This article says much more eloquently than what I've been able to say how I'm approaching this election. http://aleteia.org/2016/03/18/polit...=mail&utm_content=NL_en-Mar 18, 2016 02:01 pm
Report: 46,000 Pa. Democrats Become Republicans Due To Trump PITTSBURGH (KDKA) – Nearly 46,000 Pennsylvania Democrats have switched to Republicans since the beginning of the year. According to Penn Live, some experts attribute the mass exodus to Donald Trump. There’s even a title for the movement. It’s called “Ditch and Switch” and calls for lifelong Democrats to abandon the party, register Republican, and help ensure Trump’s place in the general election. Professor of Public Affairs at Franklin and Marshall College, Dr. G. Terry Madonna, tells the paper he has a theory behind the switch. “With the increase in support in exit polls for Trump among working class, blue-collar Democrats, it is my belief that these are people who fall into that genre,” said Madonna. The numbers are similar in other states as well. The paper says in Massachusetts, as many as 20,000 Democrats have gone from blue-to-red this year with Trump cited as a primary reason. And in Ohio, as many as 1,000 blue collar workers have promised to switch parties and vote for Trump. http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2016/03/10/report-46000-pa-democrats-become-republicans-due-to-trump/
I'm probably jumping too far ahead, but I hope municipalities protect voting precincts because I'm too old for this garbage. I have never protested one thing in my life. I do with my vote.
Yeah - are they switching because they really want to vote for Trump, or because they want to give Hillary an easy win in November? Judging from every poll that has been taken on Trump vs. Hillary, I'd say probably the latter.
I was thinking the same thing. They are t switching because they like Trump.....they are switching to mess up the Republicans and give Hillary a win against Trump.
I actually like the sinister thinking. Back in 2008 I crossed parties and voted in the Democrat Primary. I actually voted for Hillary Clinton. I even canvassed for her so 0bama wouldn't win. Most of the doors I went to were 0bama supporters. I simply left a flyer at the doors and asked to them to vote for Clinton. Then in the fall I voted for McCain. Didn't work. I tried, but it didn't work. To this day, I occasionally get correspondence from Clinton. I received one the other day. Not sure how she found me in my new home. In the end, this kind of thinking won't work for Cruz. It won't. It's been tried even before 2008. It really makes smile because now I can say I have voted democrat and for Hillary.
Interesting take: The DNC Is About to Coronate Donald Trump Donald Trump is going to be the next president of the United States, and he will have the Democratic National Committee to thank for it. Much has been made of the “math” of the Democratic nomination, and how it favors Hillary Clinton — in large part due to her huge lead in unpledged “superdelegates.” But for a moment, let’s set aside the math of the Democratic primary, and look at the big picture: What matters for the general election is who can win swing states and ensure high voter turnout and enthusiasm in solidly blue states. In this regard, Bernie Sanders is clearly the more electable candidate. The 10 closest races in 2012 were in Nevada, Colorado, Minnesota, Iowa, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Florida, Ohio, Virginia and North Carolina. Six of these have voted so far in primary contests. Of these, Sanders won three by a landslide (New Hampshire, Colorado, Minnesota) and virtually tied in two others (narrowly losing Nevada and Iowa). The only swing-state that Hillary Clinton decisively won so far is Virginia, which actually broke from Mitt Romney in 2012. In short, Bernie Sanders has a decisive edge in swing states. As for solidly-blue states, only four have voted so far, but the outcome is clear: Bernie Sanders decisively won Vermont and Maine, pulled a huge upset in Michigan, and virtually tied Hillary Clinton in Massachusetts. Clinton has not decisively won even one single solidly-blue state. Instead, virtually all of her pledged delegate lead comes from handily winning in solidly red states which she (or any Democrat) would be highly-unlikely to win in a general election. But even this lead would likely be erased as the contest heads to bluer states. Hillary Clinton’s main advantage with regards to winning the nomination is not public sentiment, but instead, due to unelected superdelegates whose purpose, according to DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, is to suppress grassroots candidates in favor of the establishment choice. And it looks like they will have their way: As a result of the superdelegates voting almost unanimously for Hillary Clinton, often in clear defiance of the popular will of their states, the math does indeed look bleak for Bernie Sanders to win the Democratic nomination. Barring a major grassroots revolt, Hillary Clinton will seize the nomination. And she will lose to Donald Trump. I know, here people are going to say “Look at the polls! They show Hillary winning against Trump!“ But there are three big issues here: First, polling more than six months prior to a race is not terribly predictive in general. Second, Trump has consistently confounded polls and projections that predicted he could never win (ditto for Sanders, for that matter). Ceteris paribus, there is no reason to believe these dynamics would fundamentally change in the general election: Trump has been antifragile — rising ever-higher despite (in many respects because of) scandals and gaffes that would have ruined most campaigns. The ridiculous amounts of money being spent on negative ads against him in critical states seem to be totally wasted. Third, there are currently six candidates in the race, and the hope that another candidate may ultimately win the nomination affects how people perceive theoretical head-to-head matchups. When the only possible candidates are Trump v. Clinton, the public is going to break towards Trump. Here’s why: Again, what matters in a general election is who wins swing states and who turns out their base. So let’s see how things look in a head-to-head between Clinton and Trump: Remember the five out of six swing states that Hillary either decisively lost or tied in? Four of these have voted on the Republican side, and Trump