To be fair, there are only two things that can get Hillary's scraggly old ***** wet:

1.  A fire hose on full blast
2.  The thought of running against Trump in the general election

Posted by MikeT23 on 9/2/2015 3:50:00 PM (view original):
To be fair, there are only two things that can get Hillary's scraggly old ***** wet:

1.  A fire hose on full blast
2.  The thought of running against Trump in the general election

Trump would destroy Hillary. DESTROY her.


I'd be more worried about Biden. He's at least likable.

538 on primary polls:

HILLARY BEATS TRUMP BY 9-12 POINTS

HILLARY BEATS  ANYONE ELSE IN THE RACE BY 6-9 POINTS

BOOK IT

HILLARY IS GOING TO JAIL!!!!

AND WOULD STILL BEAT TRUMP!!!!!!

SORRY, FORGOT!!!

BOOK IT!!!!!!!!!

Posted by bad_luck on 9/2/2015 4:05:00 PM (view original):
538 on primary polls:

The other big difference between the general election and primaries is that polls are not very reliable in the primaries. They improve as you get closer to the election, although only up to a point. But they have little meaning now, five months before the first states vote.

 

It’s not only that the polls have a poor predictive track record — at this point in the past four competitive races, the leaders in national polls were Joe Lieberman, Rudy Giuliani, Hillary Clinton and Rick Perry, none of whom won the nomination — but also that they don’t have a lot of intrinsic meaning. At this point, the polls you see reported on are surveying broad groups of Republican- or Democratic-leaning adults who are relatively unlikely to actually vote in the primaries and caucuses and who haven’t been paying all that much attention to the campaigns. The ones who eventually do vote will have been subjected to hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of advertising, had their door knocked on several times, and seen a half-dozen more debates. The ballots they see may not resemble the one the pollsters are testing since it’s likely that (at least on the GOP side) several of the candidates will have dropped out by the time their state votes.

At this point in the race guilliani do not have 30% polling. Romney did though.

Edit - nvm..
"By the end of September 2007, most polls showed Giuliani to have more support than any of the other declared Republican candidates, with only Senator Thompson and Governor Romney showing greater support in some state polls"

"More than 240 people were taken into federal custody last week across Southern California after a four-day sweep for immigrants with criminal records in the country illegally, authorities announced Monday. The enforcement action ended Thursday with 244 foreign nationals in the custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement the majority of them with at least one felony conviction on their record, authorities said." 191 of the 244 were from MEXICO. TRUMP for president 2016!! --- http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-240-immigrants-arrested-ice-20150831-story.html

Shot, who's going to clean the rooms of Trumps hotels now?

Donald Trump isn't rich because he's a great investor. He's rich because his dad was rich.

http://www.vox.com/2015/9/2/9248963/donald-trump-index-fund

But if you compare Trump's performance since 1982, when the stock market started to take off after the early-'80s recession, it looks pretty abysmal. Forbes estimated that Trump was worth $200 million that year. If he'd put that money in an index fund that year at a 0.15 percent fee, he'd have $6.3 billion today after dividend taxes, almost certainly more than he actually does. This jibes with analyzes prior to Date's which have found that Trump has underperformed compared with the market since 1988; an AP analysis found that if he'd put his money in an index fund that year, he'd have $13 billion today; the S&P calculator similarly suggested he'd have $11.3 billion, after fees and dividend taxes.

But the exact numbers aren't the point. The point is that after decades of touting his business acumen, his ability to negotiate tough deals and spot good investments, and after spending this entire campaign season arguing that he's qualified for the presidency based on his skills in the market, Trump nonetheless has an investment record that at best roughly matches and at worst underperforms the market. He did only as well or possibly worse than a retiree with a Vanguard 401(k) did.

Posted by bad_luck on 9/3/2015 9:25:00 AM (view original):
Donald Trump isn't rich because he's a great investor. He's rich because his dad was rich.

http://www.vox.com/2015/9/2/9248963/donald-trump-index-fund

But if you compare Trump's performance since 1982, when the stock market started to take off after the early-'80s recession, it looks pretty abysmal. Forbes estimated that Trump was worth $200 million that year. If he'd put that money in an index fund that year at a 0.15 percent fee, he'd have $6.3 billion today after dividend taxes, almost certainly more than he actually does. This jibes with analyzes prior to Date's which have found that Trump has underperformed compared with the market since 1988; an AP analysis found that if he'd put his money in an index fund that year, he'd have $13 billion today; the S&P calculator similarly suggested he'd have $11.3 billion, after fees and dividend taxes.

But the exact numbers aren't the point. The point is that after decades of touting his business acumen, his ability to negotiate tough deals and spot good investments, and after spending this entire campaign season arguing that he's qualified for the presidency based on his skills in the market, Trump nonetheless has an investment record that at best roughly matches and at worst underperforms the market. He did only as well or possibly worse than a retiree with a Vanguard 401(k) did.

that might be the dumbest article I have ever read. NOBODY puts ALL their money in one index fund to track the market. The goal of long term investing is to grab respectable gains while MINIMIZING downside risk. The article might as well suggest he put all his money in Apple stock in 1987 - then he woulda coulda shoulda been worth $14.8 billion today. Trump is a successful investor - bottom line. There are some 1600 billionaires in the ENTIRE WORLD which says a lot about how difficult it is to get into that 'club'. A quick look online shows how quickly one can fall out of the 'club' with poor investing -- http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/world/10-former-billionaires-who-lost-their-riches/?view=all

Maybe he just knows how to work the law.

furthermore... if my math is correct the article suggests that anyone that had a net worth of $17,700 in 1988 should be worth $1,000,000 today just to put it in perspective. Also - it speculates Trump had $200,000,000 just laying around to put in the market. Much of that money could have been invested in his businesses already. Would you suggest he shut down his businesses and invest everything in an index fund? That would be ridiculous. Trump has invested in real estate and he now can brag about a $400,000,000 annual income. That's smarter investing than putting everything in the market.