2016 Election - Trump: How Did Trump Really Win the Presidency?
- Thread starter bamacon
- Start date
- Status
Re: Can Trump Really Win the Presidency?
Just Bezos protecting his investment in the fat lady, he hears her tuning up. Trump won't be like Bernie boy was.
The source is right up you guys' alley.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/...mear-Bernie-Sanders-16-Hit-Pieces-in-16-Hours
Just Bezos protecting his investment in the fat lady, he hears her tuning up. Trump won't be like Bernie boy was.
The source is right up you guys' alley.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/...mear-Bernie-Sanders-16-Hit-Pieces-in-16-Hours
Re: Can Trump Really Win the Presidency?
Good link Grandpa. Daily Kos has some good stuff once in a while. Now if you'll just start watching Rachel Maddow!
Good link Grandpa. Daily Kos has some good stuff once in a while. Now if you'll just start watching Rachel Maddow!
Re: Can Trump Really Win the Presidency?
Heart disease symptoms caused by valvular heart disease
Depending on which valve isn't working properly, valvular heart disease symptoms generally include:
Fatigue
Shortness of breath
Irregular heartbeat
Swollen feet or ankles
Chest pain
Fainting (syncope)
===========
That could be due to her health problems
Heart disease symptoms caused by valvular heart disease
Depending on which valve isn't working properly, valvular heart disease symptoms generally include:
Fatigue
Shortness of breath
Irregular heartbeat
Swollen feet or ankles
Chest pain
Fainting (syncope)
===========
Re: Can Trump Really Win the Presidency?
Well, I would disagree slightly on one point and strongly on another. Before I do, let me be clear: as the AP said, there is NO EVIDENCE Hillary was ever a birther. It was begun by one/some of her supporters, but she was not a mover of it. The one caveat I would make is that reporter recently claimed that Sidney Blumenthal (who was up to his neck in going after Kathleen Willey) tried to have a guy look into it. Of course, assuming the reporter is telling the truth (for the sake of argument), the campaign was going to go with an ACTUAL TRUE story if Obama was, in fact, born in Kenya. Hence, I cannot exactly rip them if they were going to use the truth.
That said, I've seen enough Clinton shenanigans in both Arkansas and DC to make me at least think a plausible denial situation is possible - just like I've long said I won't be surprised at anything that comes out about Trump. So it wouldn't surprise me but let me be clear - Hillary herself did NOT begin the birther story and there is no evidence that she ever even approved of it.
Furthermore, Trump DID fire it up by innuendo. I'm not aware of Trump, either, ever saying Obama was born in Kenya. What he demanded was the birth certificate, the long one. When whatever was released a short while later came out, Trump - in typical Trumpkin fashion - congratulated himself for getting the story the press wouldn't get (in his view). Despite the lies of some of the press (they're as bad as the two candidates many times), Trump did NOT make this a five-year crusade; he crusaded about it five years ago, which is an important distinction. Of course, he did sort of raise it up last summer - once again via innuendo. He's also a lying scumbag in that he once promised to release his taxes if Obama coughed up the birth certificate. So I'd call Trump more of a midwife than a father of the thing although there's no doubt he's the one who kept it alive with one more obvious exception: the press. THEY love this crap. Did Trump ever hint at or mention this birther issue in his Convention speech or anywhere else in the last six months? (I'm honestly asking). The press suddenly seized on it last month - and got played by him for the utter fools they are. Yes, he brought it up a time or two last year long before his nomination - and no, he shouldn't have. But then again, he's not running against Obama so it's really not as big a story as they want to make it. It plays into their 'racist narrative' but it doesn't really do much otherwise.
Now...as far as his slapping this on Hillary, I mean that's laughably absurd in the literal sense. Of course, he could have scored more points and STILL hung it on her if he would have said something like, "Despite the press attempts to make this a Republican issue, it was actually begun by SUPPORTERS of Hillary in the 2008 primaries." Trump gave the press an easy one to refute: if he had said what I just did, it would have brought her name into it and people would have lost the distinction - and it would actually have been more effective at making it look like she was to blame. He could have even cited the Politico piece that (sort of) supports what I just said.
