Trump Likely to Win Re-Election, According to a Dem Strategist

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

Some posters are making the mistake of thinking that Trump and the GOP are invincible. The pendulum swings back.

It was never us who were arrogant though.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

Some posters are making the mistake of thinking that Trump and the GOP are invincible. The pendulum swings back.

You hit the nail on the head on why he really gets under my skin.

It's one thing to say that a good chunk of Democrats were arrogant, out-of-touch, and wildly optimistic about Clinton's chances.

It's another thing to go into a rah-rah mode claiming that Trump is governing with a mandate from the public, that the GOP have not made any serious mistakes (They couldn't agree on a f***ing healthcare deal), and that the GOP is DESTINED to win electoral and legislative landslides forever and ever while his cartoonish strawman liberals crumple. It's the equivalent of screaming into the crowd "HELL YEAH GUYS! OUR TEAM IS GONNA WIN THIS YEAR! HOO RAH!!! GO TEAM!!!!"

It is a perfect example of how American politics is a team sport, how politicians manipulate people like him into going this "My side is always good, and their side is always bad!". While the fools on the populist right get whipped up into a frenzy, their pockets get picked and America continues to stagnate.

Here comes Romney again! Defending Democrats even though everything they say about me they say about you.

No, it's not about "rah-rah!" It's about them being more wrong than an investor with Enron and Bernie Madoff.

It's the fact he said Clinton would win 340-198 on election day and now with no evidence says Trump virtually has no chance to win the election if he even makes it to 2020.

99% of political pundits should've been fired on November 9th for their terrible "predictions."

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

I recognised Clinton was historically unpopular months before the election. The election was a contest if two historically unpopular candidates and  whoever the news cycle focused on would see their poll numbers drop. Clinton was unlucky that she got the focus at the end. That's why it was close.

- "Historically unpopular months before the election"
- Predicted she'd win 340-198 on the day of the election

what the heck how did you do that

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

I didn't waste my time making a new prediction for Atlas I just got a prediction from a few weeks ago. But honestly it's pathetic that you can only nitpick my predictions instead if actually defend Trump's record.

You mean Trump's record of winning elections which is flawless?

Look at this picture: https://i.imgur.com/6Z9QQj3.jpg

This pretty much sums up Trump denialists.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

I didn't waste my time making a new prediction for Atlas I just got a prediction from a few weeks ago. But honestly it's pathetic that you can only nitpick my predictions instead if actually defend Trump's record.

You mean Trump's record of winning elections which is flawless?

Look at this picture: https://i.imgur.com/6Z9QQj3.jpg

This pretty much sums up Trump denialists.

No one is denying Trump beat the odds.

People were saying he wouldn't win the nomination even when he was on top of polls for 6 months straight.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

Trump did better than expected, but let's not forget he barely won against Hillary Clinton and lost the popular vote by millions of votes, and this was with the Comey letter and Wikileaks hacking the Clinton campaign. Yes, other factors played an important role too but he didn't run a brilliant campaign or win some Reaganesque landslide.

The fact he won despite not running a brilliant campaign doesn't make you step back and ask questions?

Shouldn't the fact he only spent less than $5 a vote in 2016 not ring any alarm bells? What if he doubles his spending in 2020?

David beat Goliath, and you're nitpicking the fact David needed a sling to do it.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

I didn't waste my time making a new prediction for Atlas I just got a prediction from a few weeks ago. But honestly it's pathetic that you can only nitpick my predictions instead if actually defend Trump's record.

You mean Trump's record of winning elections which is flawless?

Look at this picture: https://i.imgur.com/6Z9QQj3.jpg

This pretty much sums up Trump denialists.

Sadly the imgur link isnt working

Are you sure? I checked it in another browser and it's working fine.

Basically it's a list of "Trump doesn't have a chance" posts Nate Silver made, with the ending showing him on election night admitting Trump will win.

I can't find a non-imgur source, but it's similar to this: https://2static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Nate+silver+the+wrongest+man+in+history_f16f69_5909611.jpg

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

Trump did better than expected, but let's not forget he barely won against Hillary Clinton and lost the popular vote by millions of votes, and this was with the Comey letter and Wikileaks hacking the Clinton campaign. Yes, other factors played an important role too but he didn't run a brilliant campaign or win some Reaganesque landslide.

The fact he won despite not running a brilliant campaign doesn't make you step back and ask questions?

Shouldn't the fact he only spent less than $5 a vote in 2016 not ring any alarm bells? What if he doubles his spending in 2020?

David beat Goliath, and you're nitpicking the fact David needed a sling to do it.

"David beat Goliath" because outside forces broke one of Goliath's legs at the last minute.

