Octopus Overlords

Isgrimnur wrote:Who will help those senators most at risk during the Trumpocalype? George W. Bush

Bush's office confirms that at the event for McCain, the former president stressed the importance of preserving the Republican-held Senate as a "check and balance" on the White House - a check Bush believes would be needed whether the next president is Trump or Hillary Clinton.

Donald J. Trump is parting ways with his campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, a move that comes as the presumptive Republican nominee faces challenges as he moves toward the general election.
...
Mr. Trump had faced increasing concerns from allies and donors, as well as his children, about the next phase of the campaign as he pivots toward a general election.
...
One person briefed on the moves, who asked not to be identified, said the campaign had long planned adjustments to the needs of a general election campaign.
...
Mr. Lewandowki’s departure comes after weeks of infighting between loyalists to Mr. Lewandowski and Paul Manafort, a veteran Republican operative hired in March by Mr. Trump. The skirmishing repeatedly drew outside attention to the problems within the campaign and created a distraction for members of its staff.

hepcat wrote:A high turnover rate is a hallmark of a great businessman.

Paul Manafort, the veteran operative who since March has been amassing influence inside Trump HQ, recently telegraphed through third parties he would be gone in 48 hours if Trump didn’t oust Lewandowski, who'd run his campaign from the outset. Manafort was fed up with battling Lewandowski and let the campaign know the two of them "just couldn't get along."

From there, it became a family affair. Trump’s daughter Ivanka and her husband Jared Kushner didn’t want to lose Manafort, believing him to be the more experienced hand to guide the campaign into the general election.

They convinced Trump to keep him – and the only way to do that, given Manafort’s terms, was to dump Lewandowski.
...
Reached on Monday by The Associated Press, Lewandowski deflected any criticism of his approach, pointing instead to Manafort.

"Paul Manafort has been in operational control of the campaign since April 7. That's a fact," Lewandowski said, declining to elaborate on his dismissal.

In a subsequent interview with CNN, Lewandowski repeatedly said he didn’t know why he was fired. But he said working for the campaign was “an honor and a privilege” and he “wouldn’t change one second.” He also claimed there was no animosity in the relationship with Manafort.

A person close to Trump told the AP that Lewandowski was forced out largely because of his poor relationship with the Republican National Committee and GOP officials.

Max Peck wrote:

AWS260 wrote:Judge in Trump case supports crap beer.

Deport him back to Indiana, where he can drink Midwestern craft brews until he develops an appreciation for good beer.

tgb wrote:

AWS260 wrote:Judge in Drumpf case supports crap beer.

Deport him back to Indiana, where he can drink Midwestern craft brews until he develops an appreciation for good beer.

Being Mex'can, he probably prefers Corona.

...

Sometimes, I wish I'd been at that convention at San Francisco. I mean, I wish I'd been a delegate, I really do. I would have fought, you know. I wouldn't have worried so much about party unity because if you unite behind a man you don't believe in, it's a lie. I tell you, those people who got control of that convention: Who are they? I mean, when the head of the Ku Klux Klan, when all these weird groups come out in favor of the candidate of my party — either they're not Republicans or I'm not.

I've thought about just not voting at this election, just staying home — but you can't do that, that's saying you don't care who wins, and I do care. I think my party made a bad mistake in San Francisco, and I'm going to have to vote against that mistake on the third of November.

Holman wrote:1964 LBJ TV ad: "Confessions of a Republican"

...

Sometimes, I wish I'd been at that convention at San Francisco. I mean, I wish I'd been a delegate, I really do. I would have fought, you know. I wouldn't have worried so much about party unity because if you unite behind a man you don't believe in, it's a lie. I tell you, those people who got control of that convention: Who are they? I mean, when the head of the Ku Klux Klan, when all these weird groups come out in favor of the candidate of my party — either they're not Republicans or I'm not.

I've thought about just not voting at this election, just staying home — but you can't do that, that's saying you don't care who wins, and I do care. I think my party made a bad mistake in San Francisco, and I'm going to have to vote against that mistake on the third of November.

Clinton should put this one back on the air.

GreenGoo wrote:No comments on the Brit that tried to grab a cop's gun because he was "going to kill Trump"?

Holman wrote:

GreenGoo wrote:No comments on the Brit that tried to grab a cop's gun because he was "going to kill Trump"?

I despise Trump, but I'm definitely glad the attempt failed. Even he doesn't deserve to die for his stances, and political violence harms the whole system.

El Guapo wrote: Speaking of which, what are the odds that the RNC manages to stop Trump at the convention? Seems astonishingly unlikely (and the consequences seem unpredictable and dire), but there's a ton of buzz about it lately.

Holman wrote:

El Guapo wrote: Speaking of which, what are the odds that the RNC manages to stop Trump at the convention? Seems astonishingly unlikely (and the consequences seem unpredictable and dire), but there's a ton of buzz about it lately.

The buzz is wishful thinking.

Holman wrote:

El Guapo wrote: Speaking of which, what are the odds that the RNC manages to stop Trump at the convention? Seems astonishingly unlikely (and the consequences seem unpredictable and dire), but there's a ton of buzz about it lately.

The buzz is wishful thinking. It would be the Establishment directly opposing the clear will of the voters, and it would guarantee a backlash that would do even more damage than having Trump at the top of the ticket. The base went for Trump in a big way, and they're not going to roll over and let a Romney/Kasich ticket replace him.

I think the RNC is just going to try to ride out Trump's loss while praying to keep the Senate. The House is safe for them.

Holman wrote:The base went for Trump in a big way

tgb wrote:

Holman wrote:

El Guapo wrote: Speaking of which, what are the odds that the RNC manages to stop Trump at the convention? Seems astonishingly unlikely (and the consequences seem unpredictable and dire), but there's a ton of buzz about it lately.