Btw - I don't approve of what I just said as a tactic, I'm just saying if you play that game, you have to do it at the margins and not with a blatant falsehood like Trump told.
I also think every candidate should have no choice but to submit ALL records including military, student, business, legal, and all taxes BEFORE they are even able to compete in any primaries. Don't give them the option. You don't do it before the first party debate, you don't participate, plain and simple.
Well, I would disagree slightly on one point and strongly on another. Before I do, let me be clear: as the AP said, there is NO EVIDENCE Hillary was ever a birther. It was begun by one/some of her supporters, but she was not a mover of it. The one caveat I would make is that reporter recently claimed that Sidney Blumenthal (who was up to his neck in going after Kathleen Willey) tried to have a guy look into it. Of course, assuming the reporter is telling the truth (for the sake of argument), the campaign was going to go with an ACTUAL TRUE story if Obama was, in fact, born in Kenya. Hence, I cannot exactly rip them if they were going to use the truth.
That said, I've seen enough Clinton shenanigans in both Arkansas and DC to make me at least think a plausible denial situation is possible - just like I've long said I won't be surprised at anything that comes out about Trump. So it wouldn't surprise me but let me be clear - Hillary herself did NOT begin the birther story and there is no evidence that she ever even approved of it.
Furthermore, Trump DID fire it up by innuendo. I'm not aware of Trump, either, ever saying Obama was born in Kenya. What he demanded was the birth certificate, the long one. When whatever was released a short while later came out, Trump - in typical Trumpkin fashion - congratulated himself for getting the story the press wouldn't get (in his view). Despite the lies of some of the press (they're as bad as the two candidates many times), Trump did NOT make this a five-year crusade; he crusaded about it five years ago, which is an important distinction. Of course, he did sort of raise it up last summer - once again via innuendo. He's also a lying scumbag in that he once promised to release his taxes if Obama coughed up the birth certificate. So I'd call Trump more of a midwife than a father of the thing although there's no doubt he's the one who kept it alive with one more obvious exception: the press. THEY love this crap. Did Trump ever hint at or mention this birther issue in his Convention speech or anywhere else in the last six months? (I'm honestly asking). The press suddenly seized on it last month - and got played by him for the utter fools they are. Yes, he brought it up a time or two last year long before his nomination - and no, he shouldn't have. But then again, he's not running against Obama so it's really not as big a story as they want to make it. It plays into their 'racist narrative' but it doesn't really do much otherwise.
Now...as far as his slapping this on Hillary, I mean that's laughably absurd in the literal sense. Of course, he could have scored more points and STILL hung it on her if he would have said something like, "Despite the press attempts to make this a Republican issue, it was actually begun by SUPPORTERS of Hillary in the 2008 primaries." Trump gave the press an easy one to refute: if he had said what I just did, it would have brought her name into it and people would have lost the distinction - and it would actually have been more effective at making it look like she was to blame. He could have even cited the Politico piece that (sort of) supports what I just said.
Btw - I don't approve of what I just said as a tactic, I'm just saying if you play that game, you have to do it at the margins and not with a blatant falsehood like Trump told.
I also think every candidate should have no choice but to submit ALL records including military, student, business, legal, and all taxes BEFORE they are even able to compete in any primaries. Don't give them the option. You don't do it before the first party debate, you don't participate, plain and simple.
Re: Can Trump Really Win the Presidency?
You just disqualified the last 8 years.
You just disqualified the last 8 years.
Re: Can Trump Really Win the Presidency?
I recall there being a controversy over Bill Clinton's health records. Less than a month before the election, he got them out there and other than he had had hemorrhoids, there was nothing 'embarrassing' (and I mean it's not like that's his fault or anything). Bush had a rather notable gap in his Guard service and fortunately the media told us the truth by concocting some documents and creating a story.