If that's the case then David was blinded, his legs cut off, and given a faulty weapon (in other words: the Access Hollywood tape).

Not to mention Goliath brought a ton more weapons and armor to the fight (campaign cash + super PACs).

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

David had time to recover, Goliath got crippled right before the fight. Trump had time to recover, Hillary got Comey'ed right before the election. Its not a fair comparison. Had Comey happend in September, then you'd have a point.

- A dozen plus women accuse him of sexual assault
- "Had time to recover"

Pick one.

Not to mention the Comey letter was 100% her fault anyway. She was told the e-mail server was going to be a problem but she thought she was so invincible it wouldn't matter.

Let's not rewrite history and act like Clinton was the underdog here lol.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

No one is saying she was. But you cant deny that without Comey, Hillary might very well be president right now.

But if you take away Comey you have to take away the Access Hollywood tape to be fair. After that it's a toss-up.

Plus, outside factors happen all the time. You think Romney expected the 47% tape for example?

She had all the advantages in the world. REPUBLICANS were trying to help her win. She had a gajillion Super PACs. She spent over $1.2 billion. She had the "best ground game" and "data operation" of all time. Trump on the other hand had an annoyingly frugal campaign and kept shoving his foot in his mouth.

It's like having the 1992 Dream Team lose 4 games to 3 against Kentucky then complaining about a missed foul call. Should've never came down to that in the first place.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

No you dont. Your being intellectually dishonest if you dont think timing was a factor. Im just gonna put you on ignore cause this is dumb.

So you want to take away Clinton's October surprise but not Trump's? That's not fair at all, and you always forget the fake sexual assault accusers that came out during the entire month of October.

Comey's letter would've never happened too if Clinton wasn't so arrogant. And if that is truly what made her lost then she sucks as a candidate. Obama wouldn't have lost if something like that happened to him in 2012.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

Comey's letter wouldn't have happened if Comey had followed standard DOJ procedure and treated it like he treated the FBI investigation of Trump-Russia, in not publicly commenting on it.

The "Trump-Russia" BS was never commented on because Trump wasn't supposed to win.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

No you dont. Your being intellectually dishonest if you dont think timing was a factor. Im just gonna put you on ignore cause this is dumb.

So you want to take away Clinton's October surprise but not Trump's? That's not fair at all, and you always forget the fake sexual assault accusers that came out during the entire month of October.

Comey's letter would've never happened too if Clinton wasn't so arrogant. And if that is truly what made her lost then she sucks as a candidate. Obama wouldn't have lost if something like that happened to him in 2012.

To be fair, removing both october surprises puts us in the position we were in after the 1st debate, where HRC was winning by a decent amount due to the debate win. There would be some reversion to the mean, but without Comey AND without Access Hollywood she still wins the election.

Trump would have came back after the debates no matter what.

History is being re-written in real time to make it look like Hillary was the underdog lololol.

- On the day of the election, Hillary Clinton was going to win 340-198
- Now it's she was a "historically unpopular candidate"

Can anyone connect point A to point B for me plz?

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

the fake sexual assault accusers that came out during the entire month of October.

You were in the room with them and Trump?

They came out a month before the election and disappeared right after.

Also I am surprised it's not mentioned more that the Democrats tried to use sexual assault as a political weapon.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

Comey's letter wouldn't have happened if Comey had followed standard DOJ procedure and treated it like he treated the FBI investigation of Trump-Russia, in not publicly commenting on it.

The "Trump-Russia" BS was never commented on because Trump wasn't supposed to win.

First of all it's much more serious that the Trump campaign may have colluded with Russia than a nothing-burger of emails with no new info. And that's no way to judge it, Comey should have applied the same standard to both candidates rather than thinking "Clinton's sure to win, so I can break DOJ procedure and publicly undermine her days before the election."

If Trump would have lost as expected then the "Trump-Russia" BS would've been dropped.

The Democrats tested 2 things - Trump-Russia and Trump-sexual assault and saw that no one cared about Trump and Russia so they went with the sexual assault/Access Hollywood tape route. Why did no one care about Russia? Funnily enough, for the same reason Obama said in 2012 - the Cold War has been over for 25 years.

Trump was NOT being investigated for Russian ties, that's why it was never mentioned. It was only until he won that this BS started.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

I thought Trump would be more unpopular, and to be fair even in the prediction made in October before Comey I only got the PV margin wrong by 3%, a similar error to the one you made yourself.

On election day you said Clinton was going to win 340-198. Listen I know it soiunds like I am singling you out but I am just confused on how she was historically unpopular and this awful candidate and Trump was always expected to win yet 90% of people picked Clinton on election day.

I've been seeing a TON of "I always knew Trump was going to win" after the election.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

It's wrong and stupid to dismiss the seriousness of foreign interference in a US election just because of petty partisanship.

