Izabrat će Hillary.
Amerikanci su ili prosječno retardiran narod ili im namještaju te elektronske izbore. Davno sam u njih izgubio nadu, iako je net prepun tih Amerikanaca "koji sve kuže".

I kako si izvukao regionalnu podršku odavde?

A tu je to negdje uvijek gusto bude. Ja ozbiljno sumnjam da se izbori u USA lažiraju. Ne mislim na financiranje podobnih kandidata i medije, već konkretno na to elektronsko prebrojavanje glasova.

Da nema šanse, vjerojatno ne bi imao niti kampanju. Otkuda ti ova tvrdnja?

Kasich je jedina dobra zamjena u slučaju da Bush falšuje.

A koji je dokaz za to? Ionako imaš 3-4 države u kojima bi ta krađa imala smisla.

Zvučiš kao US novinar 1973. kad je napadao ljude da su ludi, nacisti i izmišljaju da postoji izraelski lobi u USA. Nikad se nisu ljudima ispričali kad je izraelski lobi odlučio izaći iz ormara.

Kasich nema šanse trenutno biti predsjednički kandidat Republikanaca unatoč našem wishfull thinkingu. S obzirom da je jak u bitnom swing stateu (Ohio) ima doduše jaku šansu za biti kandidat za potpredsjednika SADa (uz činjenicu da je jedan od rijetkih koji se nisu zamjerili Trumpu dosad i koji je dosad iskazao poštovanje prema Trumpu)
.
Jeb Bush puši i u svojoj vlastitoj državi (Floridi) od Trumpa po anketama, a Trump je pojedinačno najjači u svim bitnim državama SADa izuzev upravo Ohio-a.

Ukratko Republican ticket 2016 - Trump - Kashic kako sada stvari stoje. Dalje ćemo vidjeti.
Na nacionalnoj razini itekako Trump ima šanse. Hilldog je prije dva mjeseca imala prednost od gotovo 30% pred njim, po najnovijim anketama su izjednačeni sa Trumpovom tendencijom rasta, osobito među populacijom Latinoamerikanaca koji će očito biti jezičak prevage (Hilldog uvjerljivo dobiva među crncima i dalekoistočnim useljenicima, Trump uvjerljiv među bijelcima).

Pojava Trumpa i njegov rast popularnosti samo govori o tome koliko su Ameri (osobito republikanci) siti političke korektnosti i korupcije među političkom elitom.

Pa recimo iz tvojih podataka za New Hampshire ili za Ohio.

Zadre, dobrodošo nazad.

Kako god. Ankete nekih 450 dana prije izbora nisu nikakav pokazatelj. Treba se sjetit ranijih anketa. Da su one bile točne, nebismo gledali npr. McCaina u izbornoj utrci i brojne druge kandidate. Trump je trend. Giuliani je 2008. imao veće vodstvo nego što Trump ima sada, u isto vrijeme (tako negdje, godina ili više od izbora).

Dobro, ako se i dogodi čudo da Kashic ostvari pobjedu bilo gdje van Ohioa to mu učvršćuje poziciju, no trenutno Trump je safe bet.

Ne bih donio nikakve zaključke po anketama. Jer izbori u svim saveznim državama nisu otvoreni (open primaries; ne znam hrv. prijevod). Negdje mogu glasovati svi, negdje samo članovi stranke, a negdje se glasuje 'po naški'. Ukratko - ankete ne daju informacije o preferencijama članova stranke. Tako da nam ove ankete malo toga govore.

Ankete na New Hampshir su relevantne, jer su tamo izbori otvoreni.

Jasno, no ne može se negirati da Trump ipak ima najveće rallye zasad - po par desetaka tisuća ljudi na svakom. Drugima je trenutno stvaranje takve srži uvjerenih birača nemoguća misija.

Ako se ne krade ni u jednok zapadnoj državi, pa ni u Rusiji, zašto bi se kralo u kolijevci demokracije? Imaš li bilo kakav dokaz za svoju tvrdnju, pogotovo za krađu s demokratske strane.

@Zadar, jako dobra analiza. Dodao bih da Trumpu ide u korist što ovaj put nema crnog kandidata pa će izlaznost afroameričke populacije biti daleko manja.