Another one is John Kerry. Speaking of guys that make no sense at all...he tried to run as a Vietnam War hero but wouldn't release his military records. Then after his co-workers gut punched him, he pulled the old release of SOME records but not all. And then about six months AFTER the election, he released the full set. And it never made any sense at all. He had nothing to hide, but he acted like he did. As close as that election was in the Electoral College, it very well MIGHT have cost him the Presidency. He was running as a war hero (even though he wasn't and even if he was, the public could care less - insert McCain reference here) but acting like he had something to hide from the very source of his alleged heroism.
That hurt him bad.
Also true.
I recall there being a controversy over Bill Clinton's health records. Less than a month before the election, he got them out there and other than he had had hemorrhoids, there was nothing 'embarrassing' (and I mean it's not like that's his fault or anything). Bush had a rather notable gap in his Guard service and fortunately the media told us the truth by concocting some documents and creating a story.
Another one is John Kerry. Speaking of guys that make no sense at all...he tried to run as a Vietnam War hero but wouldn't release his military records. Then after his co-workers gut punched him, he pulled the old release of SOME records but not all. And then about six months AFTER the election, he released the full set. And it never made any sense at all. He had nothing to hide, but he acted like he did. As close as that election was in the Electoral College, it very well MIGHT have cost him the Presidency. He was running as a war hero (even though he wasn't and even if he was, the public could care less - insert McCain reference here) but acting like he had something to hide from the very source of his alleged heroism.
That hurt him bad.
Re: Can Trump Really Win the Presidency?
^^ wrt John Kerry's reluctance to disclose his military service records....he was running on a ticket whose party has traditionally had the reputation of being anti-war. Perhaps that was his reasoning.
^^ wrt John Kerry's reluctance to disclose his military service records....he was running on a ticket whose party has traditionally had the reputation of being anti-war. Perhaps that was his reasoning.
Re: Can Trump Really Win the Presidency?
I think you're correct and it's exactly what I thought at the time. It would have just been incongruous - someone who turned so rabidly against the war, even returning most of his medals - running as a combatant was schizophrenic and led to "who exactly is John Kerry and what does he really believe"...
Re: Can Trump Really Win the Presidency?
And btw - I'd modify your statement just a bit. You know how MSDNC likes to say Reagan could not get the GOP nomination today? They're right. But here's the thing: FDR, Truman, nor JFK could win the Democratic nomination today, either - and in large part for the very reason you're talking about. The Democratic Party was the one in power when we went into WWI, WW2, Korea, and Vietnam. And no, I'm not Bob Dole in the 76 VP debate - we got dragged into WW2 and yes, we had to use the bombs in Japan. What now is the pacifist wing of the Democrats took over the party in 1968 at the riots in Chicago. So 'traditionally' is a bit of a strong word but certainly since they nominated that left-wing nut McGovern in 1972, I'd agree with you.
I thought Kerry had more trouble on the number one issue in the election precisely BECAUSE he first voted to send the guys to war and THEN voted against funding it. He was pandering to the nominating Left - but then he was stuck with trying to defend his (as Earle rightly noted) schizophrenic idea.
It just seems to my simple mind that releasing the records early on would have buttressed his claim to being combat ready. His refusal to release the records played right into Politics 101 ("there's something to hide, demand the release").
So even the reason you give doesn't really make sense to every day normal people. It might to political operatives without sense.
A somewhat similar thing happened in 1984. What caused Ferraro's trouble was they very deliberately pointed out that she was going to release her financial records but NOT her husband's. At that point, the GOP smelled blood and began the old, "Why doesn't she want us to see his tax records?"
Incidentally, I was fourteen at the time, and I'd not seen Ferraro, but I saw that press conference. I realize she was not even remotely prepared to be President - but she handled that press conference incredibly well. I was very impressed. That could really have backfired on the GOP if not for, oh a hundred other things that year.
Where did Kerry go to school? Yale? I sure don't understand political logic from Yale then. I mean, he had already voted FOR the Iraq War. And he was running as a so-called 'war hero' despite having testified against it memorably. I mean, whether he releases them or not...how does that change the fact he voted to go to Iraq?