The buzz is wishful thinking. It would be the Establishment directly opposing the clear will of the voters, and it would guarantee a backlash that would do even more damage than having Trump at the top of the ticket. The base went for Trump in a big way, and they're not going to roll over and let a Romney/Kasich ticket replace him.

I think the RNC is just going to try to ride out Trump's loss while praying to keep the Senate. The House is safe for them.

So much this. The rank and file would rise up and I suspect we'd have insurrection, the likes of which hasn't been seen since Chicago '68.

You know how to tell if you're toxic? When even Putin backs away.

Donald J. Trump enters the general election campaign laboring under the worst financial and organizational disadvantage of any major party nominee in recent history, placing both his candidacy and his party in political peril.

Mr. Trump began June with just $1.3 million in cash on hand, a figure more typical for a campaign for the House of Representatives than the White House. He trailed Hillary Clinton, who raised more than $28 million in May, by more than $41 million, according to reports filed late Monday night with the Federal Election Commission.

He has a staff of around 70 people — compared with nearly 700 for Mrs. Clinton — suggesting only the barest effort toward preparing to contest swing states this fall. And he fired his campaign manager, Corey Lewandowski, on Monday, after concerns among allies and donors about his ability to run a competitive race.

The Trump campaign has not aired a television advertisement since he effectively secured the nomination in May and has not booked any advertising for the summer or fall. Mrs. Clinton and her allies spent nearly $26 million on advertising in June alone, according to the Campaign Media Analysis Group, pummeling Mr. Trump over his temperament, his statements and his mocking of a disabled reporter. The only sustained reply, aside from Mr. Trump’s gibes at rallies and on Twitter, has come from a pair of groups that spent less than $2 million combined.

RunningMn9 wrote: To be fair, for most of the primary season, 60-70% of the base went for !Trump.

Defiant wrote:

RunningMn9 wrote: To be fair, for most of the primary season, 60-70% of the base went for !Trump.

I wish "!Trump" was his presidential logo/slogan. I can see it now:

'We need a catchy logo"

"Why don't we use what Bush used, your name with a loud exclamation mark"

"I like it. But we should make it better. Hey, I know, why don't we move the exclamation mark to the start, so it's the first thing people see, and they'll know that it's going to be exciting and better than anyone else, believe me, we'll be more exciting and louder than everyone! We'll be so loud you won't be able to hear anyone else!"

YellowKing wrote:It's still early, but my gut is that Trump is screwed.

Last election cycle (Romney/Obama) was probably the deepest I've ever delved into campaign strategy, statistics, and ground games. My take-away from that outcome was that underlying basics still do a pretty damn good job of predicting outcome. When you look past the media hype and the click-bait shock polls, the data typically doesn't lie. Nate Silver even had a great article about how despite everyone (including himself) underestimating Trump, if they had actually followed the polls they should have seen it coming.

Trump's meteoric rise may be shocking, and it may be in some ways unprecedented, but I don't think he can just erase decades of proven campaign fundamentals. And one of the biggest fundamentals is that the candidate who spends the most usually wins. The candidate who plays the best ground game usually wins. Hillary's got Trump on the ropes in both departments. Trump has made a career of style over substance, but that can only take you so far.

Donald Trump won a standing ovation from hundreds of Christian conservatives who came to New York City Tuesday with a skeptical but willing attitude toward a man who has divided their group with comments on women, immigrants and Islam. In his comments the presumptive GOP nominee vowed to end the decades-old ban on tax-exempt groups’ – including churches — politicking, said religious liberty is “the #1 question,” and said he’d appoint anti-abortion Supreme Court justices.

“I think maybe that will be my greatest contribution to Christianity — and other religions, is to allow you, when you talk religious liberty, to go and speak openly and if you like somebody or want somebody to represent you, you should have the right to do it,” Trump said. A ban was put in place by Lyndon Johnson on tax-exempt groups making explicit political endorsements. Religious leaders in America today, Trump said, “are petrified.”

As president, he said, he’d work on things including: “freeing up your religion, freeing up your thoughts. You talk about religious liberty and religious freedom, you don’t have any religious freedom if you think about it,” he told the group, which broke in many times with applause.

Throughout the talk Trump emphasized that America was hurting for what he described as Christianity’s slide to become “weaker, weaker, weaker.” He said he’d get department store employees to say “Merry Christmas” and would fight restrictions on public employees such as public school coaches from being allowed to lead sectarian prayer on the field.

The audience included leaders and founders of many segments of the Christian Right, the evangelical movement that began in the 1970’s under people including the late Jerry Falwell. Among those present and involved in the program Tuesday were Focus on the Family founder James Dobson (who is no longer with that group), former Christian Coalition head Ralph Reed and evangelist Franklin Graham (son of evangelical icon Billy Graham).

While polls show that the majority of white evangelicals — who make up about a fifth of the country — are favorable towards Trump, his campaign has bitterly divided Christian conservatives in general. Those who oppose him do so strongly, and later Tuesday a separate group of conservatives — including leading evangelicals — were meeting to strategize about a possible third candidate. Some leading Christian conservatives used the meeting to speak out against Trump and his comments about immigrants, women, Muslims and others.

“This meeting marks the end of the Christian Right,” Michael Farris, a national homeschooling pioneer and longtime figure of the Christian right, wrote on his Facebook page Tuesday. He noted that he was present at the first gathering of the Moral Majority in 1980. “The premise of the meeting in 1980 was that only candidates that reflected a biblical worldview and good character would gain our support..Today, a candidate whose worldview is greed and whose god is his appetites (Philippians 3) is being tacitly endorsed by this throng..This is a day of mourning.”