The Art of the Donald Trumpocalypse

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 9:37 am

Kraken wrote: Regardless of how much support he gets from Republicans -- and he's gotten a lot in the primaries -- Trump can count on lower-income, less-educated independents and those Democrats who support Bernie because he's not Clinton. Other Sanders supporters who refuse to hold our noses and vote for Clinton will simply stay home.

Thing is, while much of his vote comes from independents, it doesn't look like there would be very many Sanders supporters that would vote for Trump:

In an NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey conducted by Hart Research Associates this month, 7% of Sanders voters said they could see themselves supporting Trump. Some 66% said the same for Clinton.

A similar proportion of Sanders folk – 8% – gave Trump a positive likeability rating, compared with 48% for Clinton. That figure is unlikely to be causing Clinton campaign aides much loss of sleep.

“The data does not indicate any meaningful concern for Clinton that if she wins the Democratic nomination large numbers of Sanders voters would head to Trump,” said Jeff Horwitt, a senior vice-president with Hart Research.

link

I would imagine this type of thing would be equaled or overshadowed on the Republican side.

Max Peck · Post by **Max Peck** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:00 am

Now that he's running out of GOP rivals, Il Donald picks a new target.

Trump digs in after weekend violence, threatens Sanders rallies

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump on Sunday threatened to send his supporters to the campaign rallies of Democrat Bernie Sanders, showing no sign of toning down his rhetoric after clashes erupted at his own events over the weekend. Trump, front-runner for the Republican nomination, appeared unchastened after simmering discord between his supporters and protesters angry over his positions on immigration and Muslims turned into a palpable threat on Friday, forcing him to cancel a Chicago rally and shadowing his campaign appearances on Saturday. Trump blamed supporters of Democratic candidate Sanders for the incidents in Chicago, where scuffles broke out between protesters and backers of the real estate magnate. He called the U.S. senator from Vermont "our communist friend".

On Sunday, he went a step further in an early morning post on Twitter: "Bernie Sanders is lying when he says his disruptors aren't told to go to my events. Be careful Bernie, or my supporters will go to yours!"

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:47 am

All the rallies have protesters. All politicians get heckled. Disruptive attendees are escorted out, having said their thing, and that's how the game is played.

What's different is Trump supporters roughing up the protesters and Trump actively encouraging them to do so. He just put out word that he might pay your legal fees when you're arrested for assault, which is pretty much the opposite of not condoning it.

Reactionaries in this country have been longing to beat up protesters since the 1960's. Trump is the first candidate to run on the promise of letting them do it.

(Actually he's the second. George Wallace famously threatened to run down protesters with his car, although he never followed through.)

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 12:55 pm

Trump is playing a dangerous game. It's either going to backfire on him and he's going to fall, or he'll successfully fan the flames until someone is killed in his name. I predict the latter, unfortunately.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 2:30 pm

Defiant wrote:
Kraken wrote: Regardless of how much support he gets from Republicans -- and he's gotten a lot in the primaries -- Trump can count on lower-income, less-educated independents and those Democrats who support Bernie because he's not Clinton. Other Sanders supporters who refuse to hold our noses and vote for Clinton will simply stay home.

Thing is, while much of his vote comes from independents, it doesn't look like there would be very many Sanders supporters that would vote for Trump:

In an NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey conducted by Hart Research Associates this month, 7% of Sanders voters said they could see themselves supporting Trump. Some 66% said the same for Clinton.

So if Sanders voters comprise roughly 50% of the votes cast in D primaries (and I think Clinton and Sanders will end up more or less tied in the popular vote, if not in delegates), 7% of his half will jump to Trump and 27% will stay home rather than vote for Clinton. The 34% of Bernie supporters who won't back her are about 17% of the D primary voters, give or take a few points, and most of those are going to be independents -- registered D's will fall in line.

That's rather a lot of folks withholding their support, even if only a small minority oppose her outright.