And btw - I'd modify your statement just a bit. You know how MSDNC likes to say Reagan could not get the GOP nomination today? They're right. But here's the thing: FDR, Truman, nor JFK could win the Democratic nomination today, either - and in large part for the very reason you're talking about. The Democratic Party was the one in power when we went into WWI, WW2, Korea, and Vietnam. And no, I'm not Bob Dole in the 76 VP debate - we got dragged into WW2 and yes, we had to use the bombs in Japan. What now is the pacifist wing of the Democrats took over the party in 1968 at the riots in Chicago. So 'traditionally' is a bit of a strong word but certainly since they nominated that left-wing nut McGovern in 1972, I'd agree with you.
I thought Kerry had more trouble on the number one issue in the election precisely BECAUSE he first voted to send the guys to war and THEN voted against funding it. He was pandering to the nominating Left - but then he was stuck with trying to defend his (as Earle rightly noted) schizophrenic idea.
It just seems to my simple mind that releasing the records early on would have buttressed his claim to being combat ready. His refusal to release the records played right into Politics 101 ("there's something to hide, demand the release").
So even the reason you give doesn't really make sense to every day normal people. It might to political operatives without sense.
A somewhat similar thing happened in 1984. What caused Ferraro's trouble was they very deliberately pointed out that she was going to release her financial records but NOT her husband's. At that point, the GOP smelled blood and began the old, "Why doesn't she want us to see his tax records?"
Incidentally, I was fourteen at the time, and I'd not seen Ferraro, but I saw that press conference. I realize she was not even remotely prepared to be President - but she handled that press conference incredibly well. I was very impressed. That could really have backfired on the GOP if not for, oh a hundred other things that year.
Re: Can Trump Really Win the Presidency?
We have seen more of "I never said that" or "Disregard; I've changed my position," than I've ever seen before...
Re: Can Trump Really Win the Presidency?
But you're right. Trump suddenly became a rabid pro-lifer in 2011, but the Mathews interview exposed that as a fraud. There are MANY ways to have lanced the boil Mathews invoked - you just need a little bit of intellectual firepower, and Trump doesn't have it. HRC gets a free pass from the Left on everything from voting for the Iraq War to her opposition to SSM prior to 2013.
Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and Dick Gephardt (among others) were all pro-life Democrats right up to the moment they decided to run for President. Ronald Reagan - while always pro-life - actually signed into law one of the most liberal abortion laws in the country in 1967, well before Roe v Wade passed. Mitt Romney was pro-choice, pro-gays in the military, and pro-gay marriage right up until he left Beacon Hill in 2007 and decided he wanted to be President. And Trump - well, give him 30 minutes and he'll take the opposite position. I think HRC is concerned totally with HRC getting elected President and nothing else - and I think Trump is concerned with being in the news and 'winning' more than anything else. (I still don't think he cares about being elected at all).
Btw - on an unrelated note - I realized part of the reason this race is upsetting me is because BOTH of these have two of the worst qualities of my ex-wife. HRC is the typical 'state stuff in a misleading way and then whine when you get caught' (a daily occurrence as the years went by) while Trump literally makes things that have NOTHING at all to do with him ABOUT himself. (One of my ex-wife's favorite lines when being a selfish pig was to say, "(Name of person) thinks it's all about him/her," always ignoring the selfishness inherent in her argument.
And this is what upsets me about our process (among many things). It all depends. If a person many years ago was position X and now is position Y and came through that via life experience or exposure to new data, that person can hardly be called a flip-flopper. The late William Scranton actually argued that it is WRONG if a candidate had a particular position when he sought one office to consider him forever on the record with that same position during the seeking of another office - that one could only call it flip-flopping if one took BOTH sides after seeking the position. I don't know what I think about that, but he makes a great point (e.g. as Senator I thought X about defense but defense briefings during the campaign have persuaded me that position anti-X is actually more realistic and in line with our priorities).