handily won half of them (New Hampshire, Nevada). Remember the only swing state that Clinton decisively won (Virginia)? Trump carried that one was well — and again, it broke for Romney in 2012. Remember how Hillary has won primarily in solidly-red states in the south during the Democratic primary? Guess who carried all of these rather decisively on the Republican side, and often with record turnout? That’s right, Donald Trump. That is, Trump is likely to decisively beat Clinton in virtually all of the states that she has performed strongly in so far, and seems poised to win many of the states she lost as well. This leaves her relying heavily on the solidly blue states, which overwhelmingly voted against her in the primaries, suggesting that enthusiasm will not be high with her base. Forget national polling. When one takes a sober look at the electoral map — at who can turn out their base in solidly partisan states and appeal in swing states, based on how the primaries have turned out thus far, the edge is cleanly with Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton. But it gets worse: Trump has a large and passionate base. And while many Republicans are not comfortable with Trump, they passionately hate Hillary Clinton — and faced with such a stark choice, most would vote for Trump if only to deny Clinton the White House. Reports of Republican elites who say they’d vote for Hillary over Trump are more-or-less meaningless in terms of indicating how most voters will perform: the entire Trump phenomena is a testament to how far out of touch these party elites are with their voting base. Make no mistake: Republicans will rally around Trump (or against Clinton), and they will turn out in large numbers to do so. The same cannot be said on the other side: A large number of Democrats cannot bring themselves to vote for Hillary Clinton under any circumstances — and while many of these are unlikely to vote for Trump, they may well stay home on Election Day. This scenario would itself be damning for Clinton’s candidacy: Democrats rely heavily on uncharacteristically-large left-leaning turnout in presidential election years to win national races. Absent this, they stand no chance—particularly in light of the advantage Trump already seems to have in swing states and with his base. But the reality of the matter is that many Sanders supporters will not only abstain, they will actually vote for Trump if Hillary wins the nomination. For some, it would be a vote to punish the DNC for its anti-Democratic coronation of Clinton (via the superdelegates). For others, it’d be a nihilistic act: an attempt to burn down the establishment, or to give America “the candidate it deserves.” But from exit polling we know that many others, particularly in swing states with open primaries, were legitimately torn between Sanders and Trump as the best candidate to direct their anti-establishment sentiment. And if Sanders loses the Democratic nomination, those who voted for him for this reason would not turn around and vote for someone like Hillary Clinton in a general election — they would vote for Trump. And to top it all off, there are a number of other Democrats who staunchly support the Donaldover all the other candidates regardless—in fact, they are an important component of his support base. All of this bodes ill for Hillary Clinton in a general election. Sanders is dominating the blue states and swing states. Trump is dominating the red states and swing states. The takeaway should be clear: The American people in general, and particularly the states that will decide this election, do not want an establishment candidate. A Trump v. Clinton race could play out much likeRonald Reagan v. Bush Sr., Carter and Mondale: races where people with the “right” resumes failed to connect with the public — losing handily to a contender who seemed far less qualified or competent, and perhaps even dangerous, but who really “gets“ the times we’re living in and what people are looking for in this moment. Bernie Sanders can beat Donald Trump, possibly taking the House and Senate with him. Hillary Clinton can do none of these things. Polls be damned: if Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic nomination, Donald Trump will win the presidency. Count on it. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/musa-algharbi/the-dnc-is-about-to-coronate-donald-trump_b_9462374.html
If Donald Trump comes close to winning the USA Presidency my fear is that he will be assassinated. He is not one of the NWO and as a result is a threat to the establishment.
In Election 12 I declared myself a Democrat in the Primary just so I could Vote against Obama twice that year ;-) ... Alas it did little good ;-( My only solace is that God's Plan is unfolding as He wants it to .................. and He is giving ALL HERE-n-elsewhere more time and more "SIGNS" so that all the malingerers, backsliders and slow-leaks can "Get Their **** Together"! Please God! HAPPY EASTER ... and GOD SAVE ALL HERE!!!
I learned in high school that patriotism is a virtue. A long time ago, but I remember. Given all the presidents we have had it's obvious that they are not Saints. Only one was Catholic anyways and there are a lot of rumors about his butt. I don't think they teach that patriotism is a virtue in schools today. Maybe in Catholic schools like mine, but not in public schools.
Donal Trump is very nasty, he is a very,very,very, very nasty person. I am sorry, but I am quite lost how someone so totatlly nasty could work out to be nice. Nasty people do nasty things
Nasty but nice???? Well it does not compute I am trying to put it simply Dear God , no, not Donald Adolph Hitler , exactly the same play , without the dough, not a nice guy either
Don't hide or be simple....that's fake and not honest. Saying Trump is Hitler without stating facts, like how many people he wants to kill or a manifesto, is just as bad.
Just about as nasty as your leader's post. The justification,we are telling you the truth. That's we we are nasty Let me be quite nasty back Crap As though being super nasty made you be something special and important Crap. crap, crap right back at you, I can go right back to grade school too how stupid how silly and thinking yourself so couragoeuos.
mmmm I was angry there brought down to a gutter post to go down in the gutter too. Just like Trunp himself Pope Francis wAS RIGHT GIVING HIM THE FINGER, I GIVE HIM THE FINGER TOO
