2016 US Presidential election thread

[Buddahaid]

I don't think he's a plant. I just think he's a big mouth egotist that like hearing his own voice too much for his own good and skirts criminal recklessness in the process. Webster's will have to add his name to the definition for loose cannon.

[August]

Everyone is talking about when the GoP began their fall and who is to blame but the fact is if just about anyone else had been their nominee they'd be beating the pants off the Clinton and the Democrats right now like they have in the Congress and governors mansions around the country for the past three election cycles.

[Commander Wallace]

I think Mr Quatro, Markus and Buddahaid all make valid points. I do think you left out the term narcissist though Buddahaid when describing Trump.

I think the next few months will be interesting with regards to the debates .

[u crank]

Originally Posted by August

Everyone is talking about when the GoP began their fall and who is to blame but the fact is if just about anyone else had been their nominee they'd be beating the pants off the Clinton and the Democrats right now like they have in the Congress and governors mansions around the country for the past three election cycles.

I have to ask the question... why is Trump the Republican candidate?

[Wolferz]

Originally Posted by u crank

I have to ask the question... why is Trump the Republican candidate?

Because he about it so much that they had no choice.

It was the only way to shut him up and stop him from turning blue.
Orange is the new black in the GOP.

[Commander Wallace]

Originally Posted by u crank

I have to ask the question... why is Trump the Republican candidate?

Because Mickey Mouse had contractual obligations through 2020 ?

[August]

Originally Posted by u crank

I have to ask the question... why is Trump the Republican candidate?

As opposed to being the Democrat candidate? Well for one thing the Republicans don't have super delegates that decide who wins and who looses. No way was Bernie Sanders going to be allowed to win. A power i'd bet the GoP establishment wishes they had.

If you're asking how he could have beat his competition for the nomination it points to the republicans greatest weakness; failed expectations.

As one conservative columnist put it:

For years, rank-and-file Republicans asked their leaders do their job: promote the GOP agenda. From tackling illegal immigration to passing a balanced budget to coming up with a viable alternative to Obamacare, the base had a reasonable expectation, especially with Republican majorities in Congress, that these issues would be addressed.

But they weren’t. Instead, lip service and impotence ruled the day.

Boehner and McConnell, as consummate Beltway insiders, were conflict-averse, entirely too comfortable to roll up their sleeves and do the hard work.

Instead, they endlessly complained about their conservative members, criticized without acting, and made “deals with the devil,” giving in to the President and Harry Reid without a fight, despite holding the cards.

The result? After years of saying “do something — or else,” the shoe finally dropped. The “or else” manifested itself as the establishment’s worst nightmare: Donald Trump as presidential nominee.

[vienna]

Originally Posted by August

As opposed to being the Democrat candidate? Well for one thing the Republicans don't have super delegates that decide who wins and who looses. No way was Bernie Sanders going to be allowed to win. A power i'd bet the GoP establishment wishes they had.

If you're asking how he could have beat his competition for the nomination it points to the republicans greatest weakness; failed expectations.

As one conservative columnist put it:

It would be nice to at least put in a source or link to a quote; however, I easily found it:

http://www.newsmax.com/Freind/gop-od.../11/id/728298/

Some other interesting quotes from the same opinion piece:

But accolades and party nominations don’t win general elections, especially when the baggage Trump carries is the highest of any candidate in history.

While Trump successfully tapped into a massive vein of discontent, labeling him a brilliant political strategist, as some have, is going overboard.

He won because he told a disgruntled conservative base, in blunt, politically-incorrect language, what it wanted to hear; he was the only candidate, past or present, to do so; and the competition was weak.

Perhaps the most puzzling aspect of Trump’s ascension is the unapologetic about-face executed by many conservatives, who jettisoned their normal “purity” litmus test to support someone who had no history of walking the walk.

For decades, the conservative wing held candidates to such stringent standards that a bipartisan vote cast twenty years prior was more than enough to disqualify the “offender,” earning him condemnation as a moderate.

Yet Trump earned a free pass, with many conservatives looking the other way on Trump’s personal life, insults, prior liberal positions, and his past support of Democrats, including Hillary Clinton.