It's interesting that Trump apparently sees Sanders as the greater threat, as I believe is accurate. Since Sanders voters are also disaffected and alienated, I wonder if Trump's attention will make them circle the wagons the same way Trump's supporters are doing.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 2:40 pm

hepcat wrote:Trump is playing a dangerous game. It's either going to backfire on him and he's going to fall, or he'll successfully fan the flames until someone is killed in his name. I predict the latter, unfortunately.

I have been trying to update "Darmok and Jalad at Tenagra when the walls fell" into something like "Santana and the Stones at Atamont when the Angels fought" to fit the Trump rally scenario, but that's too obscure and would likely amuse no one but me anyway.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 3:01 pm

Kraken wrote:
So if Sanders voters comprise roughly 50% of the votes cast in D primaries (and I think Clinton and Sanders will end up more or less tied in the popular vote, if not in delegates), 7% of his half will jump to Trump and 27% will stay home rather than vote for Clinton. The 34% of Bernie supporters who won't back her are about 17% of the D primary voters, give or take a few points, and most of those are going to be independents -- registered D's will fall in line.

That's rather a lot of folks withholding their support, even if only a small minority oppose her outright.

Not really. First of all, in a normal year, you tend to see about 10-15% of Democrats cross streams and vote for the other guy.

Trump is also amazingly unpopular with independents, and the Republican party is in meltdown mode. And Half of those who voted for one of his opponents in the primary say they won't vote for him - that's half of a bigger percentage of people. Now, I think that number will change (just as the Sanders number will). And Trump is nothing if not unpredictable and able to change the rules of the game, so maybe the dynamics will change.

But right now, Clinton is sitting in a better position from what I can see.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 3:07 pm

Kraken wrote:
hepcat wrote:Trump is playing a dangerous game. It's either going to backfire on him and he's going to fall, or he'll successfully fan the flames until someone is killed in his name. I predict the latter, unfortunately.
I have been trying to update "Darmok and Jalad at Tenagra when the walls fell" into something like "Santana and the Stones at Atamont when the Angels fought" to fit the Trump rally scenario, but that's too obscure and would likely amuse no one but me anyway.

Well...you and other fans of Star Trek and Hunter Thompson.

tgb · Post by **tgb** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 3:13 pm

Holman wrote:All the rallies have protesters. All politicians get heckled. Disruptive attendees are escorted out, having said their thing, and that's how the game is played.

What's different is Trump supporters roughing up the protesters and Trump actively encouraging them to do so. He just put out word that he might pay your legal fees when you're arrested for assault, which is pretty much the opposite of not condoning it.

Reactionaries in this country have been longing to beat up protesters since the 1960's. Trump is the first candidate to run on the promise of letting them do it.

(Actually he's the second. George Wallace famously threatened to run down protesters with his car, although he never followed through.)

Nixon encouraged the hard hats who kicked the asses of anti-war protesters in NYC while the cops did nothing about it.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 3:16 pm

gbasden · Post by **gbasden** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 3:18 pm

Rip wrote:

I'm sure that will comfort him when one of Trump's supporters assaults him for being too Mexican.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 3:22 pm

gbasden wrote:
Rip wrote:
I'm sure that will comfort him when one of Trump's supporters assaults him for being too Mexican.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 3:24 pm

Edit: Looks like the video was removed from the first tweet. It's here:

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 3:29 pm

The numbers are impressive.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 3:44 pm

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 3:51 pm

Meanwhile, over at a Sanders Rally a Trump supporter asks for hugs

I'd hit that. I mean hug that.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 3:51 pm

For someone who says he voted for Cruz and supposedly doesn't agree with some of the things Trump says, Rip sure does spend most of his time in the Trump threads linking to accolades for the man.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 6:57 pm

Defiant wrote:

That's what passes for political discourse these days.

"Fuck you!"
"Yeah, fuck you too, bitch!"

We deserve Trump.

raydude · Post by **raydude** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 8:08 pm

Defiant wrote:

For some reason that escapes me, the candidate that encourages this kind of discourse is somehow "better" than HRC.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 8:51 pm

This confused the heck out of me:

I suppose some people who hate Trump don't want his supporters to be able to vote for him, but I don't think that's typifies them. And I suppose some of the people who protested in Chicago protested to prevent Trump for being able to speek, so that might be anti-free-speech.

