More people are voting against Trump and Clinton than for them

[#TheShadowyAbyss]

I know this was kind of obvious but still thought I'd post it. Wish Time would use a more credible polling agency than Reuters though.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://time.com/4321059/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-poll/

[President Freedom]

No, most people are just blindly partisan.

[Meclazine for Israel]

That is an interesting topic TSA.

There is no question that the majority of my interest in the USA election is to observe the repulsion of democratic voters towards Trump and republican voters towards Clinton.

That observation is clear.

And I can see what both groups are saying. They both have legitimate arguments against the opposition candidate.

But is the lack of positive affirmation towards their own candidate not simply a reflection of the acidic social media addicts of 2016 rather than real life where people have real discussions about what they like.

It's easier to type online that you dont like someone's policies.

No one is going to come in here and write "Cannot wait for Mexico to pay for the wall" without copping a spray.

[TJ in Oregon]

That is an interesting topic TSA.

There is no question that the majority of my interest in the USA election is to observe the repulsion of democratic voters towards Trump and republican voters towards Clinton.

That observation is clear.

And I can see what both groups are saying. They both have legitimate arguments against the opposition candidate.

But is the lack of positive affirmation towards their own candidate not simply a reflection of the acidic social media addicts of 2016 rather than real life where people have real discussions about what they like.

It's easier to type online that you dont like someone's policies.

No one is going to come in here and write "Cannot wait for Mexico to pay for the wall" without copping a spray.

Social media has been prominent for the last three presidential cycles and none have been nearly as negative as this one. The two options legitimately do suck worse than in previous years.

[This account no longer in use.]

Oh wow, a less than 10% gap. Utterly shocking.

[Ronnie]

I think Hillary's unpopularity has a lot to do with the non-stop blather about her emails, and the fact that she was juxtaposed with a cranky, yet likable and grandfatherly old guy over the past year.  Once the general gets into full swing, I expect her numbers to improve, just because people will see that Trump's problems are far worse than hers.

[IceSpear]

I think Hillary's unpopularity has a lot to do with the non-stop blather about her emails, and the fact that she was juxtaposed with a cranky, yet likable and grandfatherly old guy over the past year.  Once the general gets into full swing, I expect her numbers to improve, just because people will see that Trump's problems are far worse than hers.

"Think"?

She was the most popular politician in the country until the media decided they needed to cut her down to size and fulfill their vendetta, along with creating the horse race they were so desperate for (gotta get that sweet, sweet ad revenue!) Thus, "emailgate" was born and the relentless and perpetual spamming of it has led to her current ratings.

Funnily enough, the media has now started to backpedal and rarely talks about the emails while constantly slamming Trump, as they've realized their recklessness may have paved the road for a quasi-fascist demagogue to be president (they would've kept the emails going had a media darling like Rubio won the nomination, which is why she would have been a heavy underdog in that scenario.) At least he's not a "corrupt criminal about to be indicted" after all! Unfortunately for the media (and all anti-Trumpers), there's no putting the genie back in the bottle. They've legitimized him by painting Hillary as "just as bad" all throughout 2015 and early 2016.

[Coolface Sock #42069]

I think Hillary's unpopularity has a lot to do with the non-stop blather about her emails, and the fact that she was juxtaposed with a cranky, yet likable and grandfatherly old guy over the past year.  Once the general gets into full swing, I expect her numbers to improve, just because people will see that Trump's problems are far worse than hers.

"Think"?

She was the most popular politician in the country until the media decided they needed to cut her down to size and fulfill their vendetta, along with creating the horse race they were so desperate for (gotta get that sweet, sweet ad revenue!) Thus, "emailgate" was born and the relentless and perpetual spamming of it has led to her current ratings.

Funnily enough, the media has now started to backpedal and rarely talks about the emails while constantly slamming Trump, as they've realized their recklessness may have paved the road for a quasi-fascist demagogue to be president (they would've kept the emails going had a media darling like Rubio won the nomination, which is why she would have been a heavy underdog in that scenario.) At least he's not a "corrupt criminal about to be indicted" after all! Unfortunately for the media (and all anti-Trumpers), there's no putting the genie back in the bottle. They've legitimized him by painting Hillary as "just as bad" all throughout 2015 and early 2016.

I agree with you except for one thing:

Imagine a scenario where Hillary and Rubio are both nominated. After the DNC takes place, Rubio is consistently ahead by 6-7 points in the polls. Do you not think the media would begin trying to go after Rubio in order to create a closer contest and make more money?

