump is nominated he won't carry even one state, not even Texas.

Bob Juch wrote:I predict that if Trump is nominated he won't carry even one state, not even Texas.

You are a fool, a blind one at that.

Bob Juch wrote:I predict that if Trump is nominated he won't carry even one state, not even Texas.

I have a hard time believing that any Republican could fail to carry Idaho, Wyoming, or Oklahoma, off the top of my head. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:I predict that if Trump is nominated he won't carry even one state, not even Texas.

I have a hard time believing that any Republican could fail to carry Idaho, Wyoming, or Oklahoma, off the top of my head. --Bob

Both Idaho and Oklahoma have elected Democrat representatives in recent years.

I believe if Trump is nominated many Republicans will stay home.

Bob Juch wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:I predict that if Trump is nominated he won't carry even one state, not even Texas.

I have a hard time believing that any Republican could fail to carry Idaho, Wyoming, or Oklahoma, off the top of my head. --Bob

Both Idaho and Oklahoma have elected Democrat representatives in recent years.

I believe if Trump is nominated many Republicans will stay home.

When's the last time a Democrat won a state-wide race in either state? --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:

Bob78164 wrote: Both Idaho and Oklahoma have elected Democrat representatives in recent years.

I believe if Trump is nominated many Republicans will stay home.

When's the last time a Democrat won a state-wide race in either state? --Bob

1986 Cecil D. Andrus was elected governor of Idaho and served two terms.
2002 Brad Henry was elected governor of Oklahoma.
1978 David L. Boren was elected as a senator from Oklahoma and served 7 terms. In 1994, he resigned his Senate seat to accept the presidency of the University of Oklahoma.

I still think R's in Oklahoma would rather pinch their nose and vote for Trump than see Hillary win and vice versa in democratic leaning states. A non-vote is essentially a 1/2 vote for the other party.

Bob Juch wrote:1978 David L. Boren was elected as a senator from Oklahoma and served 7 terms. In 1994, he resigned his Senate seat to accept the presidency of the University of Oklahoma.

This can't be right. Seven terms in the Senate is 42 years. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:1978 David L. Boren was elected as a senator from Oklahoma and served 7 terms. In 1994, he resigned his Senate seat to accept the presidency of the University of Oklahoma.

This can't be right. Seven terms in the Senate is 42 years. --Bob

I have no idea why I said 7. Of course that should be 3.

ten96lt wrote:I still think R's in Oklahoma would rather pinch their nose and vote for Trump than see Hillary win and vice versa in democratic leaning states. A non-vote is essentially a 1/2 vote for the other party.

Being from Oklahoma and having many friends there still, I can say with some assurance that rather than allow a Democrat to win the White House, they would vote for anyone with an "R" next to his or her name. They're the equivalent of "yellow dog Democrats" (is there a corresponding term for Republicans?).

earendel wrote:

ten96lt wrote:I still think R's in Oklahoma would rather pinch their nose and vote for Trump than see Hillary win and vice versa in democratic leaning states. A non-vote is essentially a 1/2 vote for the other party.

Being from Oklahoma and having many friends there still, I can say with some assurance that rather than allow a Democrat to win the White House, they would vote for anyone with an "R" next to his or her name. They're the equivalent of "yellow dog Democrats" (is there a corresponding term for Republicans?).

True, but they may not vote at all.

earendel wrote:

ten96lt wrote:I still think R's in Oklahoma would rather pinch their nose and vote for Trump than see Hillary win and vice versa in democratic leaning states. A non-vote is essentially a 1/2 vote for the other party.

Being from Oklahoma and having many friends there still, I can say with some assurance that rather than allow a Democrat to win the White House, they would vote for anyone with an "R" next to his or her name. They're the equivalent of "yellow dog Democrats" (is there a corresponding term for Republicans?).

At one time, people were more willing to cross party lines under the right circumstances, but voters have gotten so polarized in the last 20 years that it's hard to visualize any circumstances under which some states go red or blue. So, each candidate starts with roughly 150 or so electoral votes in the bag and the contest is only over the remaining 200-250.

In 2012, Obama won the popular vote 51-47% (the rest going to minor party candidates). Despite this, Romney carried 73% of the vote in Utah (admittedly, his native son status helped here), 69% of the vote in Wyoming, and 67% of the vote in Oklahoma. Several other states were over 60% as well. And some of the results in Democratic states were just as lopsided. Obama took 66% of the vote in Vermont and 63% of the vote in New York.

You're going to see similar results this time, no matter who the candidates are.

Bob Juch wrote:

earendel wrote:

ten96lt wrote:I still think R's in Oklahoma would rather pinch their nose and vote for Trump than see Hillary win and vice versa in democratic leaning states. A non-vote is essentially a 1/2 vote for the other party.

Being from Oklahoma and having many friends there still, I can say with some assurance that rather than allow a Democrat to win the White House, they would vote for anyone with an "R" next to his or her name. They're the equivalent of "yellow dog Democrats" (is there a corresponding term for Republicans?).

True, but they may not vote at all.

No, they'll vote (or at least they say they will) because they'd rather see Trump than any Democrat in the White House.

The real worry, it seems to me, is for the downticket races - I can't help but feel that Republicans facing reelection aren't keen on having Trump at the top of the ticket, and Democrats aren't keen on having either Clinton or Sanders at the top of the ticket.

silverscreenselect wrote:In 2012, Obama won the popular vote 51-47% (the rest going to minor party candidates). Despite this, Romney carried 73% of the vote in Utah (admittedly, his native son status helped here), 69% of the vote in Wyoming, and 67% of the vote in Oklahoma. Several other states were over 60% as well. And some of the results in Democratic states were just as lopsided. Obama took 66% of the vote in Vermont and 63% of the vote in New York.

You're going to see similar results this time, no matter who the candidates are.

Um, Mitt was born in Detroit and was governor of Massachusetts, not a native son of Utah, but he is a Mormon.

Bob Juch wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:In 2012, Obama won the popular vote 51-47% (the rest going to minor party candidates). Despite this, Romney carried 73% of the vote in Utah (admittedly, his native son status helped here), 69% of the vote in Wyoming, and 67% of the vote in Oklahoma. Several other states were over 60% as well. And some of the results in Democratic states were just as lopsided. Obama took 66% of the vote in Vermont and 63% of the vote in New York.

You're going to see similar results this time, no matter who the candidates are.

Um, Mitt was born in Detroit and was governor of Massachusetts, not a native son of Utah, but he is a Mormon.

He organized the Salt Lake City Winter Olympics in 2002... which counts, as far as the Utahns are concerned.

I often wonder if something might happen with Trump that is similar to Jesse Ventura. Ventura won a 3-way race for Minnesota Governor in 1998. His core support came from the white Blue-Collar suburbs on the north side of the Twin Cities. His core support was not political junkies.

GOP Candidate Got-34.3%

Democrat Got-28%

Ventura Got 37%

If you spot Trump the normal GOP votes-Plus a "Ventura" factor of attracting a Blue-Collar suburban vote in places like Ohio-it could get interesting.

We were on a cruise about that time (my one-and-only) and I remember talking to a couple of younger blue-collar types from Connecticut and they were really excited about Ventura.