It should be noted that it has been argued that the "younger generation" (I'm not sure whether I still form a part of this group!) are actually even MORE intolerant than the generation before - the difference being that they have shifted their intolerance to different groups. Here's an interesting piece looking at this, which notes that whilst the younger generation are more tolerant to groups such as gays and atheists, they are less tolerant towards Muslims, militarists, and most interestingly (and to my mind, surprisingly), communists. Of course, you might feel that intolerance towards those sorts of groups is justified, even to be encouraged, but enlightened intolerance is still intolerance.

Intolerance towards well over one billion Muslims because of the actions of a tiny minority of maniacs is no more justified than intolerance towards all Catholics because of the IRA.

Intolerance towards well over one billion Muslims because of the actions of a tiny minority of maniacs is no more justified than intolerance towards all Catholics because of the IRA.

 

Oh, I very much agree that the crimes of ISIS shouldn't be pinned on every Muslim. I should probably have made it more clear that those weren't my thoughts, just the thoughts of others.

and Christian/Muslim ill-will is nothing new. Richard The Lionheart anyone?

 

A proportion of young males will rally to any cause that gives them an excuse to hate and fight. Alwasy been the way, that's why wars ahve been such a popular recreational pastime throughout history.

 

nah, trust me, young people are WAY more tolerant than they were when I was at school/Uni.

From ABC News:

 

 

"Republican officials are exploring how to handle a scenario that would be unthinkable in a normal election year: What would happen if the party's presidential nominee dropped out?

 

ABC News has learned that senior party officials are so frustrated — and confused — by Donald Trump's erratic behavior that they are exploring how to replace him on the ballot if he drops out.

 

So how would it work?

 

First, Trump would have to voluntarily exit the race. Officials say there is no mechanism for forcing him to withdraw his nomination. (Trump has not given any indications that he no longer wants to be his party's nominee.)

 

Then it would be up to the 168 members of the Republican National Committee to choose a successor, though the process is complicated.

 

One Republican legal expert has advised party officials that, for practical reasons, Trump would have to drop out by early September to give the party enough time to choose his replacement and get the next nominee's name on the ballot in enough states to win."

 

 

The same applies if he died before the election. Contrary to what some people think, his VP pick doesn't automatically get the nomination.

 

I can't see him throwing in the towel myself! Can anyone here?

 

Actually, I wouldn't be shocked if he did. He's not exactly known for having a long attention span.

I really can't see him dropping out. Not unless there is some seismic shift in the polling and HRC holds a 10 point plus lead from here on out to avoid the potential failure tarnishing his SUPER SUCCESSFUL BUSINESSMAN schtick. However, as that won't be happening, that 0.1% chance of him dropping out gets even smaller.

His brain might conceivably explode in rage at someone tweeting something, a bit like the final "waffer-thin mint".

 

 

I can't see ‘The Donald’ throwing in the towel, particularly given the polls as they are.

 

He seems to be using Cameron and Osborne's trick of making a meaningless soundbite that makes them/him sound amazing. Every time he speaks and somehow avoids making some inflammatory remark that casually offends millions, he wanders inevitably towards a conversational dead-end with no valid point or observation to make - pauses to utter louder than the last time ‘we’re going to make America great again’.

 

Definite overtones of ‘our long-term economic plan is working’ whilst interest rates remain locked at record emergency low rates and wages fall 10% in real terms for the average worker...

His brain might conceivably explode in rage at someone tweeting something, a bit like the final "waffer-thin mint".

I spy a flaw in that theory.

I don't think he'd drop out. Now he's saying that the election will be rigged, even the worst loss will still be a win.

NBC online:

 

"First Read is a morning briefing from Meet the Press and the NBC Political Unit on the day's most important political stories and why they matter.

