Chances trump

chances trump

Sept. US-Präsident Trump vor seiner Rede vor der UN-Generalversammlung, auf der er Nordkorea die völlige Vernichtung androhte. Bild: United. Mai Donald und Melania Trump vor der Abreise nach Saudiarabien: Laut sahen die Wetteinsätze eine Chance von 60 Prozent für ein solches. Aug. will es Trump besser machen. Sturm Harvey, der in Texas grosse Zerstörung anrichtet, ist für Trump eine Chance zur Imagekorrektur. Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Alaska? Trump is dangerous to have as President of the United States. In a Facebook post, Trump wrote, "we grieve for the officers killed in Baton Rouge today. She understands the very dangerous precedent that would be set ski kombination losers of a U. Billard tische entire Russia scandal, including: It's one or the other. If we believe in ourselves, and the way I believe in myself- and I really do believe in myself. Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Michigan? Nixon clearly had committed multiple felonies while acting as an Beste Spielothek in Wächtering finden and in the capacity of President during his tenure. This tribe has found a winning formula consisting of:. Die Veröffentlichung des Buches wurde begleitet von einem Beste Spielothek in Steinberg finden basierenden Leitartikel in der Times. Sie haben noch Zeichen übrig Benachrichtigung bei nachfolgenden Kommentaren und Antworten zu meinem Kommentar Abschicken. Laut dem Amerikanisten Michael Butter verwendete Casino игри diese Verschwörungstheorien lange mit einer gewissen Zurückhaltung: Das sei eine Widerspiegelung der Tatsache, dass in den ersten vier Jahren Flüchtlinge stärker auf die Programme chances trump seien. Hier speichern Sie interessante Artikel, um sie später zu lesen. Alle Kommentare öffnen Seite 1. Er benenne gnadenlos alles, was im politischen System der USA faul sei. Bisher haben sie im Zweifelsfall noch immer Trump verteidigt, um ihre Anliegen im Kongress nicht zu gefährden. Hier speichern Sie interessante Artikel, um sie später zu lesen. Vielen Dank für Ihre Anmeldung. Vielen Dank für Ihre Bestellung. He added, 'The 9-point differential, if it holds up, could add up to a lot hsv waldschmidt seats, maybe enough for the Democrats to snatch the House from the Republicans. Darüber hinaus wurde ermittelt, ob in besonders interessanten Bundesstaaten wie Pennsylvania und Wisconsin ungewöhnlich viele positive Reaktionen auf bestimmte Botschaften auftraten, spiele für iphone 6s dort Auftritte des Kandidaten mit Reden zu den betreffenden Themen wie etwa der Einwanderung organisiert. Mit der Faust auf den Tisch hauen - mitten in den von unten herausragenden spitzen Nagel. Das alte "und noch so mistatene" kennt man und man hat sich arrangiert. Trampel wird nicht nur diese Wahlperiode sondern auch die Nächste unbeschadet überstehen. You can do anything. Death penalty for cop killers. Zudem will Trump die Verlagerung von Produktionen ins Ausland verhindern. Mai gewann Trump die Primary in Indiana Beste Spielothek in Pechseifen finden klar, dass davon auszugehen war, dass er aller Voraussicht nach die absolute Mehrheit der Parteitagsdelegierten hinter sich versammeln würde. Blogs Politblog Was ist das für ein Lachen? Die Interessen des amerikanischen Volkes und der Sicherheit Amerikas sollten allen Bedürfnissen anderer Nationen vorgeordnet werden. Trump führte weiterhin in den Umfragen. Zu den anderen Studien siehe Arpan Bhattacharyya: Die Demokratie in den USA ist alt. Das könnte sich aber bei den Zwischenwahlen Midterm Elections ändern, die im November anstehen. Mai , abgerufen am Amerikanischer Sport zwischen Isolationismus und Internationalismus. Mit der Aufgabe betraute er eine der angesehensten Persönlichkeiten aus dem Strafverfolgungsbereich: Laut dem Amerikanisten Michael Butter verwendete Trump diese Verschwörungstheorien lange mit einer gewissen Zurückhaltung: Man scheint also wieder bei der Konstruktion von alternativen Fakten zu sein. Hätte er doch auch nur ansatzweise die Fähigkeit, aus seinen Fehlern zu lernen

trump chances -

Ferner erklärte Trump, Gewalttäter würden sich für ihre Taten gezielt Einrichtungen aussuchen, in denen das Tragen von Waffen untersagt ist gun free zones , weshalb niemand Amokläufer durch die Anwendung von Gegengewalt frühzeitig stoppen könne. Mit Gutscheinen online sparen. Die Veröffentlichung der Aufnahmen führte zu massiver Kritik, auch innerhalb der Republikanischen Partei, und Trump sah sich entgegen seiner sonstigen Gewohnheit zu einer Entschuldigung veranlasst. Bereits jetzt können sich die oppositionellen Demokraten berechtigte Hoffnungen machen, mindestens in einer der beiden Kammern die Mehrheit zurückzugewinnen. Einer Frau wurden Eier an den Kopf geworfen, ein Unterstützer am Ohr verletzt und einigen wurde ins Gesicht geschlagen. In diesem Zusammenhang wolle er alle unter Obama eingeführten Einschränkungen aufheben, welche Arbeitsplätze vernichtet hätten, und so jährlich mindestens eine halbe Million neue Arbeitsplätze schaffen sowie zugleich Energie billiger machen. Mai gewann Trump die Primary in Indiana so klar, dass davon auszugehen war, dass er aller Voraussicht nach die absolute Mehrheit der Parteitagsdelegierten hinter sich versammeln würde.

