Jump to content

Trump in Mexico


PhatMack19

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, TxHoops said:

Read an interesting statistic today.  George HW Bush received 59 percent of the white vote in 1992.   He earned 426 electoral votes.   Mitt Romney received precisely the same share of that vote in 2012, for which he earned 206 electoral votes.  Draw your own conclusions...

Based on just these stats, it sounds like the minority vote is becoming more and more monolithic and is responsible for electing Democrats who enslave them into socialist government programs. Is this the same conclusion you draw from these stats?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, TxHoops said:

Read an interesting statistic today.  George HW Bush received 59 percent of the white vote in 1992.   He earned 426 electoral votes.   Mitt Romney received precisely the same share of that vote in 2012, for which he earned 206 electoral votes.  Draw your own conclusions...

Do you think Hillary will get blacks to turn out to vote in record numbers like Obama did?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TxHoops said:

Actually, I think the key demographic will be, as it has been trending in recent elections, the female vote.  Sorry Trumpsters.  

So you're saying the Repubs should've nominated Brad Pitt :) ?  Probably better than the two we have.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, PhatMack19 said:

Do you think Hillary will get blacks to turn out to vote in record numbers like Obama did?

But to be fair and answer your question more directly, I think Trump will be far more instrumental in mobilizing the minority vote than Hillary, if you get my drift.  And I also look for a spike in Hispanic vote.  I would not predict record number is the African American vote but I also don't think you will see as big of a dip as one might assume.  Overall, I would think the "non-white" vote may even exceed 2012.  

But I would be the first to admit that while I enjoy looking at the numbers and data (to a nerdy degree if you ask my wife), I am by no means an expert on the subject.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, REBgp said:

So you're saying the Repubs should've nominated Brad Pitt :) ?  Probably better than the two we have.  

Lol!  Brad is out there but honestly it's hard to lower the bar from where we have it.  Besides, I'm more of a Matthew McConaughey guy \m/.  (Another one that's out there.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, TxHoops said:

Also becoming evident is that the 3rd party candidates appear to be pulling more votes from Hillary than Trump (just as, contrary to prevalent yet incorrect beliefs, Perot cost her husband more votes than Bush).  So much for the "a vote for Johnson is a vote for Hillary" fallacy...

If you're talking to a person that is undecided between Trump and Johnson, then the "fallacy" is true...a vote for Johnson is a vote for Hillary. If talking to a person undecided between Hillary and Johnson, then a vote for Johnson is a vote for Trump. If talking to a person that is either voting for Johnson or will not vote, then he makes no difference. Sounds like more Hillary/Johnson undecideds are waking up to the fact that she is an unconvicted felon and unfit to occupy the office.

I did see a poll today where Hillary's lead has shrunk to around 3 points. I didn't see (or it didn't say) what demographics have switched. Could be a mixture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, new tobie said:

She is the most questioned white women in the united states 

She hasn't done a press conference in over 9 months.  Women have gotten knocked up and already had the damn kids since Hillary last did a press conference!

Hiding Hillary is playing dodgeball trying to run out the clock until November.  Hopefully the left isn't that dumb not to recognize it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, PhatMack19 said:

She hasn't done a press conference in over 9 months.  Women have gotten knocked up and already had the damn kids since Hillary last did a press conference!

Hiding Hillary is playing dodgeball trying to run out the clock until November.  Hopefully the left isn't that dumb not to recognize it.  

Didnt Mr Trump skip a couple of debates and squabble with a FOX news commentator 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, new tobie said:

Didnt Mr Trump skip a couple of debates and squabble with a FOX news commentator 

1 debate.  What does that have to do with Hillary not doing press conferences?  Maybe it has something to do with her saying the wrong thing and ending up in prison.

 

Whether you like Trump or not, you do have to admire the fact that Trump is working his butt off. The guy is everywhere giving multiple speeches and appearances each day, while Hillary naps and fundraises.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, TxHoops said:

Lol!  Brad is out there but honestly it's hard to lower the bar from where we have it.  Besides, I'm more of a Matthew McConaughey guy \m/.  (Another one that's out there.)

