Donald Trump Still Enjoying Majority Support in New York

http://media.breitbart.com/media/201...20-640x480.jpg

by MIKE FLYNN
11 Apr 2016
2,265 comments

New York, the home state of GOP frontrunner Donald Trump, is the next state on the Republican primary calendar.

According to a round of recent polls, Trump is on the verge of doing something he hasn’t yet accomplished this primary campaign; win an outright majority of the votes cast in the Republican nomination.

A new poll from Fox News, released Sunday, shows Trump leading his Republican challengers with 54 percent support in the Empire State. Ohio Governor John Kasich is second, with 22 percent followed by Texas Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) with 15 percent.

The Fox poll is consistent with other recent polling in New York. In the RealClearPolitics average of polls conducted since the beginning of April, Trump has 53.5 percent support in New York. Kasich and Cruz are tied for second place.

There isn’t any real doubt over whether Trump will win New York. Crossing the 50 percent threshold, however, doesn’t just provide Trump with bragging rights about finally winning a majority of the Republican vote in a state. Trump’s ability to win the state, and its 27 Congressional Districts, with more than 50 percent of the vote very well could determine whether or not Trump secures the 1,237 delegates he needs to claim the Republican nomination on the first ballot at the RNC convention Clevelend.

The New York primary on April 19 will award 95 delegates to the GOP convention. There are 14 delegates at stake in the statewide vote and another 81 awarded based on results in the state’s Congressional Districts. At both the state-level and Congressional District level, delegates are awarded proportionally, unless a candidate wins with more than 50 percent of the vote. In that case, the winning candidate captures all of the delegates.

If current polling holds, Trump would win all 14 statewide delegates. If he were to win all of the Empire State’s 27 Congressional Districts with more than 50 percent of the vote in each, he would sweep the state and secure all 95 delegates.

Such a result would be an enormous victory for Trump and would indicate that his campaign had rebounded from its overwhelming primary loss in Wisconsin last week. It would be more likely, although still challenging, that Trump would secure a majority of delegates before the RNC convention.

While Kasich and Cruz aren’t contesting the state overall, both campaigns will aggressively try to hold down Trump’s numbers in a handful of Congressional Districts. Holding Trump below 50 percent in a dozen districts, would make it very difficult for Trump to amass the delegates he needs to secure the nomination on the first ballot.

A poll from Emerson College found Trump dominant in 5 Congressional Districts and close to 50 percent in another 11 districts.

That leaves another 9 districts where Trump needs to increase his support to secure all of their delegates.

Trump isn’t going to lose New York, but he needs to win the state in a landslide to pile up delegates while they’re available. His best hope of winning the GOP convention is to win a majority of delegates on the first convention ballot. After the first ballot, delegates are generally free to vote for whomever they support for the nomination.

While current polling shows Trump with a wide lead in New York, he is only just on the edge of winning an outright majority statewide. Trump has rarely over-performed his polling numbers in elections this year, and his share of the vote usually has been a couple points lower than his polling average.

According to one recent poll, from Monmouth University, only 40 percent of New York voters have definitely made up their mind on whom to support. Just over a third, 34 percent, have a strong preference, while the remainder are still considering their choices.

There is still a significant part of the Republican base that is opposed to Donald Trump. Almost a third of Republican primary voters in the state, 27 percent, would vote third party or not vote if Trump were the Republican nominee, according to the Fox News poll. New York is a closed primary state, meaning that only registered Republicans can vote in the election.

In the weeks leading up to the vote in Wisconsin, Trump experienced a drop in his polling numbers across the country and in states still scheduled to vote. One month ago, Emerson College, which currently shows Trump with 56 percent support in New York, showed him with 64 percent support in the state. Two polls at the end of March showed Trump polling a few points higher than he is today.

The question now is whether the almost 10-point drop Trump has experienced in New York over the last month is an outlier, an aberration or the beginning of real weakness in the upcoming primary. Trump’s campaign hit a rough patch following the March 15th primaries.