Izabrat će Hillary.
Amerikanci su ili prosječno retardiran narod ili im namještaju te elektronske izbore. Davno sam u njih izgubio nadu, iako je net prepun tih Amerikanaca "koji sve kuže".

Establishment Republicans aren't the only ones with reason to worry



Over the past month, as Donald Trump’s campaign for the Republican nomination has captured national attention for his blowhard-y comments, personal insults, and rising poll numbers, liberal commentators have rejoiced. As long as the Trump train keeps rolling, the argument goes, Democrats emerge as the real victors as Republicans grow more fractious. Weeks ago when Trump signaled he would consider running as a third-party candidate if he failed to win the Republican nomination, it was music to the ears of the left. While it is true that a Trump independent run would guarantee a presidential victory for Hillary Clinton in 2016, the long-term damage Trump could cause for the Democratic Party could be severe.

Consider the past. In 1948, Strom Thurmond broke with the Democrats and ran as a third-party Dixiecrat against Harry Truman, who encouraged civil rights legislation and desegregated the military. Thurmond spoke for millions of people when he declared on May 10 in Jackson, Mississippi, “All the laws of Washington, and all the bayonets of the Army, cannot force the Negro into our homes, our schools, our churches, and our places of recreation.” Thurmond’s campaign was a nightmare for Truman and the Democratic establishment. Most thought the Republican nominee, Thomas Dewey, would win, but Truman squeaked out a close victory, no thanks to Thurmond who split the party. Thurmond won four southern states, but was trounced outside of the South. But in his loss, he gave a new, powerful voice to the radical right in the South – one that united white supremacy, anticommunism, and anti-New Deal sentiment into a unified ideology that undermined the liberal state over the next two decades.

Sixteen years later, Barry Goldwater secured the Republican nomination for President. He ran as an outsider, a conservative purist out of vogue with the moderate approach of the Republican leadership. But Goldwater captured the imagination of conservatives across the country, promising them a return to pure capitalism and traditional values. Lyndon Johnson hammered him in the presidential election, inspiring political commentators from the left and right to draw up the last will and testament of the Republican Party. But rather than its end, Goldwater’s loss cemented a new generation of conservative activists within the Republican Party, including Ronald Reagan. Goldwater’s loss underpinned a conservative resurgence.

In 1968, George Wallace ran as an independent presidential candidate, fanning the flames of racial hatred across the United States. Like Thurmond and Goldwater, Wallace lost by a wide margin, but he stoked fears and prejudices that still survive. Nixon tapped into these feelings as during his run too, but Wallace appealed to poor and lower middle-class whites in a way reminiscent of Strom Thurmond in 1948. In a television commercial, a voiceover asks, “Why are more millions and millions of Americans turning to Governor Wallace? Take a walk in your street or park tonight.” In the frame, a woman walks down a dark sidewalk, and someone shoots out the streetlight nearby. Appealing to white fears, Wallace linked together black criminality, urban rioting, communism, big government, and the alleged breakdown of traditional families into a powerful right-wing ideology that gripped American politics.

Trump’s candidacy is not without precedent. Similar campaigns have happened before, and the national media dismissed each at the time as insignificant. Democrats today would be wise to take Trump seriously. He won’t ever become President, but his impact on conservative America could run much deeper.

Sixty-five years ago, Arthur Schlesinger Jr., commenting in an article in the New York Times on “The Need for an Intelligent Opposition,” warned Democrats not to revel in the GOP’s troubles. “If a party becomes so feeble and confused that it turns into an object of public pity or contempt,” Schlesinger wrote, the result would be that “our whole political fabric suffers; the party itself disappears; and there is no guarantee that any new party which rises in its place will have a basic respect for constitutional processes and public order.” The same warning applies today.

T. Evan Faulkenbury is a PhD candidate in History, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Donald Trump Will ‘Make a Decision Very Soon’ on Third Party Bid



"I think a lot of people are going to be very happy," said Trump

(NASHVILLE, Tenn.) — Donald Trump will decide soon whether to mount a third party bid if he loses the Republican nomination for president, the real estate mogul said Saturday.

“I think over the next couple of weeks you’re going to see some things that are very interesting,” Trump said after a speech in Nashville to a gathering of tea party activists.