But you're right. Trump suddenly became a rabid pro-lifer in 2011, but the Mathews interview exposed that as a fraud. There are MANY ways to have lanced the boil Mathews invoked - you just need a little bit of intellectual firepower, and Trump doesn't have it. HRC gets a free pass from the Left on everything from voting for the Iraq War to her opposition to SSM prior to 2013.
Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and Dick Gephardt (among others) were all pro-life Democrats right up to the moment they decided to run for President. Ronald Reagan - while always pro-life - actually signed into law one of the most liberal abortion laws in the country in 1967, well before Roe v Wade passed. Mitt Romney was pro-choice, pro-gays in the military, and pro-gay marriage right up until he left Beacon Hill in 2007 and decided he wanted to be President. And Trump - well, give him 30 minutes and he'll take the opposite position. I think HRC is concerned totally with HRC getting elected President and nothing else - and I think Trump is concerned with being in the news and 'winning' more than anything else. (I still don't think he cares about being elected at all).
Btw - on an unrelated note - I realized part of the reason this race is upsetting me is because BOTH of these have two of the worst qualities of my ex-wife. HRC is the typical 'state stuff in a misleading way and then whine when you get caught' (a daily occurrence as the years went by) while Trump literally makes things that have NOTHING at all to do with him ABOUT himself. (One of my ex-wife's favorite lines when being a selfish pig was to say, "(Name of person) thinks it's all about him/her," always ignoring the selfishness inherent in her argument.
Re: Can Trump Really Win the Presidency?
More Trump and Russian ties.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-s-inte...ween-trump-adviser-and-kremlin-175046002.html
More Trump and Russian ties.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/u-s-inte...ween-trump-adviser-and-kremlin-175046002.html
Yahoo Article said:
Yahoo Article said:
Re: Can Trump Really Win the Presidency?
SIAP, but thought this was (for me) one of the more effective attack ads I've seen in a long while:
Regardless of what you think of Donald Trump and what he might have meant with his John McCain comments, I think the veteran's soft decency is damning to our current level of political discourse, in general.
It gets me when the veteran refers to the presidency as the "most precious office." Whereas we often resort to sarcasm and feigned apathy, the Greatest Generation had a respect, love, and even awe of civic duty that we often miss today.
SIAP, but thought this was (for me) one of the more effective attack ads I've seen in a long while:
Regardless of what you think of Donald Trump and what he might have meant with his John McCain comments, I think the veteran's soft decency is damning to our current level of political discourse, in general.
It gets me when the veteran refers to the presidency as the "most precious office." Whereas we often resort to sarcasm and feigned apathy, the Greatest Generation had a respect, love, and even awe of civic duty that we often miss today.
Last edited:
Re: Can Trump Really Win the Presidency?
Hillary bringing the heat with the attack ads. He gave her all the ammo she'll ever need:
Hillary bringing the heat with the attack ads. He gave her all the ammo she'll ever need:
Re: Can Trump Really Win the Presidency?
he has spent the entire week going after alicia machado, and continues. it is a good and right and joyful thing that he is strong enough to stand up to the pc police for all of us
Re: Can Trump Really Win the Presidency?
For the first time ever, USA Today takes a side in an election by calling Trump unfit for the office, though they did not directly endorse anybody.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...at-it-just-wrote-a-historic-anti-endorsement/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
For the first time ever, USA Today takes a side in an election by calling Trump unfit for the office, though they did not directly endorse anybody.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...at-it-just-wrote-a-historic-anti-endorsement/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Re: Can Trump Really Win the Presidency?
did they have a colorful pie chart accompanying the article?
Re: Can Trump Really Win the Presidency?
bagdhad bob got a face lift and some extensions
- Status
Latest threads
-
-
-
-
Link: Interesting result re: TideFans ... from Perplexity.ai
- Started by BamaNation
- Replies: 4
-
81 years ago today, D-Day - never forget- Started by crimsonaudio
- Replies: 2
-