Was Trump the best candidate the GOP could have run?

tsuke

New member
Analysis comes from reddit so not mine. It does analyze on a county by county level which people dont normally do so I wanted to post it here for discussion.

"And then that same real estate developer won, and brought millions of new voters into the Republican Party.

When you think about it, Trump may have been the best thing to happen to the Republican Party in ages. The man brought millions of new voters into the party, not just for him, but also for downballot candidates. Look at Ron Johnson, Marco Rubio and Pat Toomey's re-election maps. They all got unprecedented support for a Republican Senator in white working class areas while holding onto their educated base that Trump didn't do well in. Pat Toomey managed to win both Luzerne and Erie County, two counties he lost in 2010 in a Republican wave year in a much easier race. Rubio managed to put up a record number for a GOP Senator in Pasco County, Ron Johnson did even better in working class areas than he did in 2010, a GOP wave year. In Minnesota, Collin Peterson and Tim Walz almost lost. Nobody even had them on the radar because they were thought to be 100% safe. Meanwhile, to the voters that hated Trump, he was seen as completely independent from the GOP. In the 3 aforementioned Senators' states, Trump did badly in educated Republican Urban areas and suburbs. In Wisconsin, Trump did horribly for the GOP in Waukesha, Ozuakee, and Washington Counties in the Milwuakee Suburbs, but that didn't hurt Johnson at all. He put up the standard GOP margin there. In Pennsylvania, Trump did badly in Chester County, a typically Republican county in Suburban Philadelphia. But not Pat Toomey. He was seen as independent from Trump and won the county. In Florida, Trump did awfully in Miami-Dade County, a record low for the GOP. He also did very poorly in Duval County for a Republican. But not Marco Rubio. He did relatively well in Miami-Dade, losing it by only 11 points, and he won Duval by 16 points.

You see the same thing when you look at House Races. Trump lost Carlos Curbelo's House District by 17 points. Curbelo won re-election by 10. Trump did horribly in Barbara Comstock's wealthy suburban district in Northern Virginia, Romney won the district, but Trump lost it by 10 points. Yet Comstock was re-elected by 5 points. Trump did horribly in Tom Price's suburban Atlanta district, winning a typically heavy GOP seat by only 1 point, yet Price cruised to re-election by 23.

Trump somehow managed to be seen as close enough to the GOP to blue collar workers to bring millions of them into the party, yet at the same time also managed to be seen as independent from the GOP to wealthy educated whites as to not push them away from the GOP. He also delivered them the Supreme Court for a generation and will help them pass their economic agenda & repeal Obamacare. While no one would've thought this a couple months ago, Trump was the best possible thing that could've happened to the GOP. Incredible"
 
thing1 please shut the fuck up until you get at least one thing correct

"he's not a serious candidate"

"he's not going to win a primary"

"he's not going to win the nomination"

"you can't insult mexicans the way he does and expect to win"

"you can't talk about khan like that and win the election, just no way"

"this pussy grabbing stuff is absolutely the end of him, he's super done"

"trump just can't win"

"...."

"well... he prob wont be a 2 term president!"
 
no response to the actual analysis?

He was good for the GOP this year - I don't discount the analysis as far as short-term gain.

But an absolutely huge part of that was that his opponent was Hillary Clinton. People are reading too many sweeping trends into this election. Hillary's ceiling was low. People don't like her.

The biggest lesson for Democrats is that they need to have a more robust primary process, and not coronate candidates who the establishment chooses.
 
thing1 please shut the fuck up until you get at least one thing correct

"he's not a serious candidate"

"he's not going to win a primary"

"he's not going to win the nomination"

"you can't insult mexicans the way he does and expect to win"

"you can't talk about khan like that and win the election, just no way"

"this pussy grabbing stuff is absolutely the end of him, he's super done"

"trump just can't win"

"...."

"well... he prob wont be a 2 term president!"

I'm glad it's buggin' ya, Trumpster.
 
america first on jobs, tariffs and threatening to pull defense contracts if necessary

friendlier terms with russia

enforcing border laws.

I'm generally for free trade. I just don't like convoluted massive trade bureaucracies and putting our fate in the hands of some global trade organization

ambivalent on russia. But yeah I don't see a reason for a war. I don't consider this to be a bad thing though.

Border laws - in some circumstances, yes.
 
thing1 please shut the fuck up until you get at least one thing correct

"he's not a serious candidate"

"he's not going to win a primary"

"he's not going to win the nomination"

"you can't insult mexicans the way he does and expect to win"

"you can't talk about khan like that and win the election, just no way"

"this pussy grabbing stuff is absolutely the end of him, he's super done"

"trump just can't win"

"...."

"well... he prob wont be a 2 term president!"


What did you get correct? I don't see why you think not making a prediction makes you a better prognosticator.

Your boy Romney did not beat McCain in 2008 as you had predicted he would. Was the burn from that what turned you into a chicken shit or are you going to maintain that you have always been a chicken shit?
 
He was good for the GOP this year - I don't discount the analysis as far as short-term gain.

But an absolutely huge part of that was that his opponent was Hillary Clinton. People are reading too many sweeping trends into this election. Hillary's ceiling was low. People don't like her.

The biggest lesson for Democrats is that they need to have a more robust primary process, and not coronate candidates who the establishment chooses.

if hillary was the major part of the problem surely the downballot effect would have been different? The downballot is what 80% of the analysis is about.
 
Trump won, while the demographics continue to favor the Dems. That ought to account for something -being the "best"candidate.
He re-drew the map;no more "blue wall" -and if he forces the Dem's to speak to others then the 'coastal elitists' -it's a win for the country too.
 
thing1 please shut the fuck up until you get at least one thing correct

"he's not a serious candidate"

"he's not going to win a primary"

"he's not going to win the nomination"

"you can't insult mexicans the way he does and expect to win"

"you can't talk about khan like that and win the election, just no way"

"this pussy grabbing stuff is absolutely the end of him, he's super done"

"trump just can't win"

"...."

"well... he prob wont be a 2 term president!"

Douchebag Donald wasn't a serious candidate.
 
Back
Top