The Art of the Donald Trumpocalypse

Default · Post by **Default** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 11:44 am

Is it just me, or does this election seem like Charlie Sheen's "winning!"

milo · Post by **milo** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 11:54 am

Holman wrote:
Defiant wrote:Trump's refusal to accept intelligence briefing on Russia stuns experts
This defies understanding. Why would he think he knows more about Russia than the nonpartisan long-term intelligence experts? How does this even make sense to him and his team?

I'm not prepared to believe a conspiracy theory that he's in Russia's pocket. If nothing else, his handlers would coach him on how to make it look less obvious.

So it's got to be that (1) he truly believes he's smarter than anyone alive and that his untrained intuition beats anything any expert could know...

Hmm. You could be onto something here. Let's ask The Donald.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 11:57 am

Rip wrote: No such thing as bad publicity.

In the context of this thread, this is hilarious.

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 12:05 pm

Soon Donald will know more about losing than anyone else.

Enough · Post by **Enough** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 12:14 pm

Default wrote:Is it just me, or does this election seem like Charlie Sheen's "winning!"

All we're missing is the tigers blood. Good call.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 12:39 pm

Maybe that's what he's hopped up on for these debates

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 1:03 pm

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 1:13 pm

"We're going to build a fiesta, and make Trump supporters pay for it"

Some Mexicans went and sold some T-shirts that looked like they support Trump (but in heat the wording changes to make fun of Trump) and used that to fund a fiesta.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 1:27 pm

Defiant wrote:I imagine that's one individual poll. The RCP average has her at +5.3 in a four way race, and +6.7 in a two way race.

Yeah, I just don't get how it isn't 15 or 20 points. Disregarding protest vote, a 4-point spread means that 48% of Americans still prefer Trump. Used to be you just had to stick a candidate with one or two serious pieces of dirt to knock him out; this guy's made of dirt. Granted, Clinton's far from clean and shiny herself, but come on.

But then, Clinton's only up by 14.7 points even in MA, so it's clear my expectations are wrong. All depends on what kind of dirt you hate most, I suppose.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 1:39 pm

But you're only using a single poll. There are polls that show Clinton up by 11 nationally.

Archinerd · Post by **Archinerd** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 2:21 pm

Defiant wrote:But you're only using a single poll. There are polls that show Clinton up by 11 nationally.

still sad tho,

gilraen · Post by **gilraen** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 3:34 pm

Default wrote:Is it just me, or does this election seem like Charlie Sheen's "winning!"

Jon Cryer seems to agree with you (this was back in April, before things went batshit insane)

gbasden · Post by **gbasden** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 4:16 pm

Archinerd wrote:
Defiant wrote:But you're only using a single poll. There are polls that show Clinton up by 11 nationally.
still sad tho,

I still can't believe at this point that certain people on *this board* still are going to vote for the guy. He's made a complete mockery of conservative principles! Given the worries about Russia and foreign policy, it's very hard to see how that can be reconciled with Trump's willingness to drop to his knees for Putin at a moment's notice. If anybody else had cast our partnership with NATO into doubt, suggested that South Korea and Japan should look to their own defense and said we should support Assad against the rebels they wailing here would be deafening. Is there any foreign policy expert in either party that's willing to work with this clown?

Skinypupy · Post by **Skinypupy** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 4:33 pm

gbasden wrote:I still can't believe at this point that certain people on *this board* still are going to vote for the guy. He's made a complete mockery of conservative principles! Given the worries about Russia and foreign policy, it's very hard to see how that can be reconciled with Trump's willingness to drop to his knees for Putin at a moment's notice. If anybody else had cast our partnership with NATO into doubt, suggested that South Korea and Japan should look to their own defense and said we should support Assad against the rebels they wailing here would be deafening.

Hillary.

Goddamn.

Clinton.

$iljanus · Post by **$iljanus** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 4:51 pm

URANIUM!

(as per some Trump attack ad. And it's a cool word)

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 4:56 pm

gbasden wrote:He's made a complete mockery of conservative principles!

He's made a mockery of EVERYTHING. But he mentioned that Clinton is going to come take everyone's guns, just like Obama did. And 38% of the electorate fell into line, along with the usual suspects here.