In reality, Trump had virtually no “conservative credentials,” so the $64,000 question is whether he has “evolved” into a true conservative, or is simply an opportunist who utilized his TV skills to whip an angry GOP base into a frenzy.

...

If that continues, will those who gave him the nomination feel betrayed and abandon him? “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me,” may become the mantra of disaffected conservatives who took a chance on The Donald and got burned.

Trump also got lucky by competing in a very weak field (a GOP problem for decades). Granted, it wasn’t easy, but if not Trump, then who? Who was the bona fide standout contender? There was none.

The lower tier ran to make a point. The next level had name recognition, but no base.

...

EDIT: It should be noted the quoted piece was first published May 11, 2016, three months ago and before many of the more egregious utterances and actions of Trump in his campaign...




<O>

[August]

So I forgot to post the link, big deal. Who made you the forum link police?

I must be deep into your head.

Got anything to say about your girl Hillary?

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Originally Posted by August

Everyone is talking about when the GoP began their fall and who is to blame but the fact is if just about anyone else had been their nominee they'd be beating the pants off the Clinton and the Democrats right now like they have in the Congress and governors mansions around the country for the past three election cycles.

RE: Congress

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...errymandering/

[Torvald Von Mansee]

If Hillary loses, it will only be due to the collusion of an enemy government, i.e., Russia.

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by u crank

I have to ask the question... why is Trump the Republican candidate?

Because a lot of republicans will fall for these kind of shenanigans. A buffoon jumps up and says "Build a wall" and they are sold, not taking a second to analyze the odds this guy can win a general election, even against the weakest Democratic candidate since 1854. He claims to be a business expert, yet he's afraid to release his tax returns, like Presidential candidates generally do. He touts Washington needs a non-politician to demonstrate our displeasure with established politicians, and we do, we need a strong, intelligent, principled, non-politician as President, but it sure ain't Donald Trump. I would rather have Jon Stewart in the Oval Office than Trump, and Stewart is a mid-level bozo.

Republicans, about 35% of them, are easy to fool.

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by vienna

EDIT[/U]: It should be noted the quoted piece was first published May 11, 2016, three months ago and before many of the more egregious utterances and actions of Trump in his campaign...
<O>

Good note ... it is harder to be on someones side that keeps saying one thing and then he backs off and says that what he said is not true.

From seeing people throw themselves out of buildings during the 9/11 disaster to the muslim populations in New Jersey cheering the buildings falling down to the secret video of the USA handing over money to Iran to release prisoners.

I think Trump is more of a compulsive liar than a pathological lair, but here are two of the definitions from Bing.

What is the definition of a pathological liar?
Pathological lying can be described as a habituation of lying. It is when an individual consistently lies for no personal gain. The lies are commonly transparent and often seem rather pointless.

Is compulsive lying a sign of mental illness?
Although not officially designated as a mental disorder, pathological lying is

often seen as the tip of the iceberg for deeper psychological problems

including narcissistic personality disorder, antisocial personality disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder.

But love does not see the blemishes and he still has a chance to entertain us for the next four years.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

Because a lot of republicans will fall for these kind of shenanigans. A buffoon jumps up and says "Build a wall" and they are sold, not taking a second to analyze the odds this guy can win a general election, even against the weakest Democratic candidate since 1854. He claims to be a business expert, yet he's afraid to release his tax returns, like Presidential candidates generally do. He touts Washington needs a non-politician to demonstrate our displeasure with established politicians, and we do, we need a strong, intelligent, principled, non-politician as President, but it sure ain't Donald Trump. I would rather have Jon Stewart in the Oval Office than Trump, and Stewart is a mid-level bozo.

Republicans, about 35% of them, are easy to fool.

Excellent assessment of the Trump campaign. Personally, I'm not sold on any of the two offerings nor Gary Johnson.

[August]

Originally Posted by Torvald Von Mansee

If Hillary loses, it will only be due to the collusion of an enemy government, i.e., Russia.

Not for her long standing pattern of lies and misrepresentations? Not for risking national security or letting Americans in her charge to be killed? Not for her demonstrated incompetence?

It's all because a foreign government might have had a hand in releasing damaging party emails?

Ok. Whatever makes you feel better when she looses I guess.