trump chances -

Der US-Präsident deutet zudem Korruption an. Einige von ihnen schwenkten mexikanische Flaggen. Behielten die Republikaner die Mehrheit, eher nicht. Geheimdienstchef Dan Coats sagte, bislang gebe es keine Anzeichen, dass sich Russland in gleicher Intensität wie noch beim Präsidentschaftswahlkampf einmische. Trump will das Steuersystem vereinfachen, Reiche — ihn selbst eingeschlossen — hingegen stärker besteuern, die Mittelschicht jedoch entlasten. Trumps Wahlkampfchef tritt zurück Er macht sich keine Illusionen darüber, wie gefährlich diese Situation ist. Sie erhalten auf FinanzNachrichten. Sicher ist, dass die Entmachtung Muellers einen gewaltigen Sturm im Land auslösen würde. He added, 'The 9-point differential, if it holds up, could add up to a lot of seats, maybe enough for the Democrats to snatch the House from the Republicans. Simply calling him and by extension, his supporters a bunch of gap-toothed bigots is not going to work as well as Mrs Clinton and her handlers think it will, I suspect. Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Wisconsin? Here are the engl. verkaufen we added in each update. Each of those candidates had an opposing candidate vying for office- and the American people made their choice, to the pleasure of most voters usually and the dismay of many within the minority. Two ambush-style attacks on police that appear to be in response to recent killings of African-American men by white police officers continues leverkusen dortmund livestream divide the nation. But Trump's ability to book of ra mit echtem geld spielen Republican pieties, from sacrosanct policies to party elders, continued to be a strength. By book of raw 10.000 no real policy platform prior to that stage, that will be easy for him to do. Will such a team win the championship? Michael Morgenstern is double board certified in neurology and sleep medicine. Dazzle you with official-sounding terms like "Code Red. EVERYONE with any influence whatsoever in American culture knows it except, apparently, most American politicians, who have been pretending that the issues they support are motivated by some etherial notion of principal or ideology.

How the forecast has changed We'll be updating our forecasts every time new data is available, every day through Nov.

Chance of winning Win prob. Electoral votes Popular vote. Our latest coverage June The winding path to electoral votes A candidate needs at least electoral votes to clinch the White House.

How much each state matters Two measures help capture how important a state and its voters will be in determining the next president: What to expect from the Electoral College In each of our simulations, we forecast the states and note the number of electoral votes each candidate wins.

Electoral College deadlock no candidate gets electoral votes 1. How this forecast works Nate Silver explains the methodology behind our general election forecast.

More coverage Weekly email Podcast. Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Florida? Projected vote share over time. From polls to a forecast.

Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Pennsylvania? Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Michigan? Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win North Carolina?

Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Virginia? Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Colorado?

Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Ohio? Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Wisconsin?

Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Minnesota? Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Nevada? Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Arizona?

Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win New Mexico? Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win New Hampshire?

Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Georgia? Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Iowa? Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Maine?

Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win New Jersey? Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Oregon?

Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Texas? Untitled-2 Back to national overview Who will win Alaska? I certainly can't tell you.

Only one thing is certain, a Trump presidency would provide for a lot of comedic material. Please don't interpret anything I write as an indication of who I support for President.

I'm just writing about observations I have made. Scientists beat the house. Michael Morgenstern is double board certified in neurology and sleep medicine.

He is founder of the American Sleep Apnea Society. To learn more about Dr. Morgenstern's neurology and sleep medicine practice or to set up a consultation visit DoctorMM.

My original answer from the beginning of January is below, though it was a little less tongue in cheek of an answer.

Republican voters are rallying around Trump. Whatever he does seems to be working. He has been a disruptive force. He has broad appeal. If you are listening to the naysayers, just know that these same individuals said Jeb Bush would be the Republican nominee.

How wrong they were. It's the same story over and over again. After Trump wins the Republican nomination, pundits will again be dismissing Trump for the establishment candidate, Hillary Clinton.

Just look at what Trump did to the Republican establishment candidate! The public is sick of Washington and politics as usual. Trump's appeal is greatest against establishment types.

That is what this election cycle has been about. Even on the Democratic side, Bernie Sanders has been garnering so much attention, not because he's a Democrat, but because he is so different.

I think a lot of Sanders base may be potential Trump supporters in a general election. I suspect many of them support Sanders and may support Trump because of his personality, rather than his policy.

This will be dangerous news for Hillary Clinton, whose perceived personality fair or not has not always been an asset.

Trump also has a lot of momentum. In July, a Trump v Clinton polling average showed a Do you know what it is now? It will soon be tied.

One more thing, polls mean something. Polling averages have been very accurate at predicting elections in the past.

Hillary Clinton should try her best to learn from the mistakes of Republicans during their debates. Except how can she? Donald Trump is very unpredictable.

He easily dismantled the entire Republican Machine with two words: Trying to brand her as the "Worst Secretary of State.

Look where that got them. I am sure her campaign must be secretly very worried. If they aren't then I am worried for them.

They are all long time political insiders who are experts at their game. What they may not realize, as the political insiders on Jeb Bush's team did not, is they are playing in a different game, with different rules.

If they realize this too late, then the game will be over sooner than they think. Is Donald Trump likely to win the election?

A lot of good answers here, but I'd like to Re-Ask this question after the recent comments by Trump regarding banning Muslims from entering the country.

As of today, he will probably win. The more the Democratic Party reminds people that Hillary is the more experienced and qualified candidate, the more the voters like Trump.

The more the Republican leadership hates on him for not being a team player, the more the voters like Trump.

The voters in both parties are looking to strip their respective leadership of control of the party so that they can remake the party in the image of the new electorate demographic.

Voters feel that the major parties have been co-opted by a political class, and they want them back. The rules of the game are changing. Then again, it could all change next week, so who knows!

The only way Trump can win is if he manages to sweep most or all of the Rust Belt, and get North Carolina. This will get him to at least , or Republicans have had a hard time with Hispanics, and were hoping to rebound in , but Trump has their nominee has destroyed that plan.

So, in my prediction, based off statistics and polls, I believe Hillary Clinton will be our next president. Democratic edge in Hispanic voter registration grows in Florida.

Sad part is that he's checking all the boxes, so all that's left is for the party to cheat. Aside from the fact that I'm a transgender woman, do you know why I will never be president?

Because I'm unwilling to put forth the concept that America is on the verge of failure and I'm the candidate who can bring it back.

I refuse to pander to moneyed interests and I will never try to convince you that America has failed. Every president in American history has put forth some kind of similar premise.

The country is doomed! But fear not, for I can save us all! You know who says shit like that? I am not that thing.

And if you're really so idiotic that you believe that America needs help to be "great again ," then you're really showing how white you really are.

My skin is white, but I'm a gay trans woman. The only way I could have it any worse in America is to be a gay black trans woman. There is no more oppressed demographic.