While I'm generally pro-2nd Amendment rights (including an individual right), a little part of me wants these people to have to live their nightmare as a punishment for allowing this piece of shit to get this close to the Oval Office.

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:48 pm

If I wasn't so scared of a Trump presidency, I'd want him to win so I could be spend every day of the next four years (or until he is impeached) showing my friends who support him what utter idiots they were for supporting him. But that pleasure just isn't worth the risk.

The bad part, assuming he loses, is that instead I get to hear 4 years of how Hillary GD Clinton is ruining the country, while they blissfully never realize that the Titanic missed the iceberg

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:52 pm

gbasden wrote: Given the worries about Russia and foreign policy, it's very hard to see how that can be reconciled with Trump's willingness to drop to his knees for Putin at a moment's notice.

Putin, as a shrewd man, knows that Trump can't win. In fact, he's counting on it. His interest is in fueling American distrust of the electoral process and de-legitimizing the Clinton administration. Even if we avoid the torches & pitchforks scenario, our government will be weakened. It's a brilliant ploy if it doesn't backfire on him, and he's playing Trump like Yakkety Sax on a goddam kazoo.

tjg_marantz · Post by **tjg_marantz** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 5:54 pm

Listening to Bill Krystol, John Batchelor, Mark Levin, Ricochet and yes Glenn Beck, I'm hopeful some kind of sanity will return after this election. It's been eye owning listening to these podcasts.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 7:25 pm

Mark Levin is anti-Trump?!? That's astonishing to me.

Max Peck · Post by **Max Peck** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 8:10 pm

RunningMn9 wrote:Mark Levin is anti-Trump?!? That's astonishing to me.

For good reason, methinks, unless he's reversed his flip-flop sometime since the beginning of September.

After once declaring he could never support Donald Trump as the Republican presidential nominee, Mark Levin changed his mind with a big announcement on his radio program Tuesday.

“I’m gonna vote for Donald Trump. I’m gonna wind up voting for Donald Trump on Election Day," the talk radio host said after reiterating his perspective that Texas Sen. Ted Cruz was a far better choice for conservatives.

"I take no responsibility for the dumb things he says or the dumb things his surrogates say," he added of the GOP nominee and his campaign.

Levin's endorsement comes five months after unequivocally stating, "I am not voting for Donald Trump. Period.”

I get the impression that his position is that Trump is a flawed candidate for a flawed party (as in the GOP isn't pure enough) but still far better than Hillary "Jailbird" Clinton.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 8:51 pm

Um, if you endorse and vote for a candidate, and encourage your listeners to do the same, yes you are responsible for the dumb things that he and his surrogates say and do.

tjg_marantz · Post by **tjg_marantz** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 9:19 pm

Not necessarily anti-Trump but aren't wholeheartedly embracing him. I'm getting out of the echo chamber and broadening my listening habits.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 9:25 pm

Endorsing and voting for is every bit as bad as wholeheartedly embracing him.

I used to listen to Levin when he followed Hannity in NY. He is a loathesome human being. Even when I had more conservative leanings I couldn't stand him.

Max Peck · Post by **Max Peck** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:42 pm

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:45 pm

Not being able to see tweets in tapatalk is super annoying.

Anyway, I'm just parking this here. I didn't realize that this dunce has been whining about rigged elections at lease since August.

No, there isn't any widespread voter fraud.

Max Peck · Post by **Max Peck** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:55 pm

RunningMn9 wrote:Not being able to see tweets in tapatalk is super annoying.

Mark Cuban tweeted a link to this article.

Over the years, Donald Trump’s children Ivanka, Eric and Don Jr. have been relatively frequent and promiscuous political donors, making significant contributions to Democrats and Republicans alike. The three combined contributed $15,000 to Mitt Romney’s 2012 presidential campaign and $13,800 to John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign. They have given to numerous New York politicians, both Republican and Democratic. Don Jr. and Ivanka even contributed a combined $8,800 to a number of Hillary Clinton’s campaigns.

But thus far, according to campaign finance records, Trump’s three eldest children have not donated to their father’s presidential effort, even as the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee are making significant efforts to raise money from small-dollar contributors.

