No! Harry, No! Don't look at that light!

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- Ohio Gov. John Kasich is failing to close the gap between him and Donald Trump among GOP primary voters in his own state, according to a new poll.

And in a particularly concerning sign for Kasich, the new Quinnipiac University poll, released Wednesday, suggests he is not gaining on Trump even as voters abandon other GOP candidates in the lead up to Ohio's March 15 primary.

The poll of likely Ohio Republican primary voters found Trump leading Kasich 38 percent to 32 percent. That's compared to Trump's 31 percent to 26 percent lead in the university's last poll, released on Feb. 23.

I genuinely thought Kasich would hold Trump off in Ohio. The GOP is fuuuuuuucked.

The same people who said "Trump will never run for President.", then said "He'll be gone by Halloween.", then said "He'll be gone by Thanksgiving.", then said "He'll be gone by New Year's.", then said "He'll be gone in early March.", are now saying "He'll lose to Clinton.". Do they really expect other people to value what they predict will happen even after they've been so so wrong so so many times already?

Posted by all3 on 3/9/2016 1:22:00 PM (view original):
The same people who said "Trump will never run for President.", then said "He'll be gone by Halloween.", then said "He'll be gone by Thanksgiving.", then said "He'll be gone by New Year's.", then said "He'll be gone in early March.", are now saying "He'll lose to Clinton.". Do they really expect other people to value what they predict will happen even after they've been so so wrong so so many times already?

I know, right?

I'm pretty sure everyone undestimated the size of the KKK, ****, I mean Trump's base. I don't think that base is large enough to deliver 270 electoral votes.

Posted by moy23 on 3/9/2016 2:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 3/9/2016 1:22:00 PM (view original):
The same people who said "Trump will never run for President.", then said "He'll be gone by Halloween.", then said "He'll be gone by Thanksgiving.", then said "He'll be gone by New Year's.", then said "He'll be gone in early March.", are now saying "He'll lose to Clinton.". Do they really expect other people to value what they predict will happen even after they've been so so wrong so so many times already?

I know, right?

Can I predict a Trump nomination will destroy the Republican party? And that a Trump Presidency will destroy America?

I'M PREDICTING DONALD ISN'T EVEN THE NOMINEE

RYAN/CRUZ

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/9/2016 2:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 3/9/2016 2:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 3/9/2016 1:22:00 PM (view original):
The same people who said "Trump will never run for President.", then said "He'll be gone by Halloween.", then said "He'll be gone by Thanksgiving.", then said "He'll be gone by New Year's.", then said "He'll be gone in early March.", are now saying "He'll lose to Clinton.". Do they really expect other people to value what they predict will happen even after they've been so so wrong so so many times already?

I know, right?

Can I predict a Trump nomination will destroy the Republican party? And that a Trump Presidency will destroy America?

Yet another perfect example of what I mean. You were wrong about Trump, then wrong about Trump again, then wrong about Trump some more, yet now we should believe you're right about him?
Trump is certainly not an ideal Presidential candidate, but people continuing to predict what he will do is just silly. There's no precedent or past example to base anything on. Same is true about his possible Presidency - nobody has any clue what to expect, so everyone should stop trying to pretend they do.

Think of it this way. Trump "won" Michigan last night with 483k votes (35%). 55% of the voters selected Rubio, Kasich, or Cruz.

Clinton "lost" Michigan last night with 576k votes (48%).

When it comes down to just the two of them, who do you think is more likely to convert a larger number of the Sanders/Rubio/Cruz/Kasich voters?

I'm betting it's not Trump.

Now, to be fair, Michigan isn't a battleground state. It's almost certainly going to Clinton regardless of the GOP nominee. But Minnesota is another story. Clinton got 3x the number of votes Trump got in Minnesota. Clinton got 30k more votes in South Carolina.

If Clinton gets South Carolina and Minnesota in November, she only has to get one of Florida, Pennsylvania, or Ohio to win.

Posted by bad_luck on 3/9/2016 3:42:00 PM (view original):
Think of it this way. Trump "won" Michigan last night with 483k votes (35%). 55% of the voters selected Rubio, Kasich, or Cruz.

Clinton "lost" Michigan last night with 576k votes (48%).

When it comes down to just the two of them, who do you think is more likely to convert a larger number of the Sanders/Rubio/Cruz/Kasich voters?

I'm betting it's not Trump.

Now, to be fair, Michigan isn't a battleground state. It's almost certainly going to Clinton regardless of the GOP nominee. But Minnesota is another story. Clinton got 3x the number of votes Trump got in Minnesota. Clinton got 30k more votes in South Carolina.

If Clinton gets South Carolina and Minnesota in November, she only has to get one of Florida, Pennsylvania, or Ohio to win.

Don't forget she needs to spew enough BS to stay out of Federal prison until then too.

No one outside of the right wing talk radio bubble thinks there's any chance that Clinton is indicted.

Posted by all3 on 3/9/2016 1:22:00 PM (view original):
The same people who said "Trump will never run for President.", then said "He'll be gone by Halloween.", then said "He'll be gone by Thanksgiving.", then said "He'll be gone by New Year's.", then said "He'll be gone in early March.", are now saying "He'll lose to Clinton.". Do they really expect other people to value what they predict will happen even after they've been so so wrong so so many times already?

A lot of people overrated the intelligence of Republican voters. And their desire to have a Republican President. That has nothing to do with their evaluations of Trump as an individual.