| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| End of the Line for the 'Never-Trump' Brigade? |
| 2016-04-25 |
| h/t Instapundit [PJMedia] Nate Silver, whose predictions for the 2012 presidential race turned out to be spot-on, has some bad news for the Trump-bashers: Donald Trump has had a good run of numbers lately. While his victory in New York this week was expected, he got 60 percent of the vote, more than the roughly 55 percent projected by the polls. He appears headed for victories in Maryland and Pennsylvania, which vote on Tuesday. He’s gained ground in California and is narrowly ahead of Ted Cruz in the first public polls of Indiana. He’s added about 2 percentage points over the past two weeks in our national polling average. You could push back against some of these details. Some of the California polls come from pollsters that have had a Trump-leaning house effect or that used an unorthodox methodology. The Indiana polls have Trump leading, but with only about 39 percent of the vote, which might not be enough if the rest of the vote consolidates behind Cruz. The national poll gains are small and may just be statistical noise. But with Trump’s path to 1,237 delegates on such a knife’s edge, every percentage point matters. And it’s possible that Trump has moved a few voters into his column with a series of process arguments that he’s been pressing recently. The more restrained version, as you can see in a recent op-ed published under Trump’s name in The Wall Street Journal, is that the candidate who gets the most votes should be the Republican nominee -- that delegates shouldn’t upend the people’s verdict. In public speeches, Trump has taken the argument a step further, describing the GOP’s nomination process as "rigged" and "crooked." Polling suggests that a majority of Republicans agree with at least the milder version of Trump’s argument... |
| Posted by:g(r)omgoru |
| #4 TW - The reason that the Republican party is in such a sad state is that they have been able to sell us terrible candidates on the basis of their not being as bad as the alternative. For me, that is no longer enough. |
| Posted by: Iblis 2016-04-25 21:41 |
| #3 I feel like I've been putting my finger in the dike for a while, while the water goes from my ankles to my knees to my 'nads, and I don't think Trump brand grout is going to work, nor do I have any good expectations for Hillary Brand Flooding. Our planet is doomed, Doomed, to go Forward, Not Backward, Upward, not Forward, and Twirling, Twirling, twirling towards Freedom... oh well. |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2016-04-25 20:46 |
| #2 In the general election a principled conservative, like the rest of us, must vote according to his calculation of what will do the least harm to the nation for at least the next four years -- whether voting for the Democratic Party's candidate or the Republican Party's... or withholding his presidential vote and just casting his vote for Congresscritters and state and local candidates and issues. Sometimes it's about winning the war amd getting to march in the parades, sometimes it's just about being the little Dutch boy with his finger in the dike -- cold, wet, terrifying, but stubbornly refusing to let the ocean flood in. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2016-04-25 20:39 |
| #1 Why would this be the end of the line? He either gets the nomination or he doesn't. Doesn't mean any principled conservative would vote for him in the general election. |
| Posted by: Iblis 2016-04-25 17:41 |