07-15-2016, 07:20 PM
vision63 wrote:
[quote=DeusxMac]
[quote=vision63]
[quote=DeusxMac]
[quote=vision63]
It was perfectly plausible that Trump could take the nom. He just needed to tally more votes.
Hmmmm...
vision63 wrote: I don't think he'll want to battle the kind of money Jeb can reign in. You know it because all he wants to talk about are the evils of SuperPacs. He ain't got the loot. His big mouth can only take him so far.
vision63 wrote: If Trump were to survive these contests, then the ball gets punted to the latter half of the season, which never happens anymore. California's primary is generally meaningless though still gigantic) If Jeb, Rubio etc don't quit, they'll overtake Trump.
I had too much free time this afternoon.
In the Republican primary, there were few hurdles to slow down a outsider candidate. No super delegates, mostly winner take all primaries. Only some caucuses could be gamed. Trump might be a surprise, but it's not a surprise that he could tally votes if he became popular.
You're hindsight isn't 20/20 my friend.
What "hindsight" of mine are you referring to?
hindsight noun
understanding of a situation or event only after it has happened or developed
Vision, if you stated just this week that Trump's accession should come as no surprise, but back last year made statements that you thought he wouldn't succeed, wouldn't that be an example of that "20/20" hindsight you pronounce?
You're the one mining the forum not me and then contrasting it with the results. Jeb is the one that quit in February. Weeks into this thing. Bernie should could have quit on Super Tuesday but he kept going. My predictions didn't even get a chance to play out. I dropped it when he quit. It's a marathon, not a sprint.
No answers to my two questions, so I'll just drop it.