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

I think Hillary's unpopularity has a lot to do with the non-stop blather about her emails, and the fact that she was juxtaposed with a cranky, yet likable and grandfatherly old guy over the past year.  Once the general gets into full swing, I expect her numbers to improve, just because people will see that Trump's problems are far worse than hers.

"Think"?

She was the most popular politician in the country until the media decided they needed to cut her down to size and fulfill their vendetta, along with creating the horse race they were so desperate for (gotta get that sweet, sweet ad revenue!) Thus, "emailgate" was born and the relentless and perpetual spamming of it has led to her current ratings.

Funnily enough, the media has now started to backpedal and rarely talks about the emails while constantly slamming Trump, as they've realized their recklessness may have paved the road for a quasi-fascist demagogue to be president (they would've kept the emails going had a media darling like Rubio won the nomination, which is why she would have been a heavy underdog in that scenario.) At least he's not a "corrupt criminal about to be indicted" after all! Unfortunately for the media (and all anti-Trumpers), there's no putting the genie back in the bottle. They've legitimized him by painting Hillary as "just as bad" all throughout 2015 and early 2016.

They've also legitimized him by refusing to acknowledge his idiotic adolescent bullsh**t for what it is. Following his announcement speech, he should have gotten the exact same sort of coverage as Vermin Supreme or David Duke, but instead they treated him as a serious part of the conversation.

Don't sit down for chess with a pigeon, and say, "It's fine that he's a pigeon, I don't mind". That makes it very difficult to object later when it turns out that he doesn't know how to play, and just knocks over pieces while sh**tting on the board.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Ice makes an interesting point about media and manipulation.

That got me thinking that Trump could really kill this if he successfully sets up the media to follow his campaign without being as offensive as he was in round 1.

He needs to relax and come off as more Presidential.

The May 17 thing with Megyn Kelly was an example.

If he can get those style of media appearances going once a fortnight plus the debates, that will keep the focus on him.

Then he will receive more votes.

Hillary needs to really get on top of the media to help avoid Trump taking centre stage.

[Angrie]

What do you expect at a time when trust in literally all of America's institutions is at an all time low, and then the two major political parties go and nominate the least popular candidates that they can find?

[IceSpear]

I think Hillary's unpopularity has a lot to do with the non-stop blather about her emails, and the fact that she was juxtaposed with a cranky, yet likable and grandfatherly old guy over the past year.  Once the general gets into full swing, I expect her numbers to improve, just because people will see that Trump's problems are far worse than hers.

"Think"?

She was the most popular politician in the country until the media decided they needed to cut her down to size and fulfill their vendetta, along with creating the horse race they were so desperate for (gotta get that sweet, sweet ad revenue!) Thus, "emailgate" was born and the relentless and perpetual spamming of it has led to her current ratings.

Funnily enough, the media has now started to backpedal and rarely talks about the emails while constantly slamming Trump, as they've realized their recklessness may have paved the road for a quasi-fascist demagogue to be president (they would've kept the emails going had a media darling like Rubio won the nomination, which is why she would have been a heavy underdog in that scenario.) At least he's not a "corrupt criminal about to be indicted" after all! Unfortunately for the media (and all anti-Trumpers), there's no putting the genie back in the bottle. They've legitimized him by painting Hillary as "just as bad" all throughout 2015 and early 2016.

I agree with you except for one thing:

Imagine a scenario where Hillary and Rubio are both nominated. After the DNC takes place, Rubio is consistently ahead by 6-7 points in the polls. Do you not think the media would begin trying to go after Rubio in order to create a closer contest and make more money?

Yeah, most likely. Their first priority is a horse race, so they need to bring down anyone polling too far ahead. After that is accomplished they pick their horse. Unfortunately, due to the fact that they force it to be close, it's very possible Trump could win even if he's slightly trailing going into election day. This was kind of shown in 2012. Obama was a media darling, but they didn't want the election to be a predictable and boring easy win either, so they were very conflicted. Anyone who believes there could be a Goldwater/Mondale-esque landslide in this day and age is silly. The media will never allow it.

Actually, I've thought Hillary would win by about 5 points or so for years. Only for a brief window did I change my prediction (around SC when I thought Rubio would win the nomination from all the media love until right before Super Tuesday) where I had her losing Kerry style. Perhaps massive underdog was an exaggeration. She might have been able to pull it out solely due to muh demographics, but yeah, I would not have been optimistic at all.