“We’re going to make a decision very soon,” he added, “and I think a lot of people are going to be very happy.”

Trump has so far refused to pledge to support the eventual Republican nominee, saying his refusal to commit gains him leverage over the party establishment, which has been caught off-guard by his early dominance in the race. He’s also said repeatedly that he’d prefer to run as a Republican as long as the party treats him fairly.

But to appear on the ballot in South Carolina and several other states, he’ll have to pledge to support the eventual nominee.

Trump was in Nashville to court tea party-leaning voters at a conference hosted by the National Federation of Republican Assemblies, which describes itself as “a grassroots movement to take back the Republican Party for the vast and disenfranchised majority of its members.”

With more than a year before the presidential election, Trump has been leading summertime polls. Many of his supporters’ sentiments align with those that fueled the tea party’s rise. Trump made clear Saturday that he welcomes tea party support.

“I love the tea party!” he told the crowd during a meandering, hourlong speech at a Christian music venue and skateboard park, making the case that they hadn’t been treated fairly.

“The tea party people are incredible people. These are people that work hard and they love the country and then they get just beat up all the time by the media,” he added. “You don’t know the power that you have.”

The event came the day after Trump held a glitzy $100-per-person campaign event — which he repeatedly insisted wasn’t a fundraiser — outside of Boston.

Trump said the money raised was only to offset the costs of the event and said people attending could choose to pay whatever they wanted.

But multiple signs posted at the property’s entrance and along a staffed check-in table told those arriving to “Please have cash ready or make checks payable to: Donald J. Trump for President, Inc.” Another read, “Entry Fee $100 Per Person.”

On Saturday, Trump expressed frustration that coverage of Friday’s event focused on the discrepancy.

“I got so angry at my people because somebody put up a sign saying $100,” he said.

Trump also defended a personal attack he launched Friday against Huma Abedin, a top aide to Democratic front-runner Hillary Rodham Clinton, who has been swept up in the controversy over Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state.

Trump again speculated that Abedin had shared classified information with her husband, former Congressman Anthony Weiner, who resigned after sending sexually explicit images of himself to women he’d met online.

A spokesman for Clinton’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment, but said in an emailed statement Friday that there “is no place for patently false, personal attacks towards a staff member” and that Trump “should be ashamed of himself.”

Charlie Sheen i Hulk Hogan su izjavili da žele biti Trumpovi running mate-ovi za potpredsjednika.

SIMI VALLEY, Calif. — Something unusual happened here Wednesday when the Republican presidential candidates met for their second debate: For the first time since he joined the race, Donald Trump wasn’t the commanding presence on the stage.

Not that Trump wasn’t the Trump whom Americans have seen nonstop on cable television. Among the first words out of his mouth was a personal and unprovoked attack on Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul. He sparred at times angrily with Carly Fiorina over who was the better business executive. He and Jeb Bush, standing next to each other, had repeated exchanges.

But at other times, particularly when the discussion shifted from what Trump has said about the others to issues of domestic and foreign policy, the candidate who has dominated the summer and leads the polls was far less a force.

Unlike the debate in Cleveland last month, the other candidates arrived with no illusions about Trump’s candidacy — they take him seriously now — or the need for them to step up and show their own mettle, both in challenging Trump and in displaying their own attributes, records and character.

Over three hours of lively, entertaining and at times angry debate, Trump was put on the defensive as much as he tried to stay on the offensive. Whether that will change the course of the nomination battle won’t be known for some weeks. After the last debate, despite missteps, Trump rose rather than fell. But Wednesday showed that his rivals are ready to engage him, when necessary, both from long distance and to his face.

This was billed in advance as the debate that would highlight the current state of the Republican race, one in which the outsiders — Trump, Ben Carson and Fiorina — enjoy more than 50 percent of support against the insiders — the eight current or former elected politicians. Instead, it became a classic of debates past — poke the front-runner. It was Trump against the field, or rather the field against Trump.

The ebb and flow of the debate, guided by CNN’s Jake Tapper with the help of CNN’s Dana Bash and conservative radio talk show host Hugh Hewitt, oscillated between personal exchanges, many of them with Trump involved, and discussions of issues.

