Stopped reading right there. Off the top of my head - - Donald Trump tweeted about an Apple boycott... from an iPhone - Donald Trump talks about preserving American jobs... while hiring 17 out of 500 American applicants at Mar-el-Lago (the bulk of employment there made up of Romanians, whom Trump keeps in green cards) - Donald Trump on the record (on video) saying he'd date his daughter if she wasn't his daughter - Donald Trump offending every minority that has ever been, often within days of crassly and obsequiously flattering them - Seasons upon seasons of Donald Trump, entertainer, to feed into hours and hours of political advertising Let's be clear about one thing: Donald Trump has yet to partake in any public event whose staging he can't control. To the best of my knowledge, no presidential candidate has ever decided to take his ball and go home from a debate. I mean, look at this shit. Up to this point, the race has been about who can be the most reactionary conservative. Who wants to build the highest wall. Who will deport the most immigrants, deny the most abortions and give away the most taxes. That there has been no substantive discussion allows crazy shit like this: A gentle reminder of Donald Trump vs. vague criticism: That's FOX F'ING NEWS right there, folks. That's the official mouthpiece of the Republican Party. I mean, John Tesh could annihilate Trump in an open debate. Jimmy Fallon could outmaneuver Donald Trump. The man has been a flamboyant, preening asshole in front of any lens he can find since Reagan's first term. The man's boorishness and anti-humanitarian record is a part of American folklore. He's never run for an elected office with any seriousness, and he's never faced any oppositional party in any capacity. The reason the Republicans are scared to death of Trump winning is that they're fucked if that happens. I'll bet I could craft a PAC "you're fired" campaign about jobs, Hispanics, working mothers, the middle class, you name it, using fair use and royalty-free music: I mean, just in googling "Donald Trump fired compilation" here's half.a.fucking.hour of the choad on ALEX JONES: Look - I'll vote for Clinton. I'll vote for Sanders. But I, and every sane individual in America, will never vote for Donald Trump. The discussion up to this point is "would you rather Donald Trump OR Ted Cruz OR Marco Rubio OR Carly Fiorina OR Jeb Bush?" To which the answer is "I would rather Hamburgler than any of the above, but Donald Trump is certainly the face I've seen the most." As soon as the discussion is "would you rather Donald Trump or a qualified politician" the folx voting for Trump are going to be scarce. Remember: The National Review printed an entire issue against Donald Trump. Ask yourself: will an NRO reader vote for Trump? Will an NRO reader vote for Clinton? Will an NRO reader vote for Sanders? I'd wager that a substantial portion of mainstream Republicans will vote for Clinton over Trump. A larger portion will opt out but Trump legitimately scares the shit out of mainstream Republicans. Clinton? She's just an anti-hero. Sanders? He's an ineffectual Vermont socialist. Trump? Trump can destroy the brand for a generation.Every one of Clinton’s (considerable) weaknesses plays to every one of Trump’s strengths, whereas every one of Trump’s (few) weaknesses plays to every one of Sanders’s strengths.
“And honestly, Megyn, if you don't like it, I'm sorry. I've been very nice to you, although I could probably not be based on the way you have treated me,” he added to the moderator. “But I wouldn't do that. But you know what? We, we need strength, we need energy, we need quickness, and we need brain in this country to turn it around. That I can tell you right now.”
Not that it's a high bar, but Megyn Kelley has become my favorite Republican shill. I hear people who used to be talking about Obama's birth certificate talking about Donald Trump being misogynistic, and it is hilarious. If only she used her powers for good more regularly.
I looked through hubski posts submitted from the culturalaffairs.com domain, and there are only a few, one of which was this. I'm rereading the discussion, and it's striking how less confident I am that folx voting for Trump will be scarce in November. The NYTimes mentioned in a blog post introducing a predictive model of the election, and put the odds of Hillary losing at 34%, or about the liklihood that an NBA player will miss a free throw. I agree though, where's the PAC running boorish comment n montage ads of Trump?
In my opinion, it's exactly as it was. I mean, This is June 21: I mean, the Koch Brothers are sitting this one out. That 3%? That's all about money.In the primaries you're appealing to roughly 50% of roughly 97% of the electorate that has made up its mind and will never vote for the other side's candidate. In the general you're trying to grab the 3% that's legitimately up-for-grabs, doesn't hear your dog whistles, and has somehow managed to stay undecided in the most polarized political climate since the Civil War.