 

GOP, Trump go from 'unraveling' to 'break glass' mode

 

Yesterday morning, we wrote that Donald Trump's campaign seemed like it was unraveling over his inexplicable clash with the Khan family. Twenty-four hours later, the word "unraveling" seems like an understatement. Take a look at what's happened in the last 24 hours:

 

In a Washington Post interview, Trump declined to endorse House Speaker Paul Ryan against his primary challenger

He reiterated that he hasn't endorsed Sen. John McCain and said the onetime prisoner of war "has not done a good job for the vets"

He slapped out at Republican Sen. Kelly Ayotte, saying "she has given me zero support"

He suggested that Americans should pull their 401(k) funds out of the stock market

He said he's "always wanted" to receive a Purple Heart but that having one gifted to him by a supporter was "much easier"

He said that the handling of sexual harassment has "got to be up to the individual"

He accused Khizr Khan of being "bothered" by his plan to keep terrorists out of the country, and said that he had no regrets about his clash with the family

He appeared to feud with a crying baby during a rally

He reiterated that "if the election is rigged, I would not be surprised"

The sitting president of the United States publicly called Trump "unfit to serve" and urged Republicans to withdraw their support for him.

Trump spokesman Katrina Pierson suggested that Obama and Clinton are to blame for the death of Humayan Khan, who died in 2004, when neither were in the executive branch at the time

An ally of Paul Manafort told our colleague John Harwood at CNBC that the campaign chairman is "mailing it in," leaving the rest of the staff "suicidal."

Sitting GOP congressman Richard Hanna, HP head Meg Whitman and former Christie aide Maria Comella all said they plan to vote for Hillary Clinton

The Washington Post released a transcript of its full interview with Trump, indicating among other things that he paused five times to watch TV coverage in the middle of the sit-down

A GOP source told NBC's Katy Tur that Reince Priebus is "apoplectic" over Trump's refusal to endorse Ryan and is making calls to the campaign to express his "extreme displeasure"

 

 

What are we missing? Any one of these items would be problematic on a normal campaign day. This all happened since 8am yesterday. With all that, do we need to be asking a new question: Do Republicans go public with their hope that Trump withdraws from the race? We're at the point where there's GOP chatter about key Republicans coming out hard against their own nominee - and especially eyeing Trump's falling polling numbers to gauge the point at which they need to come up with a "break glass" backup plan to save down-ballot seats. Republicans have been hoping that Trump would change his ways for nearly the entirety of his campaign to no avail. (And for a GOPer, it's got to be hard to read the transcript of that Washington Post interview and come away not thinking that something drastic has to be done.) If you're a Republican, can you just un-endorse Trump, or do you take the next step to push the candidate to get out now for the good of the party?"

 

Whoops! Minor faux pas from la Trump.....

 

Still, at least his hotel biz is dropping off a cliff.

Is the collective opinion still that it's Trump's to lose?

 

(my current likely ludicrously optimistic prediction is 384-154 to HRC)

I still think it's too close to call at this point, but the optimist in me has returned to the fore and I think I'm going to DARE TO DREAM. I think she might end up with a very similar electoral college total to Obama in 2012, I can't really see her flipping (m)any states. Maybe NC, but then if Trump flips PA which I think is very likely, that will end up being largely negated.

There are signed that Clinton is doing well in some of the states more traditionally won by the Republican candidate, so the earlier stories about her being behind in some of the more Democrat-leaning states may not be as alarming as feared.

Unfortunately, due to Trump's gaffes, I'm resigned to the fact that Hillary will be the first female president.

Is the collective opinion still that it's Trump's to lose?

 

(my current likely ludicrously optimistic prediction is 384-154 to HRC)

 

So last week's "convention bounce" polls for Trump were an unrepresentative one-off, yet Hillary's "convention bounce" somehow represents the permanent new way of things? :P

 

Remember that, even with her bounce this week, Hillary's position in the polls is still no better than the Remain campaign's position 3 months before the referendum. The pattern with anti-establishment campaigns seems to be they pick up more and more steam in the last few weeks, because people who previously had misgivings about them just think when it comes to the crunch that they can't resist taking the chance to change things.