In 2012 the Democrats said Romney wasn't qualified to be President because of his anti-Russian comments.

Now you're telling me Russia is the new Soviet Union.

For one thing, countries get involved in our government/politics all the time. Second of all, Russia barely cares about Trump, and Trump barely cares about Russia.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

If Hillary Clinton had colluded with Russia to hack the RNC and Trump campaign and this enabled her to win the election despite losing the popular vote by 2%, and then she obstructed justice by firing the FBI Director who was investigating said collusion. In that scenario Republicans would have already impeached her and be crying out for blood.

The FBI hasn't even investigated the servers. The DNC wouldn't let them.

Not to mention if you look at the timeline, the "Russian hacking" story makes no sense.

And anti-Trump protesters were always waving the Mexican flag, and the DNC had a Mexican national speak at their convention. See what I am saying now?

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

The "Russian collusion" story has officially jumped the shark.

Now they're saying they used "Pokemon Go" as a way to influence the election lmao!

http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/12/media/dont-shoot-us-russia-pokemon-go/index.html

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

Roger Stone, a close friend of Trump and noted 'ratf***er' knew the Russians were coming for Podesta months in advance.

Nope. That's a myth. That's an Adam Schiff lie - Stone never said that.

See? You drink the Kool-Aid phenomenally well.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

Why, if Trump is innocent, does he act like he is guilty rather than let the process run its course?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

- The Democrats - https://twitter.com/thedemocrats/status/260497619862835201

You must be logged in to read this quote.

- Barack Obama at the 2012 DNC - http://www.npr.org/2012/09/06/160713941/transcript-president-obamas-convention-speech

You must be logged in to read this quote.

-  Barack Obama during 2012 Presidential debate https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QS2a44F5TgM)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The DNC even made a poster mocking Romney about watching Rocky IV to get his foreign policy: https://theintercept.com/wp-uploads/sites/1/2016/09/romneykerry.jpg

- John Kerry at the 2012 DNC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgUyqLrgO7Q

You must be logged in to read this quote.

- Then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Romney's views on Russia http://www.redstate.com/erick/2014/03/04/hillary-clinton-mocked-romney-on-russia-then-goes-to-hitler-comparisons/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

-  Then VP Joe Biden http://www.politico.com/story/2012/04/biden-assails-mocks-romney-on-foreign-policy-075653

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

Why would the Russians go to such lengths to influence the election if they didn't want Trump to win? They interfered to help Trump, that's the CIA's verdict, not mine, as he was their preferred candidate.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/07/world/europe/putin-calls-missile-deal-more-likely-if-obama-wins.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hillary Clinton 2012:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303836404577475061208876588

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

Russia became a greater threat since 2012 with its aggression in the Crimea and Ukraine. And I never approved of what Obama and the Democrats said and they were wrong about Romney, indeed Mitt Romney, while wrong on many issues, was right on that and unlike Trump fit to serve and would have been a much better President.

See people? Earlier in this thread I said Democrats are going to rewrite history on how they treated Russia and Romney in 2012 and here it is. Here is the proof I was right.

Notice to see he says Russia wasn't a "threat" in 2012 despite the fact Russia invaded Georgia in 2008, Putin allegedly killed journalists all throughout the 00s (Obama was never asked about that like Trump), AND the fact they hacked us before.

Also, what did the former governor of Massachusetts see in Russia that our Commander-in-Chief, TWO Secretary of States, and our Vice President could not see?

What the hell was Obama doing those eight years? Oh that's right - golfing, smoking cigars, giving medals to celebrities, making stupid Buzzfeed videos for YouTube, and inviting wanna-be clock bombers to the White House.

Thank god Clinton didn't win. If she was saying "trade with Russia is a win-win" in 2012 only to be fooled by them not even 2 years later then Trump was truly the right choice.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

Diplomatic praise is not the same as actively hacking an opponent's campaign to advance your preferred candidate, likely with illegal collusion from that preferred candidate and their campaign.

The New York Times literally said Putin was getting involved in the election and praised Obama and you still deny it. BTW, Putin praised Obama FAR more in 2012 than he did for Trump in 2016. The Democrats in 2012 were far more pro-Russia than Trump was.

Heh.

You sound like one of those wackjobs during the primaries who claimed Trump was working with Hillary Clinton to get her elected. It's like you guys can't accept defeat so you make excuses on why Trump kicked your ass.

[60+ GOP Seats After 2018 GUARANTEED]

What we have found out so far is just the tip of the iceberg but already it looks very bad for Trump.

So where did Roger Stone say anything about Podesta and Russian hacking?

Stone was referring to the fact that Podesta's Russian connections would be revealed, and they were.