When immigration came to the fore, Trump was at the center of the debate, defending his hard-line stance that calls for deporting the millions of undocumented immigrants and challenging the 14th Amendment over the issue of birthright citizenship.

Bush fired back at him over those proposals. He invoked Ronald Reagan’s optimistic vision in contrast to what he said was Trump’s approach “that everything is coming to an end.” He said Trump’s proposals would cost hundreds of billions of dollars and tear families and communities apart. Trump disputed Bush’s comment that those who have come illegally came out of an act of love. “This is not an act of love. He’s weak on immigration. He doesn’t get my vote.”

Trump and Fiorina clashed memorably several times. Once was over their business records, and it was as pointed and sharp as any during the evening. He accused her of running Hewlett-Packard into the ground. She accused him of running up “mountains of debt” and filing for bankruptcy four times.

The other exchange, one everyone was waiting for, came when Fiorina was asked about Trump’s comment, captured in a Rolling Stone profile, denigrating her looks by saying, “Look at that face!”

Trump had earlier explained that he was talking about her “persona,” not her looks. Asked about that, Fiorina said acidly, “I think women all over this country heard very clearly what Mr. Trump said.” The audience responded with one of the biggest rounds of applause of the night. Trump’s response: “She’s got a beautiful face, and I think she’s a beautiful woman.”

Fiorina was the new addition to the main debate stage, after her performance in the undercard debate in Cleveland, and she came with the clear intention of making a memorable impression. She got another applause-meter moment with a ringing statement about Planned Parenthood and sought to project strength and confidence surrounded by 10 men in suits and ties.

At times, others stepped forward. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, in danger after seeing his poll numbers plummet nationally and, critically, in Iowa, leapt into the conversation when the question on the table was whether Trump could be trusted with his hand on the nuclear codes. “We don’t need an apprentice in the White House,” Walker said. “We have one right now. . . . We don’t know who you are or where you’re going.”

One reason Trump seemed a less commanding presence was that on some issues, he offered little substance beyond reassurances that he would be strong and tough, a negotiator par excellence and someone who would grasp the complexities of national security issues as president — and would find experts to help him.

Challenged on how he would deal with the Russians putting military resources into Syria, he said he would know how to get along with Russian President Vladimir Putin, an answer that others seemed to find unsatisfying.

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, who displayed his fluidity with foreign policy, challenged him implicitly on how much he knew about the world, saying he would be happy to have a longer discussion of the issues to see the depth of Trump’s knowledge.

Rubio wasn’t the only one who had a moment. Ohio Gov. John Kasich and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz sparred over what to do with the Iran nuclear deal. Paul expressed his support for diplomacy over war in dealing with Iran.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie upbraided Trump and Fiorina for talking about their business records and said the candidates should instead focus on the lives of middle-class Americans.

Carson, the retired neurosurgeon, displayed the same low-key, sober demeanor that has found a growing audience over the past six weeks. And near the end, he showed humor, when he tweaked Trump for having called him “an okay doctor.” After Trump had spoken about vaccinations, Tapper asked Carson for his view of Trump’s ideas. “He’s an okay doctor,” Carson said.

Former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee defended his strong support for Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis for her resistance to giving marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

The prelude to Wednesday’s debate was strikingly different than the buildup before Cleveland. Then, many of the other candidates still were clinging to the belief — or hope — that Trump would quickly burn himself out, that his candidacy would prove a short-lived, if entertaining, sideshow.

By this month, that belief had disappeared. Trump’s continued strength atop the Republican field has forced all the others to rethink his potential and its impact on their hopes of winning the nomination. Some still believe he will sink under his own weight, and if they were not prepared to abandon their original strategies, they recognized that they had to make adjustments.

Last month’s debate in Cleveland marked the beginning of the end of a long exhibition season. Wednesday’s forum at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library signaled a turn to the post-Labor Day phase of the campaign that, historically, brings more intensive campaigning, more debates, sharper engagement and heightened stakes for the candidates.

It was clear throughout the evening that everyone on the stage understood what’s now at stake. Trump may continue to dominate the polls, but if Wednesday’s debate was any indication, he can expect a bumpier ride in the weeks and months ahead.