Octopus Overlords

Holman wrote:I think we can take "quitting for the good of the party" off the table. Trump cares nothing for the good of anyone but Trump, and quitting would harm his brand.

He's the leader of a movement, and his followers are still rabid for him. He'll still have that even after Clinton beats him, and then he'll be free to capitalize on it. Look how well Sarah Palin has done, and she's not one-tenth the salesman Trump is.

For the past day or two Trump has been complaining darkly about a rigged election and threatening riots in the streets if he loses. Establishing that charge now, before he actually loses, gives it more credibility in his followers' eyes. Far from quitting, he is determined to become dictator one way or another.

GreenGoo wrote:And while we're talking about trumpalos, they're the reason I'm still worried despite Drumpf seeming to self destruct. They don't care. They will vote for him even if the next picture is of Drumpf using utensils to eat a baby.

There is another category of Trumpshakers, and I think that's the category my mom falls into. She doesn't read the news, she's pretty uninformed when it comes to politics, so she's mostly unaware of Trump's gaffes. It's an "ignorance is bliss" mentality. She's voting against Hillary more than for Trump, so she doesn't have to really have anything but the shallowest surface level overview of his politics.

GreenGoo wrote:

LordMortis wrote: Is there a point where it's appropriate to call the trumpster fires who eat up this piece of shit pieces of shit as well?

I've been trying really hard not to do that. Early on in this fiasco both Rip and cheeba warned me that doing so would only cause them to double down. There was some disagreement about whether the chicken or egg came first.

And while we're talking about trumpalos, they're the reason I'm still worried despite Drumpf seeming to self destruct. They don't care. They will vote for him even if the next picture is of Drumpf using utensils to eat a baby.

If? They'll demand it!

YellowKing wrote:She doesn't read the news, she's pretty uninformed when it comes to politics, so she's mostly unaware of Trump's gaffes. It's an "ignorance is bliss" mentality. She's voting against Hillary more than for Trump, so she doesn't have to really have anything but the shallowest surface level overview of his politics.

This perfectly describes damn near every single Trump supporter I know.

I made the mistake of wandering into an office discussion on politics yesterday where one of my co-workers was trumpeting (no pun intended) his Trump support. I casually asked him "So, which part of Trump's platform are you most supportive of?" He literally could not name a single Trump position, other than building a wall to keep out the damn Mexican rapists. Not one. There was the generic "he's not a politician" and "he's not a liar like Hillary" (which I found amusing) drivel, but he had zero idea of what Trump's politics are...yet he's a avid supporter.

Just read that Newt Gingrich has now come out and said that Trump is "more unacceptable than Hillary Clinton."

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, one of Trump's most loyal defenders, warned that his friend was in danger of throwing away the election and helping to make Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton president unless he quickly changes course.

"The current race is which of these two is the more unacceptable, because right now neither of them is acceptable," Gingrich said in a Wednesday morning telephone interview. "Trump is helping her to win by proving he is more unacceptable than she is."

Gingrich said Trump has only a matter of weeks to reverse course. "Anybody who is horrified by Hillary should hope that Trump will take a deep breath and learn some new skills," he said. "He cannot win the presidency operating the way he is now. She can't be bad enough to elect him if he's determined to make this many mistakes." [The Washington Post]

Wow!

Kurth wrote:Just read that Newt Gingrich has now come out and said that Trump is "more unacceptable than Hillary Clinton."

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, one of Trump's most loyal defenders, warned that his friend was in danger of throwing away the election and helping to make Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton president unless he quickly changes course.

"The current race is which of these two is the more unacceptable, because right now neither of them is acceptable," Gingrich said in a Wednesday morning telephone interview. "Trump is helping her to win by proving he is more unacceptable than she is."

Gingrich said Trump has only a matter of weeks to reverse course. "Anybody who is horrified by Hillary should hope that Trump will take a deep breath and learn some new skills," he said. "He cannot win the presidency operating the way he is now. She can't be bad enough to elect him if he's determined to make this many mistakes." [The Washington Post]

Wow!

I'm sure he meant to say "seems more unacceptable than she is."

Pretty sloppy, Herr Professor. You'll need to be more precise in praising the Leader if you expect to be Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Kurth wrote:Just read that Newt Gingrich has now come out and said that Trump is "more unacceptable than Hillary Clinton."

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, one of Trump's most loyal defenders, warned that his friend was in danger of throwing away the election and helping to make Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton president unless he quickly changes course.

"The current race is which of these two is the more unacceptable, because right now neither of them is acceptable," Gingrich said in a Wednesday morning telephone interview. "Trump is helping her to win by proving he is more unacceptable than she is."

Gingrich said Trump has only a matter of weeks to reverse course. "Anybody who is horrified by Hillary should hope that Trump will take a deep breath and learn some new skills," he said. "He cannot win the presidency operating the way he is now. She can't be bad enough to elect him if he's determined to make this many mistakes." [The Washington Post]

Wow!

As if learning some new skills in a few weeks is all he needs.

Newt Gingrich also wrote:Gingrich said Trump is continuing to operate on instincts that helped him in business and in the primaries but said the GOP nominee doesn’t realize those skills are not adequate for a general election.

“He can’t learn what he doesn’t know because he doesn’t know he doesn’t know it,” Gingrich said. He added, “You cannot allow yourself to be drawn into fights that aren’t relevant to winning the presidency.”

Max Peck wrote: If? They'll demand it!

Ok, that gif is awesome even (especially?) without my comment.

I lol'd for realz.

Gingrich must be pissed about not being chosen as Trump's VP.

Sooo...Eric Erickson is a little upset with Trump.

You people reflect the evil character of your god. You should be ashamed, but you have no shame left. You all deserve to be defeated and annihilated. You disgust me in cheering him on. He disgusts me.