Trump raised just over $3 million in May — the month he secured enough delegates to win the Republican nomination — while Clinton raked in more than $26 million, according to the latest filings from the Federal Election Commission.
Is that right? I've heard so much conflicting analysis regarding money in politics that any consensus, if there is one, is that votes follow the more monied candidate but also that money naturally finds the likelier candidate anyway etc. with the cause being difficult to single out. Is money really the only (/largest) influence on that 3%? And why is it 3%, not 5% or 25%? How come it doesn't ever swing to 60% one party and the other 30%? Why is the party breakdown always so nearly even? Also, now that I think about it, I don't think I've ever known someone in that 3%. Who the fuck makes their mind up about something like that based on a 30-second ad spot?That 3%? That's all about money.
You convert an undecided voter to a decided voter by carpetbombing their field of view with propaganda. Propaganda costs money. Current polls seem to put "undecided voters" somewhere between 10% and 20%. Whenever I find someone skeptical about the general stupidity of the human race, I encourage them to read some Youtube comments. If that doesn't work, I advise them to sell something on Craigslist. Elitism only grows easier the more you interface with the proletariat. TRUE STORY: The last time I voted in person in Washington, I crossed the street to the church and walked into the foyer. Someone struck up a conversation with me. We chatted for a minute. Then he said "You seem to be pretty intelligent. Who should I vote for?" I told him that it was an important decision and I'd be happy to help him, but I wouldn't tell him, and he shouldn't let anyone else tell him, either. He gave me a thoughtful look like he'd never heard such a thing in his life.
I find my incredulity from last night somewhat foreign to me now. I literally just sold my car on craigslist and the experience was very much what you describe. My love for the proletariat is very abstract.
Your videos and the subsequent clicks they provided led me down a 30 minute wormhole I didn't have time for :) Trump is nothing, if not entertaining. His twitter feed alone is amazing. It's seriously hard to fathom someone that tweets, "When Mitt Romney asked me for my endorsement last time around, he was so awkward and goofy that we all should have known he could not win!" being our president. Seriously, take a moment and read his tweets. It's like he's a 13 year old girl. (no offense #grrlski) He's extremely catty.
To what degree is the rise of an extreme candidate like Trump the Republican Party's own fault? There's a great article (in Dutch, sadly) I read this morning that tried to explain the rise of Trump using the insights of Thomas Mann and Norman Orstein: [...] Today, however, we have no choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party. That quote is from 2012. The article further argues that the polarizing politics of the Republican Party has lead to candidates getting ever closer to the end of the political spectrum. "Trump is what you get when your party abandons all moderate politics." Do you think there's truth to that?Today, thanks to the GOP, compromise has gone out the window in Washington. In the first two years of the Obama administration, nearly every presidential initiative met with vehement, rancorous and unanimous Republican opposition in the House and the Senate, followed by efforts to delegitimize the results and repeal the policies. The filibuster, once relegated to a handful of major national issues in a given Congress, became a routine weapon of obstruction, applied even to widely supported bills or presidential nominations. And Republicans in the Senate have abused the confirmation process to block any and every nominee to posts such as the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, solely to keep laws that were legitimately enacted from being implemented.
One hundred percent. The Republican Party used to be all about fiscal conservancy and social issues weren't their bag. Remember - Richard Nixon not only started the EPA, he wound down the Vietnam War and launched the HMO act, which was sponsored by Ted Kennedy. When the Democrats managed to run him out of office, however, the sting of "Dirty Tricks" and the annihilation of Barry Goldwater combined to convince the party to listen to Lee Atwater (and others) to appeal to the baser instincts of uneducated whites through the Southern Strategy, religious conservatism and other similar gambits. The only way to get the poor to vote against their own self-interests is through broad values appeal and the Republicans were perfectly willing to become the party of God, Guns and Glory. Lee Atwater learned from Nixon, Karl Rove learned from Lee Atwater. The Tea Party? Didn't exist prior to a black man becoming president. Trump is what you get when your party abandons all moderate voters. Something like 80% of the country believes that abortion should be legal in some cases at least, for example, and the number one concern across all spectrums is jobs. Yet the republicans are still about repealing Roe V. Wade and are willing to make Obamacare their Waterloo.