So last week's "convention bounce" polls for Drumpf were an unrepresentative one-off, yet Hillary's "convention bounce" somehow represents the permanent new way of things? :P

 

Remember that, even with her bounce this week, Hillary's position in the polls is still no better than the Remain campaign's position 3 months before the referendum. The pattern with anti-establishment campaigns seems to be they pick up more and more steam in the last few weeks, because people who previously had misgivings about them just think when it comes to the crunch that they can't resist taking the chance to change things.

The obvious difference there being that the official referendum campaign hadn't kicked off 3 months before the poll, whereas it's now in full swing in the US.

 

Also, I don't think that the poll change has that much to do with Hillary - it's more down to Trump saying and doing things which many swing voters will see as beyond the pale.

So last week's "convention bounce" polls for Trump were an unrepresentative one-off, yet Hillary's "convention bounce" somehow represents the permanent new way of things? :P

 

Remember that, even with her bounce this week, Hillary's position in the polls is still no better than the Remain campaign's position 3 months before the referendum. The pattern with anti-establishment campaigns seems to be they pick up more and more steam in the last few weeks, because people who previously had misgivings about them just think when it comes to the crunch that they can't resist taking the chance to change things.

Obviously it was triggered by the convention, but I don't think it's the convention itself that's made the move so pronounced - I think that's come as a result of his racist accusations against the dead soldier's family in the wake of it. I think that kind of lead is going to be tough for him to pull back substantially now that Republicans are either entering full panic mode or starting to openly endorse Hillary after those attacks, and especially now he's refused to endorse Paul Ryan.

 

The narrative is sticking that not only is Trump morally unfit to be president, but that people are scared to have such a loose cannon in that position. I think if the bounce was primarily because of enthusiasm for the Democrats after their convention you'd be seeing more discussion about how Hillary had changed minds. I don't deny that there are plenty of people who will do anything to change things. The problem is that Trump is probably the most extreme 'anything but this, even though who knows what might happen?' choice there's ever been in a proper election like this. With Brexit there were a lot of arguments that people could fall back on for reassurance that it would all be fine - 5th biggest economy and so on. There's not much reassurance there for those who might be open to Trump's message but aren't in an 'anything but this' position.

The obvious difference there being that the official referendum campaign hadn't kicked off 3 months before the poll, whereas it's now in full swing in the US.

 

Was the referendum campaign not already effectively in full swing by this time? My recollection is that there were already daily hysterical news items about the "economic damage Brexit would cause" from the Mark Carneys of the world.

 

Obviously it was triggered by the convention, but I don't think it's the convention itself that's made the move so pronounced - I think that's come as a result of his racist accusations against the dead soldier's family in the wake of it. I think that kind of lead is going to be tough for him to pull back substantially now that Republicans are either entering full panic mode or starting to openly endorse Hillary after those attacks, and especially now he's refused to endorse Paul Ryan.

 

The narrative is sticking that not only is Trump morally unfit to be president, but that people are scared to have such a loose cannon in that position. I think if the bounce was primarily because of enthusiasm for the Democrats after their convention you'd be seeing more discussion about how Hillary had changed minds. I don't deny that there are plenty of people who will do anything to change things. The problem is that Trump is probably the most extreme 'anything but this, even though who knows what might happen?' choice there's ever been in a proper election like this. With Brexit there were a lot of arguments that people could fall back on for reassurance that it would all be fine - 5th biggest economy and so on. There's not much reassurance there for those who might be open to Trump's message but aren't in an 'anything but this' position.

 

We'll see. I would much rather Clinton win obviously, but it does seem to me that, looking at recent election/referendum campaigns, ones that look like Donald Trump's have been having much more success on the day of voting than ones that look like Hillary Clinton's, regardless of what the opinion polls are saying months ahead.

Edited August 5, 20168 yr by Danny

There is, however, the advantage that if Remain replicated its demographic vote share on US demographics it would have won by a landslide.