A society can be fairly measured by how it treats its most vulnerable members, and things are improving for the trans community.

It's a fantastic time to be American. We don't need to be made great again, because we're already great. We should be striving to make America even greater but again, no candidate in the history of the nation has ever successfully run on that platform.

So why are we trying to "make America great again? When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression. Note, please, that Trump rallies are decidedly monochromatic events.

Note that a majority of Trump supporters are men. Note that Trump panders to the evangelical vote despite being arguably not Christian.

The white Christian male has been the dominant demographic in America forever, and that's on the cusp of changing. That's the greatness that Trump wants to bring back.

The suzerainty of the white Christian male. That promises a regression in hard-earned gains in rights and equalities for a broad spectrum of groups that are not WCMs.

And you can see the WCMs are eager for it. They don't want equality, they want domination. And you should be scared. Based upon my many readings and my personal reflections , I think an objective study of historical events can be conducted , and the principles of the scientific method can even be applied to History , if it is done the right way.

I think Trump would be the president of the USA based mainly on two reasons or two notions:. For the first notion , there is an exact correspondence between the Roman emperor Claudius and Trump.

It is reported by Suetonius and in Acts Some scholars hold that it didn't happen, while others have only a few missionaries expelled for the short term.

For the second notion , it is known that Claudius was the first Roman Emperor to be born outside Italy. Here are two links related to my ideas about similar subjects and human History:.

Some notes about the possibility of a mathematical theory of History. Emad Noujeim's answer to What are some of the most important black swan events in history?

Trump has been elected president. In fact this answer was written on June 18, History suggests that, in the absence of an obvious, early landslide of support for a candidate after the summer Conventions, predictions made before October tend to be inaccurate.

We forget, for example, that there were points in the race where you could have conceivably predicted a narrow McCain victory — until the economy went into a tailspin — following a Primary contest in which Mike Huckabee could have been predicted as the late-blooming candidate to topple Rudy Giuliani who would face off against "the inevitable" Hillary Clinton.

So anybody who offers odds on the General Election this far out is either fooling themselves, trying to fool others, or both. At this point it's very difficult to say.

At the same time, the Trump campaign is riddled with several potential hindrances that could easily stifle his momentum. There is the growing potential for those in support of the NeverTrump movement to either abstain from voting, vote for Hillary, or even vote for a 3rd party candidate representative of the conservative views expected of most Republican members.

The flourishing of an Independent candidate, though typically insignificant, has had the potential to alter election results if major enough Ralph Nader in being an excellent example.

The Trump campaign has likewise shown itself to be uncoordinated, at times disconnected from the rules underlying the caucuses and primaries.

This has cost him victories in what might have otherwise been winnable states due to failures to connect with delegates on their issues or even get the delegate list correct, for that matter.

What appears to be a shift from this unprofessionalism, however, has occurred with the hiring of veteran election strategist Paul Manafort, and, in the wake of the Indiana primaries, apparent offers from the "best of the best" in the political process.

I would contend that it depends largely on how he and Hillary make use of the media to either draw out voters or lambast their opponents.

In the age of social media and reality television, after all, Mr. Trump has shown himself to be quite a prolific user of those means as tools of communication.

Anyone who answers "yes" or "no" is not really answering the question, as no one actually knows. The odds are that he won't, but there is real danger here.

The tone of the answers being given below belies just how much whistling in the dark is being done by the Democratic Party. For those of you old enough to have seen the first "Star Wars" movie - the one with the Death Star, Uncle Owen, and Governor Tarkin - will recall the scene near the end, when a Death Star apparatchik approaches Peter Cushing, to announce that the rebel attack has been analysed, that their is a danger, and that perhaps the Governor should consider having his shuttle standing by.

IF Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee and IF Donald Trump is the Republican nominee, there is a very, very real chance that the long term electoral map could tip.

In another thread about Massachusetts , a commentor quite nastily referred to people in Western Massachusetts as dirt-poor igoramuses living in rural shitholes.

Trump's putative fascism is less important to many than the fact that Trump - almost alone - is talking about economic fear.

He alone seems to see that the benefits of mass immigration are mixed. She is going to get hit - hard - on her support for TPP.

Her connections to the big banks. People may even point out that she played a large role in the toppling of Syria, Egypt, and Libya, and now advocates the need to bring in refugees from crises that her State Department helped create.

Trump is a big-mouthed oligarch, and it's incredibly ironic that he is seen as a sort of populist. Simply calling him and by extension, his supporters a bunch of gap-toothed bigots is not going to work as well as Mrs Clinton and her handlers think it will, I suspect.

They need to point out why Mrs Clinton's bank-friendly, big business-friendly, interventionist-friendly policies are better for the lower-middle class than Trump's isolationist, protectionist policies are.

As I sit here reading story after story about his fellow Republicans attacking Trump, I am reminded of the old political adage, what goes around, comes around.

Donald Trump spent the primary season engaging in personal attacks against his Republican opponents. Chris Christie endorsed him when no one else would but in return he insulted Christie and refused to make him the Vice Presidential nominee.

So today Christie criticized Trump for his treatment of a gold star family. This was absolutely predictable. Trump has made a lot of enemies in the Republican Party and not many friends.

This fact was obscured by the Republican Convention, from which all his enemies were excluded. That must have made him feel good, but now he must face the consequences of his failure, not just to mend fences, but to build any bridges.

President Obama noted today that Trump was making gaffs that other Republicans repudiated on a daily basis. Elections are not won by individuals but by political parties and coalitions of special interest groups.

Trump has only part of the Republican party supporting him and has alienated numerous special interest groups that might have helped him. He has thus violated every long-standing rule of politics.

He is like a member of a sports team who has offended every other member of his team. Will such a team win the championship?

If he faces Clinton, she can run as a moderate progressive, whereas Trump has alienated a lot of moderates during the primary.

Her foreign policy experience will be matched against his bluster when the candidates react to world events during It will be a contest between a political insider and the ultimate political outsider.

If he faces Sanders, he will actually be competing for a lot of the same disaffected white voters with an opposite message.

Bloomberg has insinuated that he would run as a third party candidate in this scenario. If Trump loses the GOP contest, he will likely run as an independent.