If Trump can rebound in New York and deliver the landslide win he needs, then the past few weeks will be remembered as just a bump on his road to the nomination. If he wins New York with less than 50 percent of the vote, however, or fails to meet that threshold in many of the state’s Congressional Districts, Trump’s campaign could be said to have suffered its own Ides of March curse.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...port-new-york/

Trump's Kids Can't Vote for Him in New York Because They Screwed Up

Maybe Judy will have a comment on this.
Trump seems to be saying some crazy things lately. I have been a supporter of his (had a bumpersticker for the last six months) but in the face of hardball opposition he seems to be going over the edge. I don't know what to make of it.

Yesterday I went to a county GOP fundraiser (even as an independent) and the talk was "Anti establishment vs. establishment GOP" and most people there seemed to identify themselves as Anti-establishment. That means people are seriously disillusioned with the Party mechanism. They want someone who thinks outside the box-----while the "progressives" relentlessly pursue their social engineering goals and seem to be headed towards completely upsetting things. Trump seems to think outside the box.

But now it seems like he is starting to say some really crazy stuff. While, I do think Cruz would be better than any of the Dems, the tendency of Texans to opt for unilateral action has me alarmed, though. But it seems like Trump has been kind of daffy himself, lately.

Hi Captainron! Was there something specific that he said that worries you? These are the things that the media has been making hay about:

1. NATO - he wants to change the NATO functions to be less about Russia and more about ISIS as well as restructure how NATO is funded. There are 28 countries presently in NATO and the US pays for 71% of the cost. He's right. NATO needs redefining, restructuring to meet present realistic needs and the financing mechanism for it needs to be much different where for example the other 27 countries pay for most of it and we chip in.

2. North Korea - he wants China to handle North Korea and compel them to get rid of their nuclear weapons program. He believes China has enough trade and financial power over North Korea to effect that. He's right, China does have that power and they should be encouraged to solve that problem.

3. Japan - he wants Japan to pay more for our defense of them, same with Germany, he's right about that on both levels. When he was asked in an interview what if Japan refuses, Trump said then we walk. And the interviewer says "and force Japan to defend itself, even with nuclear weapons". And Trump said, "if it comes to that" or something along those lines. He said we're happy to defend them, but they have to pay, so if they don't want to pay properly for our defending them, then they would need to defend themselves. If they had nuclear it's no different than India or Pakistan having nuclear. And he's right.

The objective is non-nuclear proliferation. So far, our government has failed to avoid the proliferation of nuclear weapons where we don't want them, North Korea and Iran, India and Pakistan, and of course the secret one, Israel. Yes, Israel has nuclear weapons, that's why Iran wants them. North Korea wants them to be in the "nuclear club", running with the big boys. They believe that's how they will earn respect where it has otherwise been denied.

4. Using nuclear weapons - In an interview he was asked is nuclear off the table. He said no, nuclear is not off the table. It's one of our "cards" and he's not taking any "cards" off the table. Then the interviewer asked even in Europe" He said yes, even in Europe because you don't know what or when something could happen there.

These are all hypothetical situations. What he's doing in these interviews where these questions are raised not by him but by the media is raising the bar to start a new conversation about nuclear weapons and a true nuclear non-proliferation treaty. There are nine countries with nuclear arsenals: Israel, India, Pakistan, Great Britain, Russia, France, China, North Korea and the United States. Together we can destroy the world about 10 times over. Why invest in it? Why maintain these dangerous weapons? Why have any country wasting precious money on any of it to protect themselves which means destroy themselves in a manner than can not be fixed? I think that's where he's going. We need a whole new conversation about nuclear weapons. Many of US have lived our whole lives under the threat of a nuclear war. Wouldn't it be nice for all countries and their citizens to be free of that fear? I think that's where he's going or would like to if he's President and in a position to do it.

I think what has some people nervous is that if Trump gets shut out due to procedural matters he may go ballistic. But rules are rules. Cruz is working the system---and while some people may hate him for it, it's the system the party has agreed to. We can't live by our own rules. They say the Kennedy clan did that, and look what happened to them!