But most anti-Trump people just really hate Trump.

D.A.Lewis · Post by **D.A.Lewis** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 9:11 pm

Kraken wrote:
hepcat wrote:Trump is playing a dangerous game. It's either going to backfire on him and he's going to fall, or he'll successfully fan the flames until someone is killed in his name. I predict the latter, unfortunately.
I have been trying to update "Darmok and Jalad at Tenagra when the walls fell" into something like "Santana and the Stones at Atamont when the Angels fought" to fit the Trump rally scenario, but that's too obscure and would likely amuse no one but me anyway.

INSPIRATION

Max Peck · Post by **Max Peck** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 10:05 pm

Defiant wrote:This confused the heck out of me:

I suppose some people who hate Trump don't want his supporters to be able to vote for him, but I don't think that's typifies them. And I suppose some of the people who protested in Chicago protested to prevent Trump for being able to speek, so that might be anti-free-speech.

But most anti-Trump people just really hate Trump.

If Neil deGrasse Tyson says that you must be pro-Trump to love freedom, then I need to reconsider my opinion on Trump. Or my opinion on the Flat Earth Society. I haven't decided which...

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 10:18 pm

That's the ballgame folks!

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 10:49 pm

Now this guy knows how to deal with hecklers - positively presidential.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:23 pm

Rip wrote:
That's the ballgame folks!

That's fitting. Pete Rose might very well be a bigger publicity whore than Trump. He'll sign his name on anything for a few bucks. Just like Trump.

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:25 pm

Trump supporters:

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:31 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkYbBStofDo

VIN WEBER [Former Congressman]: I talk to people all of the time, as I’m sure everybody around the table does, and they say, “Why don’t you Republicans do something about this guy?” I’m sorry. This is not the Soviet Union. We can’t call a meeting and decide Trump is out.

RON KAUFMAN [White House Advisor Bush 41]: And we hate that.

[Laughter]

KAUFMAN: Deny dictatorship — Who’s for it? Trump is doing well for one reason. He understands the climate and the culture of America today better than anybody at this table.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Sun Mar 13, 2016 11:41 pm

"lefty pinko"? Someone actually used that unsarcastically (or do I mean unironic?)?

tru1cy · Post by **tru1cy** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 8:11 am

Rip wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkYbBStofDo

VIN WEBER [Former Congressman]: I talk to people all of the time, as I’m sure everybody around the table does, and they say, “Why don’t you Republicans do something about this guy?” I’m sorry. This is not the Soviet Union. We can’t call a meeting and decide Trump is out.

RON KAUFMAN [White House Advisor Bush 41]: And we hate that.

[Laughter]

KAUFMAN: Deny dictatorship — Who’s for it? Trump is doing well for one reason. He understands the climate and the culture of America today better than anybody at this table.

Did you read some of the comments below that video... WTF is wrong with people. The amount of hate and vitriol is just sad

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 8:54 am

Jeebus, that whole comments section reads like a white supremacist forum.

When you start making your fellow citizens think ISIS is the least of our problems, it's time to take stock in your beliefs, people.

tjg_marantz · Post by **tjg_marantz** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 9:05 am

The French revolution was a leftard liberal revolution. I like the cut of his jib.

And that's the problem here. You can't have a reasoned discourse with that kind of person during this time. It's just not happening.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 5:53 pm

Voters don’t seem to hold violence at Trump rallies against him. (Or at least Republican voters don't)

em2nought · Post by **em2nought** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 6:34 pm

LawBeefaroni wrote:
Defiant wrote:
That's what passes for political discourse these days.

"Fuck you!"
"Yeah, fuck you too, bitch!"

We deserve Trump.