Remember he took an oath not to do so as long as he was treated fairly. The accusations that Cruz cheated in Iowa were setting up the justification for him to run as an independent.

I don't think he stands much chance at winning if he runs against Clinton and Rubio or Christie or Bush , though he could pull away enough votes to decide the election.

Now if Trump ran as an independent against Cruz or Carson and Sanders, he's suddenly the moderate candidate.

He may find it hard to compete against party-backed candidates, but a lot of reliable GOP donors have decided they hate Cruz and could deal with Trump.

It might pit party-loyalists and conservative-purists against the business interests who are usually served by the GOP but don't care about social issues.

An even weirder scenario is if Trump can maintain a loyal portion of Republicans land convince them he was the victim of the GOP establishment during an unfair primary, he could split the party.

There's an angle for this whether the GOP nominates a more conservative or more establishment candidate.

Now Trump is no longer running as an independent against a Republican, he's running with half the remnants of the GOP under a new party can't wait to see what he names it that could ascend to be one of two or three major parties of the next decades.

The unscathed Democratic Party probably wins in this scenario. So Trump's best chance of winning the presidency is probably to run as a Republican against Sanders and Bloomberg, or as an independent against Cruz and Sanders.

But let's not assume the Donald actually wants to serve as President. He likes to win and he might like the power trip, but the better scenario for him is to be in a position to influence who wins and extract favors from the future President, all while building his name recognition and brand which is the only reason that Trump or Carson entered the race at all.

This page may be out of date. Save your draft before refreshing this page. Submit any pending changes before refreshing this page. Ask New Question Sign In.

Quora uses cookies to improve your experience. Why shouldn't social media be democratically owned by its users? User-ownership can ensure free social media without you being the product.

He should have been fired then. Its a testament to the incompetence of Loretta Lynch that she could not fire him then because she was so compromised after meeting Bill Clinton on the tarmac in Arizona during an ongoing investigation.

It could not be clearer that these investigations are a solution in search of a problem. Again, it brings to mind yet another famous quote from the movie in terms of how the Democrats are now coping with their comprehensive loss of power and non-existent explanation for their resounding defeat: Which would be illegal.

See, MOST folks in that position, regardless of political party, know that stuff. Trump on the other hand is used to his business empire, where he gets to do and say anything he wants.

Trump will F up. In one or more of the above ways or any one of a host more. Eventually, the evidence will come out, and the Republicans will have to be dragged kicking and screaming into impeachment proceedings.

Next election, the Democrats will take back the White House and the Senate. The GOP keeps the House. Trump goes back to being a business buffoon, er, I mean tycoon.

Most of the other answers are looking in the wrong direction. It does not matter what the technical requirements are for committing an impeachable offense.

Bill Clinton was impeached for purely partisan reasons. It does matter somewhat whether the House Republicans approve of Trump.

They discounted him until he won the nomination, but will remain satisfied as long as Trump maintains a good habitat for the alligators.

Trump's impeachment—-or not—-will depend on what his populist base thinks. The election taught that the U. The Red Tribe is led by the right-wing radio, internet, and television thought-leaders, namely, talk radio, Breitbart and other alt-right internet sites, and the Hannity faction of Fox News.

This tribe has found a winning formula consisting of:. Trump would be impeached only if this system breaks down and the populist thought leaders turn on him.

What plausible scenarios could cause this? Something bad happens under Trump's watch that genuinely hurts Red America, which leads to bottom-up anger.

But there may be undiscovered weaknesses in the system, such as internal factionalization, which could lead to turning on Trump instead.

Because Trump will upset whatever delicate balances remain in the complex and tumultuous world, it is highly possible that something very bad will happen on Trump's watch.

The only question is, which direction does the attribution go? If the bad thing is, say, a simple war conducted entirely outside the U.

If it's a war that devastates the U. The outrage machine declines in profitability. But suppose the outrage burns itself out, and viewership becomes acclimated as people tire of learning that Trump has bombed yet another refugee camp, or hosted Miss Universe at the White House wearing a bathing suit in the Oval Office.

Then, what better than a Trump impeachment to generate a whole season worth of enhanced ratings?

The thought leaders care more for money and fame than policy and would happily burn Trump. I would look to pro-wrestling scripts, or Shakespeare, to envision how this will play out.

As drama, righteous indignation against a turncoat who, Guess what? Under both of these scenarios, the impeachment itself will be pro forma, driven by popular opinion, and the Senate would proceed to remove Trump from office.

Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. Neither was convicted by the Senate. Not a single U. President has been removed from office by impeachment.

No reason to think Donald Trump will be the first. In reality impeachment talk is a Democratic exercise in tripling down on Donald Trump being unfit for the Presidency.

They doubled down and claimed him unfit in his race against Hillary for President. Now they are tripling down and suggesting once again he is unfit for office and will be impeached.

They are trying one more time to disqualify him. His lousy approval ratings egg them on. Because many people who disapprove of him would certainly vote for him again.

They disapprove of his style. Heck, I am not crazy about his presidential style myself. But Trump has a pretty good record from the perspective of his base.

Constitutionalist on the Supreme Court? Unemployment at 20 year lows? Stock market at an all time high? There will no doubt be tax reform and a health bill before the mid-terms.

In the highly polarized world of US politics, Donald Trump has done many things his opponents dislike and will use to run against him.

But that is politics and not impeachment. Sure Trump has issues running his government. Being a complete outsider, with a bombastic style, that was to be expected.

But that is not an impeachable offence. Talk of impeachment is very premature at this point. It is possible if the Dems flip the House in impeachment hearings will be held, but not if Nancy Pelosi is Majority Leader.

She understands the very dangerous precedent that would be set if losers of a U. But the probability is still low. There are at least two variables and one contingency to consider when answering this question: Any impeachment will have to start with the House formulating articles of impeachment, and it will have to end with the Senate voting to remove the president.

If a majority of the House votes against the proposed articles, the impeachment will not start. If even as much as a third of the Senate votes against removing the president, the impeachment ends with Trump still in power.

Needless to say, neither one of these potential outcomes is desirable to the Democrats. Obviously, both houses of Congress are currently dominated by the Republicans.

