Here's how Nate Silver (whom I have the utmost respect for as a pollster) of FiveThirtyeight put it (underline mine):
"The scarceness of Trump's offices in several of his must-win states, and their unclear focus on his candidacy, cast real doubts on the Republican nominee's ability to get out the vote. Clinton's edge in battleground states will allow her campaign to focus on getting her voters to the polls, target those on the fence and find the Democrats in deep-red counties. If Trump's chances of winning depend upon disaffected rural voters and previously unregistered Republicans, as some have suggested, those voters may need to mobilize and persuade themselves: The campaign simply does not have the organizational scope to reach them."
Donald Trump failed to grasp the fact that in 2016 political campaigns are about the science of targeting and micro-targeting, fundraising and voter issues. They are not about your ability to insult, malign, ostracize and alienate large diverse communities and voting blocks. In today's political climate so-called "outsider" politicians are very risky bets no matter how sexy and alluring this sounds. You cannot elect an inexperienced "non-politician" to the most important and powerful job in the free world and expect him or her to "learn on the job." That's what will happen if Americans were to elect Donald Trump -- he will have to learn on the job that carries with it the very real potential to make "mistakes" -- some that we do not have the luxury of correcting.
Indeed, America has flirted with this political abnormality over the course of its history -- often with mixed outcomes and sometimes devastating circumstances (See below). Non-politicians like Donald Trump come with some level of business acumen but that's not the same thing as running a government with a legal opposition, checks and balances, and strict proscriptions as to what a president can and cannot do. Trump and his naà �ve supporters do not get this. They think that he's a political miracle worker who can just jump in and get things done.
We're seen his ignorance of how the US government works and his own simplistic approaches to very complex issues facing the American people today. The questions therefore are: Can a failed businessman with zero political experience and an acute lack of understanding about how the United States government operates and what it takes, just "walk right in" and "handle" the 3 million employees? How will he move to appoint the 4,000 federal managers and an "immediate" 250 must-hires, while doing so in a way that does not violate the constitution, and finds common ground with the vetting processes in the US Senate?
My dear readers, I leave you to judge on the merits and basis of FACTS who is better prepared, experienced and qualified to be President of the United States.
FOOT NOTE: [Taft and Hoover are the only two American presidents who were elected to the presidency despite having never been elected to previous office or served as a high-ranking military officer; however, both served as high-ranking federal government officials.
Donald Trump has never been elected to public office (a big disqualifier in American politics), never been appointed to a political office, and has no military experience. He is a businessman. We have had presidents who have had previous careers in business (e.g., Harding, Truman, both Bushes), but none who have gone straight from business to being elected President.]
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