No, we deserve the career politicians, and that one baseball team owner that we've elected ever since Ike.

msteelers · Post by **msteelers** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 7:48 pm

Defiant wrote:Voters don’t seem to hold violence at Trump rallies against him. (Or at least Republican voters don't)

Nope. Multiple Trump supporters told me this morning that the violence was all because of those evil Black Lives Matter people and MoveOn.org.

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 8:12 pm

Ugh. Watched raw, uncut video from the camera platforms at the Chicago Trump rally. The three physical confrontations repeated in the CNN video loop are put into context by a 50/50 mix of Trump supporters and protestors in the arena. The Trump campaign representative walked out to say Trump won't be here, then rushed off stage without saying anything to control the crowd. The protesters got jubilant, and the Trump supporters got very angry. Words were said (although there was no sound), and tempers flared starting mostly in the Trump camp.

The link to the Showtime series is worth a watch, despite GOP operatives talking about "lefty pinko" SCOTUS nominees. There is great behind the scenes campaign event footage and shots of Bernie walking into the Lion's Den of Obama country in South Carolina trying to narrow the black vote gap. Cruz's reaction walking on stage after his Nevada defeat to talk about his chances in Texas showed how close he came to getting knocked out.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 8:21 pm

Zarathud wrote:Ugh. Watched raw, uncut video from the camera platforms at the Chicago Trump rally. The three physical confrontations repeated in the CNN video loop are put into context by a 50/50 mix of Trump supporters and protestors in the arena. The Trump campaign representative walked out to say Trump won't be here, then rushed off stage without saying anything to control the crowd. The protesters got jubilant, and the Trump supporters got very angry. Words were said (although there was no sound), and tempers flared starting mostly in the Trump camp.

From the video I saw, it seemed to me tensions flared both ways, from Trump supports and from protesters (the oddest, to me, was when someone in a Trump shirt (presumably a Trump supporter?) grabbed a Trump poster from (presumably) a Trump supporter). That said, it also looked like a lot of people on both sides were also just milling about not getting into confrontations.

LawBeefaroni · Post by **LawBeefaroni** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 10:27 pm

“The man got carried away,” Trump said on NBC’s “Meet The Press” Sunday. “He obviously loves his country, and maybe he doesn’t like seeing what’s happening to the country.”

At Wednesday’s rally in Fayetteville, N.C., John McGraw, 78, was caught on video punching the protester, 26-year-old Rakeem Jones, as Jones was being led out of the event by security.

After the rally, “Inside Edition” interviewed McGraw, who freely admitted assaulting Jones.

“He deserved it,” McGraw said. “The next time we see him, we might have to kill him.”

Police arrested McGraw the next day and charged him with assault and disorderly conduct.

Call me crazy, but I think the word "coloreds" is probably what that guys uses in polite company.

Also, he's probably never been in a fair fight.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 9:06 am

Oops

Correction at 9:58 a.m. on 3/09/2016: Due to an oversight involving a haphazardly-installed Chrome extension during the editing process, the name Donald Trump was erroneously replaced with the phrase “Someone With Tiny Hands” when this story originally published.

tru1cy · Post by **tru1cy** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 9:13 am

Defiant wrote:Oops

Correction at 9:58 a.m. on 3/09/2016: Due to an oversight involving a haphazardly-installed Chrome extension during the editing process, the name Donald Trump was erroneously replaced with the phrase “Someone With Tiny Hands” when this story originally published.

Too bad Wired is blocking browser with Ad Block, so I can''t read. They just joined the list of sites I'll never visit again

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 12:44 pm

Captain Caveman wrote:Seeing reports that Ben Carson will endorse Trump tomorrow.

Carson then said that Trump had promised him a role in his administration, “certainly in an advisory capacity.” Asked by NewsMax’s Steve Malzberg whether this meant a cabinet position, Carson declined to “reveal any details about it right now, because all of this is still very liquid.”
Federal law expressly prohibits candidates from directly or indirectly promising “the appointment of any person to any public or private position or employment, for the purpose of procuring support in his candidacy.” The penalty for violations could include fines or a year in jail — two years if the violation was willful.

Oops