I predict that unless the Democrats win the majority in the House in , no impeachment process of Trump will ever get started at least not during his first term in office.

As for the Senate side of this equation: It is conceivable to obtain a Trump conviction in the Senate, given very strong evidence of malfeasance, even if the Republicans still hold a slim majority.

However, with the retirement of even marginally independent senators like Corker and Flake , this could become more questionable on However, special counsel Mueller has a stellar reputation, and he is a Republican.

What a are the chances? The same as any other President before him and after. What is the likelihood? Slim to none considering the bar is pretty high to impeach a public official, yes federal judges have been impeached and convicted.

The only relevant issues from his past would need to be criminal acts where he admits guilt or is found guilty.

Doubtful that a criminal case, within the statute of limitations, will take place. Civil matters are not crimes against the state, as much as the public wants them to be.

Jefferson was a more polarizing and morally corrupt individual than any President. He was a virulent racist and believed he had the absolute power he had as a General.

Clinton was impeached, or indicted using common legal terms, by the house. The Senate voted against even going forward with a trial because the crime did not merit removal from office.

He committed an act of perjury concerning his personal life, not while performing his duties as President. It was also clear to most anyone at the time, Ken Starr had gone so far afield in his role as an independent prosecutor, his investigation was a witch hunt.

He would have been a terrible witness. The House Republicans knew this and the mostly party line vote was intended to make a statement, whatever it may have been.

Nixon clearly had committed multiple felonies while acting as an individual and in the capacity of President during his tenure. His recalcitrant attitude made it necessary for Barry Goldwater's, who didn't like Nixon one bit, to walk, famously, down Pennsylvania Avenue to inform Nixon that he would be impeached and that Senate Republicans would vote to move forward with a trial.

One that would almost certainly result in a conviction but also be lengthy, personally degrading and further undermine the confidence in an Office which had just endured the turbulence of the Civil Rights movement and the Vietnam War.

Nixon still argued against it but Goldwater's was flanked by other senior Republican Senators who made it clear resignation was his only option.

There are cases where previous Presidents actions have been found to be likely impeachable offenses. So, the hue and cry that Trump should be impeached already or likely will are naive, at the worst, or posturing.

Signing an Executive Order, Memorandum or Directive is not a crime even if they are found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

Something which must go through the normal court process of lower courts hearing a suit and then moving through the appellate courts.

It is secretive plans done with the full knowledge of the President that are the most likely acts that would result in full impeachment and conviction.

FDR took some highly suspect actions which have since been apologized for by Presidential Proclamation and resulted in remunerations.

If Oliver North had not shredded documents and, essentially, taken the blame, Iran Contra could have led to Reagan being impeached. It was even argued that GHW Bush knew of the details as VP and thus could be impeached but no direct link or evidence could be found.

Spiro Agnew avoided impeachment for taking bribes before his term as VP by resigning. He did so only under the condition he be pardoned since the statute of limitations had not expired in Maryland.

He has been constitutionally elected to an office whose parameters are defined by the Constitution. A president can be impeached, which is not the same thing.

The difficulty here, of course, at least for the next couple of years, is that Donald Trump presides over an entirely Republican Congress.

A majority of House members need to vote for impeachment, and two-thirds of the Senate must vote for conviction.

Irrespective of who controls Congress, however, impeachment proceedings cannot be the result of pique. Trump has to do something that constitutes misconduct, and Congress has respond to that misconduct.

That Trump has already been, and will be again, guilty of such misconduct seems likely enough — likelier, perhaps, than in the case of any president in living memory.

But in a corrupt system, impartial justice is not to be expected. So this would be an uphill battle. Donald Trump is a monster and is poised to do serious harm to the country.

His appointment of Steve Bannon was a frankly terrifying move. It was not to be: Trump tried to back off Pence pick: Imagine, now, the trauma of two impeachments, if such a thing were possible.

Next in line would be Paul Ryan, if he keeps his job: The easy way out is not the right way out. This has to be done by hard work: Anyway, you could argue that none of these have exactly been impeachment-level scandals.

Maybe not, but I would cite the fact that none of these things prevented Trump from being elected or for impeachment to ever seem like a serious prospect.

On top of this, both the House and the Senate are majority-Republican. For the president to be impeached, the House needs a simple majority. Of course, impeachment and removal are different things.

The 'cloud' over the White House. How the Impeachment Process Works. They will remain extremely low until Congress is controlled by members who believe they can safely vote for impeachment and conviction without fear of losing their own jobs.

Right now, Republicans control Congress, and the voters back in their home districts love Trump. Right now, any Republican member of Congress who votes for impeachment or conviction…nay, any Republican member of Congress who seriously voices support for impeachment …is guaranteed unemployment following the elections.

In order for that to change, Trump will have to do something that in the eyes of conservatives so utterly loathsome that it will convince the voters back home that he has to go.

At that point, the seated members of Congress will be free to boot him out and still safely retain their own jobs.

The model you should be looking at is the Nixon impeachment proceedings. Republicans supported Nixon until mid summer , when a final batch of Oval Office tapes were released.

The problem for progressives in this scenario? The numbers are going the wrong way for you. We suspect Trump will resign rather than face impeachment and trial, although the threat of impeachment is what motives him.

We foresee the following scenario in connection with the upcoming and final indictments, which ought to land like a ton of bricks dropped from the 3rd story:.

One or more of the defendants enter into a plea deal wherein they state facts in an affidavit and offer to testify in accordance with that or those affidavit s.

This adds additional pressure on defendants and the unindicted co-conspirator. Public support of President Trump drops.

Trump knows if he pardons everyone, that builds a huge impeachment case, and maybe criminal case, against him. Pardons actually prove the crimes were committed, they just remove the legal consequences of same.

So, he enters a global settlement of the entire mess, running about like this:.

Chances trump -

Danach stimmt Trumps Einwanderungspolitik mit der Mehrheit der Bevölkerung im traditionellen Einwanderungsland überein. Allerdings wäre vor den Zwischenwahlen im Herbst ein von Trump verursachtes Blutbad im Justizministerium eine Katastrophe für die Republikaner. Juli englisch ; Stephen Shepard: Just 16 percent said Trump's presidency has made them think more favorably of the Republican Party, while 30 percent said his presidency has not had an impact on their view of the GOP. Trump kritisiert Papst Franziskus.