Interestingly, the three older Trump children have in the past been significant donors to Republican party committees, contributing tens of thousands of dollars to the Republican National Committee, the Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee, and the National Republican Congressional Committee since 2008. (They have also made significant contributions to the three Democratic counterparts to these committees.) But these donations ceased in 2014; since their father captured the Republican nomination, the Trump children have not continued their support of GOP party committees, according to records accessed on OpenSecrets.org.

Trump’s children are not the only ones close to him who are financially sitting out this election cycle. The GOP nominee routinely brags about his company creating tens of thousands of jobs, yet a search on OpenSecrets.org for campaign contributions from employees of Trump’s companies returns just 19 contributions to Trump from 13 employees, totaling just $5,477.

tjg_marantz · Post by **tjg_marantz** » Sun Oct 16, 2016 11:50 pm

RunningMn9 wrote:Not being able to see tweets in tapatalk is super annoying.

Anyway, I'm just parking this here. I didn't realize that this dunce has been whining about rigged elections at lease since August.

No, there isn't any widespread voter fraud.

Amen about tapatalk.

Chaz · Post by **Chaz** » Mon Oct 17, 2016 5:42 am

Well, Trump's philosophy, as he's stated in this campaign, is that a donation to a candidate is only so you can buy influence with them. He and his kids already have all the influence with Trump that they'll ever need, so why spend their money when they can spend other people's money? We know he loves doing that.

Something just occurred to me. Trump's children, mostly the boys, are basically running his campaign. It seems strange that Melania doesn't have a bigger role. Usually the candidate's spouse is out there taking a pretty big role, or at least it seems like it, yet Melania's kept pretty well out of the limelight. It's almost like Trump doesn't want to make her a focal point of the campaign. Like, maybe he's thinking she won't be in the picture in a few years.

tgb · Post by **tgb** » Mon Oct 17, 2016 6:41 am

Chaz wrote:Well, Trump's philosophy, as he's stated in this campaign, is that a donation to a candidate is only so you can buy influence with them. He and his kids already have all the influence with Trump that they'll ever need, so why spend their money when they can spend other people's money? We know he loves doing that.

Something just occurred to me. Trump's children, mostly the boys, are basically running his campaign. It seems strange that Melania doesn't have a bigger role. Usually the candidate's spouse is out there taking a pretty big role, or at least it seems like it, yet Melania's kept pretty well out of the limelight. It's almost like Trump doesn't want to make her a focal point of the campaign. Like, maybe he's thinking she won't be in the picture in a few years.

I get the sense that Ivanka is more involved in day-to-day campaign management than either Uday or Qusay, who just come off as another couple of shills. Even on Celebrity Apprentice she seemed the sharpest of the three. Although, like Inspector Lestrade, that just makes her the best of a bad lot.

As to keeping Melania under wraps, it could be that she didn't want him to run and doesn't want to be part of the tire fire. More likely there's a skeleton or two in the closet, probably having to do with her immigration status, so why give the press a reason to dig into yet another scandal?

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Mon Oct 17, 2016 8:46 am

But he mentioned that Clinton is going to come take everyone's guns, just like Obama did.

There is an ad running here in SC and that's all it says. Save our guns, don't vote for Hillary. It would be amusing if I didn't know a number of people it is working on.

Xmann · Post by **Xmann** » Mon Oct 17, 2016 9:00 am

stessier wrote:
But he mentioned that Clinton is going to come take everyone's guns, just like Obama did.
There is an ad running here in SC and that's all it says. Save our guns, don't vote for Hillary. It would be amusing if I didn't know a number of people it is working on.

Is it the lady who was assaulted by a knife. But since she had a gun, she was able to fight off her attacker?

And Clinton wants to take her right to carry a gun away and this is why we need to vote for Trump?

That shit started a couple days ago here in Colorado.

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Mon Oct 17, 2016 9:09 am

That's got nothing on the ad running in Colorado featuring women telling us that Trump is the candidate that will best represent them.