I think Trump is probably more realistic in his view of Russia. The media may make fun of the camaraderie, but Russia is a pivotal player in Asia, and capable of enacting alliances that would be very powerful. For example, they deal with India, much more directly than we do, because it is in their sphere of influence. If they wanted to, Russia, India and China could run the globe and just tell us to get lost. So we should not miss an opportunity to have a productive relationship with the Russians. I found a good book about three decades ago concerning Russia ---by a State Department specialist, Thomas B. Larson. It's simply a different world, in their eyes. And for hundreds of years they have been dealing with an active Muslim contingent in their south----sometimes in the empire, sometimes out of it, as they are now.

I also followed some of the stuff Gorbachev wrote about trying to lead the Russians, and had a chance to go to the Forum that the Gorbachev Foundation had begun in 1995. Which they partnered with some of the other major figures of that era, who had been instrumental in the detente between the Soviets and the West. The "new world order" was kind of a handy catch phrase that various world leaders used in those days----and probably doesn't signifiy the sinister conspiracy that it is often considered to be. It was a concept that borders should remain where they are, and that countries in a region could partner together in keeping them there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Captainron

I think what has some people nervous is that if Trump gets shut out due to procedural matters he may go ballistic. But rules are rules. Cruz is working the system---and while some people may hate him for it, it's the system the party has agreed to. We can't live by our own rules. They say the Kennedy clan did that, and look what happened to them!

---

Oh, you're referring to Trump's statements about the delegate fights? Well, that's not daffy, that's appropriate. He's bringing attention to a serious problem with our nomination system that most people weren't aware of and don't find fair or right. Trump has the right for example under the "rules" to challenge and contest delegates if they don't think they were selected properly according to the "rules" or if they aren't holding to the votes of the people. Trump is going to win the nomination on the first ballot. But if you don't talk about these problems as they're occurring, then they are never talked about and nothing ever changes.

Because of the stink Trump made about Colorado, the GOP State Chairman of Colorado has already committed in a letter to a disgruntled Trump supporter that they're going to return to a primary election system next year. Trump is the change artist. In a few minutes of comments he can change the process and make it better. That's not daffy, that's how you fix our country.

No Trump won't go "ballistic". If Trump has the most votes, the most states and the most delegates and doesn't win the nomination because of "procedures", he'll leave the race on the Republican ballot. What else he might choose to do will be his right, to either go back to his wonderful life or undertake the big task of running as an independent.

Those are the three choices:

1) win on the first ballot
2) retire from politics
3) run as an independent.

I think he'll win on the first ballot with at least the necessary 1237 delegates.

In the meantime, the more issues he exposes the more people like and understand him. That's important for people to see how he reacts to threats on the will of the people. Who else in the race is standing up for the will of the people? NOT A SINGLE SOUL. Just Trump, Trump is the only one pointing out that the people of Colorado got cheated out of being able to vote in a primary election. No one should be cheated out of voting in a primary whether it's in Colorado or anywhere else.

As for the "rules", the rules will be written before the Convention, like they are every Convention. So when the media and candidates and the RNC say "rules are the rules" they aren't being honest. There are no rules, rules will be established by the Rules Committee of the Convention, the week or so before the Convention in July. So these candidates are out there spending money, raising money, working their asses off, without any rules.

So it's a very strange system that given the state of our country based on the leadership this process has produced does not work to our benefit. We're electing the wrong people under this system. Hopefully, it will get one right for a change and Trump can win it on the first ballot, but for the future, the whole process needs to be based on a primary election in every state, no caucuses, no state conventions, just primary elections and whoever wins the most votes and the most states in the primaries is the automatic nominee at the Convention with all delegates simply voting for the candidate who won their state. You drop out of the race after a primary, those delegates go to the winner. Very simple.

We're are supposed to be a nation that values winning. A political process that rewards losers at the expense of the winners goes against the very fiber of our souls and our nature as human beings. Now that this sick wickedness has been exposed, many thanks to Donald J Trump, it will not fly further in the United States. That bad boy game is over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Captainron

. . . Trump seems to be saying some crazy things lately. . .