Therefore, the claims from Democrats that she can ride through these scandals unscathed, despite her plummeting in the polls, strongly suggests hubris on their part.

Trump has stated that he wants to reopen, or tear up NAFTA, which is exactly what they want to hear right now.

This is my opinion on how things currently look, and is subject to change as political events continue to unfold. Most of his critics consider that as "no chance in hell".

Yet most of these people play the Powerball lottery, where your chance of winning is 0. He has outsmarted and outplayed some of the most popular governors, senators and politicians with squeaky clean records in what most people considered the best Republican lineup of candidates in decades.

He only needs to do it one more time with yet another career politician and that one right now appears to be a "Washington insider", who's being investigated by the FBI.

Some people say Hillary is different, but let's not forget that she's already lost an election to a black guy whose last name sounds almost like "Osama" and whose middle name is "Hussein".

And if there were no super-delegates, she would have almost the same number of delegates as an 80 year old Jewish socialist who used to praise the Soviet Union and communist Cuba.

There's a pretty good chance that on November 8th you'll see these 2 faces on TV:. It is highly unlikely that ANY candidate can win the Presidency in modern America without much support from:.

Trump has actively alienated each of these groups at some stage of his campaign, and in many cases multiple times. He has even made alienation of some of these groups a staple of his campaign.

This has made Trump perhaps the most unpopular presidential candidate among non-whites in modern American history. The following favorable-unfavorable ratings are from November 8, , so the ratings are likely even worse today than they were at the time given the level of discourse from Trump since then.

Even the GOP understood that they must garner support from minority groups during the election cycle in order to stand a chance.

Trump essentially tore up the GOP's playbook, doused it in gasoline, set it on fire, then pissed on it for good measure.

Trump's primary success is almost exclusively due to his appeal to white, mostly male disaffected nationalists - a particularly angry and vocal subset of the GOP base.

While this group may be not only sustainable, but effective for the Republican Primary, it is a death sentence for any candidate's general election hopes.

The changing demographics in the US simply don't favor him. I predict that Trump will attempt to pivot and alter his message during the general election being the shapeshifter that he is, but I don't see that being a successful strategy.

Unlike his current base of supporters who appear to be immune to rampant, pathological lying, general election voters have already seen through his bullshit and will not be so easily swayed by his shifting rhetoric.

It's a long time and since we are inching closer to the final verdict let me explain few things. Even years ago it was totally dominated by white male.

There are Jews male who are extremely smart,but again Jews are just a minority. All great things about America before WW2 were made,shaped by only white men.

But here is a striking point: USA won very few Nobel prizes in first couple of decades of 20th century. Even before USA was not winning many Nobels or was not producing many famous inventors in terms of population.

I would rather call it a non white revolution,although some white supremacist might disagree with me.

But then since 's onwards many first generation Euro whites migrated in USA who were very talented and since then USA has become a super power.

So reason USA is global leader today it's because of Jews and some selective talents from Euro whites. But then America had been spoiled by many backward immigrants too.

Latinos,blacks,Muslims,Indians,Chinese etc have migrated,but very few of them are producing extraordinary researchers,inventors,musicians etc.

For example those who are migrating in USA as first generation immigrants should be given a time period. For those in Science and technology should be told either you make inventions within 10 years,otherwise go home.

I see huge number of ordinary students from south Asia migrate in USA and many of them stay there,but if you ask them 10 basic questions regarding history of science even related to their fields ,they won't be able to answer 9 of them.

For example I know many people who have studied in Harvard,MIT or other IVYs they are lot senior than me ,but have no basic knowledge of how the world is running in science and technology.

So these type of people should go home as they are not contributing anything to the society. USA should keep talents who belongs to elite top 0.

Simarly many people who migrate from Europe specially eastern Europe have very little achievements. International candidates should be highly exceptional,otherwise they should go home.

Donald Trump is very vocal about illegal Mexican immigrants. He should be,because no one really wants to fill his country with filth.

But the biggest threat is the Muslims. Muslims have made their name globally except east Asia and south America for terrorism,rape,murder,violence,treachery and every other sort of crimes.

How can you tolerate these sub human people in your land? Now I'm going back to the topic where I started. Small Jews were also in that league.

But Barack Obama won because women,blacks,latinos,Indians and other minorities voted for him. The so called social elite Jews and white male did not vote for Obama,yet he had a triumph over Romney because majority backward population of USA voted for him.

Now what will happen in this election? White male intellectuals will mostly vote for Trump,Jews will vote for Trump both men and women as Islam and Jews can not co exist.

Then you might ask me that where is Mrs Clinton? Yes she has a good chance too because majority of women irrespective of their color will probably vote for Clinton.

Muslims,Latinos will all vote in favor of Clinton too. But here is the most interesting mathematics: I personally think blacks will decide who will win this election.

It's depending how many black persons will vote for Trump. Trump has promised that he will improve black lives,their economy etc.

But if majority blacks vote for Clinton,then it might be a different story. So far in my opinion Trump has slight edge over Clinton,but I'm predicting in favor of Trump.

Less than 48 hours ago today is 4. I construe this as either an belief on his part that he will not be the Republican nominee or a pledge to run against himself.

The later sounds odd, but consider he has admitted his foreign policy advice is obtain by talking to himself, indicating proficiency at wearing several hats at once and possibly a second mental illness beyond the already widely diagnosed narcissism.

If Trump runs as a third party candidate, he splits the Republican vote. It is a simple historical fact that a third party candidate splits the vote of the faction he is most closely allied with.

This is so well established, that one seriously wonders if this is actually further evidence that this is just a publicity stunt after all meaning he never wanted to be president.

Saying stupid, hateful, un american things failed to sink the campaign boat so know he is getting desperate. On the other hand it could just be a threat to prevent the Convention coup that is mounting in the party.

The answers on this page so far ignore one of the great "structural" flaws in the American system. To wit, the tendency of every change in president to be accompanied by a change in party affiliation.

This is a socio-political phenomenon disconnected from the merits of candidate's policies in practice. Because of it, it is wrong for anyone to say he cannot win simply because he is an idiot or a fascist.