Mentioning Brad was to get the female vote.  The fact that many vote on the sex of a person, or race of a person, physical looks, etc, is alien to most of us.  If a green female hobbit, that was conservative was running in either of the major parties, I'd vote for her (would hope she'd wear shoes to State functions lol).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, new tobie said:

She is married to one of the greatest speaking politicians of all time, maybe she will get a little tutoring 

If she didn't get it in the last 40 years, its hard to believe she can get it in the next 60 days.  If she becomes a better speaker, does that absolve her of all of her dirty laundry?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I think about it, I am surprised that the Dems don't absolutely love the Trump wall idea.   How can they not like something that is, by virtue of Mexico paying for it, a bit of "free stuff"?  Nothing appeals to them more than saying " I am going to give you this and I will make some other guy pay for it". ( the answer is probably that the free wall is not done via a tax hike)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    46,206
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    Ceb2000
    Newest Member
    Ceb2000
    Joined



  • Posts

    • You got a LOT more than that, you’ve got Riceland filling up. GCM is dropping down from 23-6A back down to 5A in ‘26.  GCCISD is redrawing attendance zones to make sure of that.  At the same time, BH was only about 100 students under the 6A threshold last time UIL drew districts so BH is definitely going up to 6A when those maps get redrawn, probably right into the empty spot in 23-6A GCM is leaving when they drop down.
    • Like I said, even if it’s only 10% of the 100 kids BHISD takes from GCCISD each year, that’s 10 athletes per year and that’s being generous.  You’re right about the jobs with BHISD, BTW.  There’s more than 1 athlete from Baytown originally who got transferred to BHISD after a job opened up for Mama.
    • Here’s a link to another story about it This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up
    • It’s behind a paywall but here’s Baytown Sun’s story on it.  It was reported on in other papers statewide so if you search by the date I think you’ll find other stories on it. UIL strengthens student transfer rules By Ron McDowell [email protected] Oct 18, 2024   In order to maintain a level playing field for all member schools, the University Interscholastic League strengthened rules regarding transfer student eligibility at its most recent meeting in Austin. Every year thousands of students transfer schools in the state of Texas. A student’s ability to participate in UIL sanctioned activities may be limited base on the reasons for the transfer. A change in family status, work transfers, enrollment in an academic magnet program, or a move across town, receive scrutiny, but only rarely does one of these reasons result in the loss of eligibility. The only reason to automatically cause the loss of participation eligibility is a transfer for athletic purposes. The current rule, which has been in place since 1981, does not require a Previous Athletic Participation Form (PAPFs) to be submitted if the student-athlete does not participate in a varsity level sport during the first year of enrollment. There has been growing concern among some member schools, that other members are breaking the current rule and creating “super teams” with new transfer enrollees, and that the UIL is not doing enough to police, what appear to be, the inordinate number of transfers among high school athletes. To mitigate these concerns, the UIL approved a proposal to expand the power of the State Executive Committee (SEC) and allow it to investigate schools based upon the number of PAPFs submitted. Schools that submit an inordinate number of PAPFs would face heightened scrutiny and possible public reprimand and future sanctions. The UIL has also changed the requirements for PAPF submission, mandating that the form be submitted before a grade 9-12 transfer student may participate at any level of school athletics. This is a marked departure from the current policy which encourages schools not to complete PAPFs for students who transfer in, if the school believes that the student will not play a varsity sport in the first year the student is enrolled at the new school. Some critics of the current system think that the change doesn’t go far enough. Speaking on background, one local school district source suggested that there should be an automatic year wait for transfer students due to the number of loopholes in the waiver process. “If a student transfers, it should be a year out of competition automatically,” the source said. In addition, the UIL also approved a proposal that gives the SEC the power to appoint an independent administrator to oversee the conduct of the local District Executive Committee (DEC) if it is determined that the DEC is not consistently enforcing the rules of the governing body. The change is significant since all appeals that a school brings, starts and usually ends with the DEC. That includes the determination of transfer student eligibility. It is believed that with the implementation of this change, schools in a UIL district will be less likely to face retribution from the DEC chair and other members. The policy changes will go into effect, Aug. 1, 2025 This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up  
    • I was hoping WOS was going to win. To get another chance to redeem ourself. Silsbee did not look good in that game and has not played consistent during the season. Hopefully against La Vega they will play 4quarters of football
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...