Donald Trump

[ecureilx]

If he gets into White House, I'm subscribing to whatever channel that wins his daily airtime rights.

I am not so much of a fan of US Politics, but Trumps call to rid the country of cheap foreigners (Mexicans and all and sundry) seem to be pulling the votes of the poor whites and blacks (so to say) - who's jobs had been getting taken over by the illegal immigrants et al.

You never know, the poor may be holding the deciding vote, come election day - poor who have no interest in Trump's foreign policies or how many religions he offended or which country he's gonna go to war with.

[x9200]

"I wrote this out, and it's very close to my heart," he said at the outset of his remarks on Buffalo on Monday evening. "Because I was down there and I watched our police and our firemen down at 7/11, down at the World Trade Center right after it came down. And I saw the greatest people I've ever seen in action." The businessman did not correct himself.
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/18/polit ... index.html

[PNGMK]

In The Australian the other day the editor pointed out that less than 42% of voters are not dependent on a government salary or pension or payment and are actual nett tax contributors (a significant number of wage earners in Australia receive tax funded benefits and are nett takers from the system). He argued that the nett payers should be the only ones with a vote or democracy will simply continue to work against the taxpayer. I think the same of Trump; if you're in the USA and you don't contribute you don't get a vote. That would most likely wipe Trump out.

[Barnsley]

In The Australian the other day the editor pointed out that less than 42% of voters are not dependent on a government salary or pension or payment and are actual nett tax contributors (a significant number of wage earners in Australia receive tax funded benefits and are nett takers from the system). He argued that the nett payers should be the only ones with a vote or democracy will simply continue to work against the taxpayer. I think the same of Trump; if you're in the USA and you don't contribute you don't get a vote. That would most likely wipe Trump out.

Makes it rather simple to disenfranchise people though....

That should be the "fun" of democracy the too and fro of the politics and economics.

The system is already rigged in favour of the few , and without largescale revolution its impossible to have meaningful change in democratic countries.

[JR8]

Meanwhile it looks like Trump cleaned up, taking the GOP nomination in every district of NY.
https://mishtalk.com/2016/04/19/trump-r ... ompletely/
'Trump Romps and Stomps in New York; Cruz May Be Shutout Completely'

https://mishtalk.com/2016/04/20/piss-po ... more-37167
'Piss Poor Analysis by Financial Times, Nate Silver, Others, on Trump’s Chances of Winning

[Barnsley]

Meanwhile it looks like Trump cleaned up, taking the GOP nomination in every district of NY.
https://mishtalk.com/2016/04/19/trump-r ... ompletely/
'Trump Romps and Stomps in New York; Cruz May Be Shutout Completely'

https://mishtalk.com/2016/04/20/piss-po ... more-37167
'Piss Poor Analysis by Financial Times, Nate Silver, Others, on Trump’s Chances of Winning

I just looked at Huffington Post front page , and it seems Trump won every district and thus the popular vote, whereas Clinton won the popular vote but seemed to only with in the big urban areas in New York State.

She only won 4 districts according to Huffington Post website .... is that a mandate?

[Barnsley]

!

[BBCWatcher]

Trump may have narrowly lost one district in New York (the 12th Congressional District, to John Kasich) as I write this, although he certainly did quite well statewide. He'll probably end up with 90 delegates out of the 95 available.

Each Congressional district awards 3 delegates. In the 12th Trump probably got one delegate and Kasich two, so he doesn't come away empty handed even if he loses a district. In a very few other districts Trump didn't get at least 50% of the vote, so Kasich gets one delegate to Trump's two. Otherwise, in the vast majority of districts, Trump hit 50% and gets all three delegates. So that's how the math works to get 90 out of 95. (Cruz gets zero since he was weaker than Kasich in New York.)

As the vote counting is slightly adjusted for mathematical errors and such, Trump might end up with 89 or 91 delegates, but no matter how you look at it he did extremely well in New York.

Kasich was long ago mathematically eliminated from winning an outright majority of delegates to the Republican Party's nominating convention. After New York, Cruz is on the cusp of being mathematically eliminated from an outright majority and surely will be, soon. Trump still has a rather good chance of winning an outright majority of delegates, although if that does happen it won't happen until the last group of states votes in June, including especially California. Both Cruz and Kasich are trying to keep Trump under an outright majority since that's the only possible way Trump could be denied the nomination. (Well, the only plausibly possible way, at least.)

[JR8]

So.... Trump is on track to win.
Gonna be interesting times.

[BBCWatcher]

So.... Trump is on track to win.

That's a bit hard to determine. Trump will certainly go into the Republican Convention with the most delegates. Whether he goes into the Convention with an outright majority of delegates is still to be determined and won't be known until after the last states vote on June 7. Mathematically Trump cannot hit an outright majority until then. It's still possible before then that Trump could be mathematically eliminated from an outright majority.

Various prognosticators have looked at this and the basic summary, even after New York, is "We don't know -- it could go either way." If Trump misses an outright majority it'll be a close miss, and if he wins an outright majority it'll be a close win.

Having an outright majority of pledged delegates means, barring quite implausible scenarios, Trump wins his party's nomination on the first convention ballot. If Trump doesn't have an outright majority of pledged delegates he could still win a first ballot. (There's a small pool of unpledged delegates on the first ballot.) If Trump doesn't win a first ballot he could still win a subsequent ballot. Or not. And of course winning your party's nomination doesn't mean you've won the presidency. A Candidate Trump would face (most likely) Candidate Clinton in the general election in November.

"Stay tuned."

[JR8]

Yes yes, I used to live there, I know, as I'm sure do others. About the precise ins and outs, the prognostications and nuances...

Meanwhile, here we are, most people with 30 seconds to hear an opinion and stay listening.

i.e. Get to the point, I haven't time to read the acres that you write... that's if you're expecting to invite debate of course.

[nakatago]

Get to the point, I haven't time to read the acres that you write...

[x9200]

Me ehem, ehem too.

[PNGMK]

Yes yes, I used to live there, I know, as I'm sure do others. About the precise ins and outs, the prognostications and nuances...

Meanwhile, here we are, most people with 30 seconds to hear an opinion and stay listening.

i.e. Get to the point, I haven't time to read the acres that you write... that's if you're expecting to invite debate of course.

You're so mean sometimes JR8...!

[maneo]

Trumps call to rid the country of cheap foreigners (Mexicans and all and sundry) seem to be pulling the votes of the poor whites and blacks (so to say) - who's jobs had been getting taken over by the illegal immigrants et al.

The irony is that most of those "illegal immigrants" are doing jobs that no legal US resident wants to do for the wages that US consumers are willing to support, or even to do at all (i.e. really hard work, like in the fields).

Further irony is that if this supply of affordable labour is impacted, then prices of basic food items will go up, hurting the poor the most.

Every "fix" creates at least a couple new problems.
In this case the new problems will likely be worse than what is being "fixed."