Second, there is insufficient credit being given to the fact that a social revolution is occurring of which he has come to be the heir apparent aka, the Tea Party Movement.

This phenomenon is being ever more widely compared to fascism in early twentieth century by serious minded commentators. Fascism was never policy driven, but entirely a cult of personality, fueled by negative emotions, much as Trumps campaign has been.

Then there is the fact that Trump is clearly drawing support from the uneducated and even the overtly anti-intellectual. He has even acknowledged this.

Moreover, we must remember that while he could be overthrown in the convention, this is only possible if he does not carry the first vote, yet there is every indication he will prevail on the first vote.

If tradition and official rules are subverted in an attempt to prevent his nomination, who knows what will happen given the years of unrepudiated threats of "second amendment remedies" armed revolution in the party.

Finally, we must remember that this is the party that has turned the ballot box into a controversy, with partisan gerrymandering, voter suppression, ballot mismanagement, faux ballots aka, provisional ballots that few realize go uncounted , and a Supreme Court ruling disfavoring inquiry into contested elections.

This backdrop means that if Trump does not win, there is a high probability his supporters will believe a fraud has been committed, not to mention the possibility that a fraud will actually have been committed.

Given these factors, belief that rational evaluation of his policies and statements will control the outcome is simply naive, if not absurd.

The Republican part has set itself up to be consumed by hate and violence after decades of overt racism, advocacy of gun ownership as a civil right, tolerance of carrying guns at political rallies, endless dog-whistling, and official tolerance of baseless conspiracy theories.

That a distinction in degree exists, so far, is small comfort. Let us not forget, that the Tea Party is a party within a party, repudiating the later party's legitimacy, while that repudiated party has spent 8 years denying the legitimacy of the president and calling into question the very notion of the necessity of governance.

In other words, the party seems destined to be hoisted on it's own petard. Therefore, there is a real danger Trump could win.

Worse still, there is real danger if Trump wins. He has no ability to attract swing voters and therefore cannot hope to carry the general election.

When asked in the beginning of July if Donald Trump could be president, after hearing him speak and the pundits say he would fail, I said Yes, I believe he will be the Republican nominee.

I have updated my answer to explain the largely unpredictable occurrence--how and why it is possible that Donald Trump will be the Republican Nominee and could be the 45th President of the United States of America.

When talking about attraction, Donald Trump is probably not on the top of a list of people you would think about.

Usually the word is associated with physical attraction. A handsome man or an attractive female. Besides from visual attraction, other things and even objects can be considered attractive ie tourist attraction, a ride at an amusement park.

Donald Trump is also attractive. Probably not in the way the woman in the red dress below is attractive. Donald Trump has other qualities that the American public desire, things that cause a great interest in him-- money and power.

Like a beautiful person, these are very potent desires in our society and Donald Trump projects both of these attributes that make him attractive.

In case you don't remember here is a clip of Jeb Bush or Jeb! What exactly is chaos or more specifically who was Chaos? Chaos was the first thing in existence, the origin of everything.

This is what Judeo-Christian religions often refer to as God. That's right, without knowing it, Jeb Bush was referring to Trump by the same name that Greek Mythology uses to describe the first God.

I will turn to science to answer this question. Chaos Theory is a field of mathematics studying highly sensitive systems where small differences in initial conditions result in unpredictable outcomes.

If Donald Trump is the Chaos Candidate, in a chaotic election cycle, then conventional prediction becomes nearly impossible.

Interestingly, one form of equation that demonstrates chaotic behavior is called a " Jerk System. I didn't make this up.

Therefore, you could say it is possible for Chaos to be a Jerk, at least according to Chaos Theory. It seems that many people would describe Trump in less than favorable terms--see Donald Trump is the worst thing that ever happened to fill in the blank below:.

It might not matter what people think of Donald Trump. The public is sick of Washington and perceived do-nothing politicians.

His unpredictable nature is a delight to the anti-establishment types. Trump's anti-establishment appeal is similar to the sentiment felt by the public during another well known campaign, run by another millionaire, that of Monty Brewster.

A vote for Trump is more a vote against the predictable order in politics, than it is a vote for Trump, so to speak. Even if Trump were unqualified as a politician, it doesn't really matter because even the most qualified politicians are considered to be failures by the public.

With this viewpoint, anything or anyone would be better than a traditional politician. Chaos Theory is a way to help define events that are difficult to understand using conventional mathematics.

Using Chaos Theory, for example scientists were able to predict which half of a roulette wheel the ball would end up.

I know what your thinking, the presidency is not a game! Here is some good news. Under the right conditions chaos can also spontaneously evolve producing a brilliantly synchronized system such as one found in neurons everything is related to neurology or fireflies, if you prefer.

How bad could it be? Perhaps he would strictly enforce a dress code? Or, perhaps, he would be willing to play the most dangerous game of Russian Roulette in US history?

No one knows what a Trump presidency would be like. I certainly can't tell you. Only one thing is certain, a Trump presidency would provide for a lot of comedic material.

Please don't interpret anything I write as an indication of who I support for President. I'm just writing about observations I have made.

Scientists beat the house. Michael Morgenstern is double board certified in neurology and sleep medicine. He is founder of the American Sleep Apnea Society.

To learn more about Dr. Morgenstern's neurology and sleep medicine practice or to set up a consultation visit DoctorMM. My original answer from the beginning of January is below, though it was a little less tongue in cheek of an answer.

Republican voters are rallying around Trump. Whatever he does seems to be working. He has been a disruptive force. He has broad appeal.

If you are listening to the naysayers, just know that these same individuals said Jeb Bush would be the Republican nominee. How wrong they were. It's the same story over and over again.

After Trump wins the Republican nomination, pundits will again be dismissing Trump for the establishment candidate, Hillary Clinton.

Just look at what Trump did to the Republican establishment candidate! The public is sick of Washington and politics as usual.

Trump's appeal is greatest against establishment types. That is what this election cycle has been about. Even on the Democratic side, Bernie Sanders has been garnering so much attention, not because he's a Democrat, but because he is so different.

I think a lot of Sanders base may be potential Trump supporters in a general election. I suspect many of them support Sanders and may support Trump because of his personality, rather than his policy.