Ralph-Wiggum · Post by **Ralph-Wiggum** » Mon Oct 17, 2016 9:27 am

Xmann wrote:
stessier wrote:
But he mentioned that Clinton is going to come take everyone's guns, just like Obama did.
There is an ad running here in SC and that's all it says. Save our guns, don't vote for Hillary. It would be amusing if I didn't know a number of people it is working on.
Is it the lady who was assaulted by a knife. But since she had a gun, she was able to fight off her attacker?

And Clinton wants to take her right to carry a gun away and this is why we need to vote for Trump?

That shit started a couple days ago here in Colorado.

We've had that one in Florida for awhile now, except in the ad here the woman tries to get her gun until she realizes it has been taken away by Clinton. The next scene just shows cop cars and police tape.

That particular ad was put on by the NRA, I believe.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Mon Oct 17, 2016 9:46 am

Yeah, that last one is the NRA ad the runs here in NJ. Trump quintupled down this morning claiming "massive voter fraud", and wondering why GOP leaders are denying it. I can only imagine he's taken all of the evidence for that to the authorities.

tjg_marantz · Post by **tjg_marantz** » Mon Oct 17, 2016 10:32 am

Shocked Drumpf hasn't complained about RT getting it's accounts frozen in Great Britain. Or would that be too obvious?

Carpet_pissr · Post by **Carpet_pissr** » Mon Oct 17, 2016 10:36 am

I don't know if this is a regional behavior, but I have noticed the complete lack of bumper stickers this year supporting either candidate. It's the first presidential election I can remember, where there seem to be almost NO bumper stickers (or hats, or shirts, etc).

In fact, I was taking my daughter and some friends to the state fair yesterday, the SOUTH CAROLINA state fair of all things. You would think you would see a crap ton of people sporting Trump paraphernalia. In the HORDES of people I saw, (and I was watching intently as I waited for hours while my kids rode the rides), I saw precisely ONE old white dude wearing a red Trump hat. That's crazy (for more than one reason!). And of the hundreds and hundreds of cars I passed to get to and from our parking area, I saw (and was actively looking for) ZERO bumper stickers or magnets supporting a candidate.

Anyone else noticing that wherever you are? Again, considering where I am, and specifically at a fair...geez, you would think the place would be lit up with red hats, but nay. Not sure if I am worried or encouraged by that.

Remus West · Post by **Remus West** » Mon Oct 17, 2016 10:59 am

Carpet_pissr wrote:I don't know if this is a regional behavior, but I have noticed the complete lack of bumper stickers this year supporting either candidate. It's the first presidential election I can remember, where there seem to be almost NO bumper stickers (or hats, or shirts, etc).

In fact, I was taking my daughter and some friends to the state fair yesterday, the SOUTH CAROLINA state fair of all things. You would think you would see a crap ton of people sporting Trump paraphernalia. In the HORDES of people I saw, (and I was watching intently as I waited for hours while my kids rode the rides), I saw precisely ONE old white dude wearing a red Trump hat. That's crazy. And of the hundreds and hundreds of cars I passed to get to and from our parking area, I saw (and was actively looking for) ZERO bumper stickers or magnets supporting a candidate.

Anyone else noticing that wherever you are? Again, considering where I am, and specifically at a fair...geez, you would think the place would be lit up with red hats, but nay. Not sure if I am worried or encouraged by that.

There was a huge sign on the road near my house supporting Trump. It is now, thankfully, gone. Replaced with several smaller signs supporting local republicans but nothing on the presidential race. I don't see shirts , hats, or anything else for either side. I do see a bunch of Bernie Sanders bumper stickers around Ann Arbor though. Shocking.

Archinerd · Post by **Archinerd** » Mon Oct 17, 2016 11:01 am

Yeah, I regularly see more Bernie bumper stickers than Hillary on my daily commute.

Last weekend while in Conservative central Illinois, I saw only 1 Trump yard sign.

PLW · Post by **PLW** » Mon Oct 17, 2016 11:03 am

Carpet_pissr wrote:I don't know if this is a regional behavior, but I have noticed the complete lack of bumper stickers this year supporting either candidate. It's the first presidential election I can remember, where there seem to be almost NO bumper stickers (or hats, or shirts, etc).

Come to Clemson. Tons of Hillary stickers in town. Tons of Trump stickers/signs out in the sticks.