But now it seems like he is starting to say some really crazy stuff. While, I do think Cruz would be better than any of the Dems, the tendency of Texans to opt for unilateral action has me alarmed, though. But it seems like Trump has been kind of daffy himself, lately.

---

I heard some guy on a talk show the other day say Trump is still a democrat and his goal is to destroy the republican party from the inside out so that any democrat can get elected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnDoe2

I heard some guy on a talk show the other day say Trump is still a democrat and his goal is to destroy the republican party from the inside out so that any democrat can get elected.

---

I wonder what the talk show guy will say when Trump wins the Presidency as a Republican and fixes our country?

Hundreds Protesting Political System Arrested On Capitol's Steps

Peter Overby, NPR Digital Media
April 12, 2016
2 min

https://api.wbez.org/v2/images/ed621...LL&threshold=0
Protesters with a coalition of progressive groups sit in front of the U.S. Capitol steps Monday as part of the Democracy Spring demonstration.
PreviousNext
(Photos: Peter Overby/NPR)

Police needed most of Monday afternoon to arrest all of the sit-down protesters outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington at a demonstration in favor of changing the rules on political money, voting rights and redistricting.

More than 600 turned out for the protest, and more than 400 were arrested in closethe sit-in at the Capitol steps, U.S. Capitol Police reported. The nonviolent protest was led by Democracy Spring, a coalition of more than 100 progressive groups.

The protest was cheery and peaceful. Police blockaded the marble staircase with a chain and a cordon of officers. Demonstrators sat in front of the chain and on the plaza, talking, chanting, singing and taking pictures as police led them away one by one.

Police, badly underestimating the potential crowd, initially brought a single bus to Capitol Plaza to haul the protesters away.

In a rally preceding the protest, organizer Kai Newkirk of the group 99Rise told the crowd that "we send a message — to everyone in our country who needs a government that represents us all — that this House is your House too, and now is the time to stand up and to take it back."

The coalition wants a "Congress of Conscience" to pass legislation limiting undisclosed and big-donor money, giving more clout to small donors; to restore powers in the Voting Rights Act; and to put an end to gerrymandered districts that insulate incumbent lawmakers from election challenges.

Newkirk has been campaigning to limit political money since 2014, when he interrupted a Supreme Court hearing to object to rulings that lifted restrictions on big donors.

Democracy Spring plans four more daily protests this week. April 16-18 it will be joined by another large coalition, Democracy Awakening, for a teach-in, speeches and another sit-down demonstration.

https://www.wbez.org/shows/morning-e...0-c9dcfc92a68c

Trump Mentions Two Former 2016 Contenders as Possible VP Picks — & Another That’s Still in the Race

Apr. 11, 2016 11:53pm Oliver Darcy

Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump listed a few of his fellow 2016 rivals as possible running mates in an interview published Monday.

Speaking to columnist Kirsten Powers, Trump spoke favorably about Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) who he famously feuded with before defeating him in his home state.

Asked if he could appoint Rubio to a position in his administration, Trump answered in the affirmative.

“Yes. I like Marco Rubio. Yeah. I could,” he said.

Trump then floated some possible names for a possible running mate.

“There are people I have in mind in terms of vice president. I just haven’t told anybody names,” he said. “[I] do like Marco. I do like (John) Kasich. … I like (Scott) Walker actually in a lot of ways. I hit him very hard. … But I’ve always liked him.”

Trump added, “There are people I like, but I don’t think they like me because I have hit them hard.”

http://i.imgur.com/kuTY4I7.png

According to Powers, the brash billionaire seemed to have forgiven Rubio for sharply attacking him in the final days of his campaign.

“He made a mistake,” Trump told her. “He became Don Rickles for about four days, and then I became worse than Don Rickles.”

Trump Mentions Two Former 2016 Contenders as Possible VP Picks ? & Another That?s Still in the Race | TheBlaze.com

Trump should pick Scott Brown for VP, former US Senator from Massachusetts.