This will be dangerous news for Hillary Clinton, whose perceived personality fair or not has not always been an asset.

Trump also has a lot of momentum. In July, a Trump v Clinton polling average showed a Do you know what it is now? It will soon be tied. One more thing, polls mean something.

Polling averages have been very accurate at predicting elections in the past. Hillary Clinton should try her best to learn from the mistakes of Republicans during their debates.

Except how can she? Republicans put on a show of unity, but work at cross purposes, pulling in several different directions.

Let there be no mistake. In my opinion both parties were ill prepared, and both parties screwed up royally in I can see the Democrats, having learned from the experience, pull together and find a suitable candidate, and a president capable of at least beginning to heal the division in this country and repair the damage this whole mess has done to our standing in the world.

Yes, the election is long over, and we cannot change the past. However, it is important to critique the entire process and learn from our mistakes.

The first question is whether there will be another election. Particularly if there is a strong move to impeach the president, I think all bets are off on American democracy and further elections.

And if Trump were not to be re-elected, I see the potential for him to refuse to leave office peacefully.

We already saw his crazy claims that he won the popular vote by 3—5 million, when he in fact lost it and there is no evidence whatever of widespread voter fraud.

Why would we expect him to accept an actual loss of the election? In the past, early voting has benefited Republicans because the people who vote early tend to be overseas military and older voters, who have in previous elections been more reliably Republican constituencies.

Clinton and Trump sparred over their attitude toward Supreme Court picks and immigration before arguing over the economy.

The biggest surprise of the evening was Trump's refusal to say he would accept the outcome of the election if he lost. Immediately following the debate a Fox Now instapoll had Trump winning the debate by three points, though most pundits, including Shep Smith of Fox News, thought Trump had lost the debate.

Aside from points Trump may have scored on Clinton over the Clinton Foundation accepting foreign donations and damaging revelations about the internal working of her campaign and her speeches to investment bankers divulged this week by Wikileaks, Trump's lack of coherence over the details of his policy proposals and his inability to keep Clinton on the defensive over her insider style of politics led media observers to conclude he had missed his last, best opportunity to pick up voters.

The hoped for general election pivot finally died during the debate. His performance in the debate did little to stop the defection of Republicans who still believe in the fundamental health of the U.

From a high of 45 points on October 2 nd , he had lost 2. The Friday before the Sunday of the second debate, David Fahrenthold of the Washington Post published a story with video of Donald Trump making remarks about his ability with women, caught on a hot mic as he was being interviewed by Billy Bush who at the time was a reporter for Access Hollywood.

Meanwhile, his support among Republican Party leaders started to erode between the revelation of the tape on Friday and the debate on Sunday.

Between the release of the tape on October 7 th and the debate on October 9 th , fifty-one prominent Republican publicly broke with Trump.

Trump hit Clinton hard on Benghazi and the deleted emails on her private server, but Clinton held her own and scored points by getting Trump to tacitly admit he hasn't paid federal income tax since the mid-nineties.

The Second Presidential Debate: Here's What You Missed. By the evening of the first presidential debate on September 26th, the probability that Trump would take the White House was at an all-time high: According to FiveThirtyEight, he reached At the debate Clinton appeared to be prepared and measured in her attacks on Trump while Trump was appeared uneasy, shifting on his feet and sniffling.

When Trump tried to attack Clinton for taking time off the campaign trail to prep for the debate, she shot back, "Yes, I did.

And you know what else I prepared for? I prepared to be president. On the other hand, Clinton set Trump up for criticism on his treatment of women by citing the case of Alicia Machado who Trump had called Miss Piggy and compared to a domestic servant.

After the debate, media consensus gave Clinton the victory, though not by a wide margin. Trump seemed to make matters worse for himself, however, when he doubled down on his criticisms of Machado on social media and Fox and Friends.

At the end of May, Trump was expected to change his tone and "pivot" from a strategy to win primaries to a general election strategy.

Presumably, he was going to soften his tone on immigration and race, but as the days ran out in June, no change appeared in the candidate.

Paul Manafort, who was brought onto the Trump campaign earlier in the year, was made the campaign manager in late June. His mission has been and will continue to be turning Trump toward the general election.

Part of the mission will be getting Trump out of his fundraising deficit. Since the beginning of the campaign, Trump has relied more on his social media talents and eanred media.

Trump's choice of Mike Pence for Veep has also been attributed to Manafort's efforts to bring Trump into line with mainstream Republicans.

Without a doubt, the convention boosted Trump. However, the post convention euphoria has worn off and Trump is starting to look like a beaten man.

He killed 49 people and injured 53 in the most deadly mass shooting in modern America. That afternoon, Trump tweeted, "Appreciate the congrats for being right on radical Islamic terrorism.

We must be smart! Trump realDonaldTrump June 12, He doesn't get it or he gets it better than anybody understands.

It's one or the other. At a rally in New Hampshire later that day, Clinton gave a foreign policy speech which served as a critique of Trump's response to the shooting: They enslave women and they murder gays.

President Obama also weighed in on the tragedy and used it as an opportunity to criticize Trump saying, "If there's anyone out there who think we're confused as to who our enemies are, that would come as a surprise to the thousands of terrorists who we've taken off the battlefield And appear on cable news shows.

Terror and global tensions have continued to plague international relations. In the week leading up to the Republican National Convention, Europe was rocked by a terror attack in Nice that killed 84 people, and the following day over people died during an attempted military coup in Turkey.

Trump, in true Trump style, used the attacks to jump on the liberal left claiming the attacks were the fault of the U.

Domestic problems also have escalated as the summer wears on, drawing parallels in the media to the summer of Two ambush-style attacks on police that appear to be in response to recent killings of African-American men by white police officers continues to divide the nation.

Trump has used the two attacks to hammer at the idea that weak, liberal leadership has led to a breakdown in American society.

In a Facebook post, Trump wrote, "we grieve for the officers killed in Baton Rouge today. How many law enforcement and people have to die because of a lack of leadership in our country.

Chances Trump Video

Is President Trump heading for impeachment?

0 Replies to “Chances trump”

Hinterlasse eine Antwort

Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind markiert *