I think you still have a problem here when you're going and you're looking not just that Trump is winning, but he's winning in a broad swath of voters. It's not just that he's got this one lane, oh, he only wins when there's low turnout, he only wins when conservatives, he only wins in these kinds of states. He wins enough across a broad array.
Voters are saying "I like this guy [Donald Trump]. He just might shake this place up. "
We did really, really badly with older African-American voters. I mean we got decimated.
Anybody who imagines that an election can be won under these circumstances by banging on about William Ayers and Jeremiah Wright is. . . to put it mildly. . . severely under-estimating the electoral importance of pocketbook issues. We conservatives are sending a powerful, inadvertent message with this negative campaign against Barack Obama's associations and former associations: that we lack a positive agenda of our own and that we don't care about the economic issues that are worrying American voters.
Five people in robes said they are bigger than the voters of California and Congress combined. And bigger than God. May He forgive us all.
Politicians are just a bunch of local bandits, sent by their local voters to raid the public treasury.
Republicans and conservatives have to figure out that Democrats have plenty of rope to hang themselves on their own. But you have to give voters a reason to vote for you as well.
Voters might have short memories. Politicians do not.
In the United States, if 43 percent of eligible voters do not vote, then democracy is weakened.
I could stand in the middle Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn't lose any voters.
There are similiarities between Nixon and Trump, no question. But there are also big differences. Nixon was shy, private, he attacked the media behind closed doors and insulted people behind their backs, and we only know about it because of the taping system in the Oval Office. The dark side, the vengeance we only know because of these tapes. Trump is right out and front with it. He actually campaigned on how nasty he can be, which found resonance with enough voters to get him into the White House.
This is so classic. Government comes along under the guise of fairness, fixes something, gonna make it fair, gonna make it equal, gonna make it affordable, maybe even make it free. What they end up doing is blowing it all to hell, screwing it up worse than it's ever been screwed up, then their voters bellyache and complain about it. And the same Democrats come back and demand that something be done, because their voters need a second chance.
Voters don't decide issues, they decide who will decide issues.
If Clinton somehow pulls out a win in both states, then she has an excellent argument to make to the superdelegates: Voters still respond to fear. Obama's campaign has been based on the implicit argument that voters no longer respond to fear. If Clinton wins both states, that probably proves Obama wrong on that point.
They reality is that we have 70% of our voters use a punch card system that I tried to change and that bipartisan resistance in the legislature stopped.
Even as voters, we try to keep up with the guys as much as possible, mainly through television or ESPN.
The ban directly hampers the partys ability to spread its message and hamstrings voters seeking to inform themselves about the candidates and issues.
Politicians must let voters know what they think about issues before the election. Judges should not.
Pennsylvania might be a parochial state, but it's not a homogeneous state. So, even among just Republican voters, to be able to pull that off, when you have very moderate voters on one side of the state and more conservative in the middle, shows that Donald Trump has very, very broad support.
Statistically there is enough voter fraud to sway zero elections.