On September 11, 2001, our NATO allies surrounded our nation and our nation’s interests globally while we buried our dead and you people cheer that braying jackass on ignorant of that fact and demanding money from our allies.

Donald Trump can go to hell and perhaps you will do the rest of us a favor and follow him there.

Shame on you all. Shame on you.

Archinerd wrote:

Silly deciders! For every career politician that publicly states their non-support, The Donald probably gains another hundred voters. Looking forward to my signed copy of

Nothing says "Classy!" like a gold sharpie.

El Guapo wrote:Sooo...Eric Erickson is a little upset with Trump.

You people reflect the evil character of your god. You should be ashamed, but you have no shame left. You all deserve to be defeated and annihilated. You disgust me in cheering him on. He disgusts me.

On September 11, 2001, our NATO allies surrounded our nation and our nation’s interests globally while we buried our dead and you people cheer that braying jackass on ignorant of that fact and demanding money from our allies.

Donald Trump can go to hell and perhaps you will do the rest of us a favor and follow him there.

Shame on you all. Shame on you.

Quite the rant, I really liked this part.

These are allies. They are not vassal states. These are friends. Our promises do not require shakedowns. We are not the global bully demanding lunch money for protection. We are the shining city on the hill.

Erickson may just have to vote Hillary if it's that serious.

i look forward to the emergence of the NeoPublican, the TRUpublican, the Rebirthpublican and the Republican: Origins parties over the next half decade

em2nought wrote: Silly deciders! For every career politician that publicly states their non-support, The Donald probably gains another hundred voters. Looking forward to my signed copy of

He signs his name "Awful Dummy"?

But if you love The Art of the Deal, be sure to read the sequel.

Holman wrote:He signs his name "Awful Dummy"?

Thought it was "Amish Granny"

Annual Gummy?

From the NYT - Voices From Donald Trump Rallies, Uncensored. It's an article with a completely NSFW embedded video.

Not everyone attending a Trump rally behaves this way. In fact, many are polite and well mannered. But while protesters are often shouted down, crowds seldom express disapproval of the crude slogans and angry outbursts by Mr. Trump’s supporters. Indeed, these displays have become inextricably bound with the Trump show itself — as much as the snaking entrance lines and the calls to “build a wall” along the border with Mexico.

With that in mind, we set out to record the shouts, slogans, imprecations and interactions among audience members that set Trump events apart from other political gatherings. We also obtained recordings from others in attendance, who sometimes were closer to the action.

The resulting compilation gives a sense of what we saw – from Maine to North Carolina, from Ohio to Arizona.

Saw that this morning - I'm just shaking my head. It's hard to dismiss the racism element when these events are filled almost entirely with white folk and there media accounts consistent with people yelling terrible things. With close to *zero* outcry.

Meh, pales in comparison to the things that get yelled at Trump supporters by protesters.

At least the anti-Trump protesters acting like children actually are children.

Also, I agree that the Trumpistas look "pale" compared to the kids.

The latest Fox News poll has Trump down by 10. Add in Gary Johnson and he's still down by 9. That's not a good sign for Trump. If Fox News can't Trump up a poll in their favor then who can?

Rip wrote:Meh, pales in comparison to the things that get yelled at Trump supporters by protesters.

While it is sad to see children giving the finger and yelling "F--you!", I'm not quite sure that is on the same level as hearing a Trump supporter give a hearty Sieg Heil! during a rally. We can agree to disagree on the matter of degree.

As I've noted elsewhere, IMO, the problem for Trump is that in order to win the Presidency, he has to hold every state that Romney won. That gets him 206 electoral votes. That leaves him 64 shy. I expect the battlegrounds in this election will be Florida (29), PA (20), Ohio (18), Michigan (16), North Carolina (15) and Virginia (13).

All of those except NC were lost by Romney. Pull NC out for a moment though, to see my point. Without NC, Trump is 79 electoral votes shy of the 270 needed. Trump has to win at least four of those states (assuming no other state flips from Red to Blue). And if he doesn't win any of the big three (FL, PA or OH), than he needs to win all 5 remaining states.

Based on 538's "Polls Only" model, the chances of Trump winning in those states: While there is time, I don't see any scenario where time doesn't hurt Trump. More time is more opportunity to say stupid things. Winning four or five of those states was obviously too hard for Romney, and the party was unified behind Romney. The only thing he was missing was the passionate racist vote. I'd like to believe that the passionate racist vote isn't enough.

So watching both links I see the pro-Trump group yelling racist things about Mexicans, Muslims, women, and provoking calls to kill Hillary Clinton.

I see the other group yelling "fuck you" at the above folks.

If you can't see the difference between those two, then I don't know what to tell you.

I can't speak for the other states but Mi will be a battle ground. The ignorant support for Trump coming out of here is the same stuff that Snyder fed off of but now his supporters are sick of him and want to sacrifice him at the alter of Trump, whom they don't like but dammit the Rs are terrible and nope to Hillary.

I don't think he'll win here but I think it's going to be closer here than in a lot other battle ground states and I'd leave room for me to be wrong and for this place to fall on the other side of the fence.

Scraper wrote:The latest Fox News poll has Trump down by 10. Add in Gary Johnson and he's still down by 9. That's not a good sign for Trump. If Fox News can't Trump up a poll in their favor then who can?

Even that absurd LA Times/USC poll flipped back to Clinton having the lead.

Edit to add: I just took a look at the details of the Fox News poll. The contents in that poll are *devastating* to Trump IMO. Question after question after question reflects terribly on people's opinion of Trump.

RunningMn9 wrote:While there is time, I don't see any scenario where time doesn't hurt Trump. More time is more opportunity to say stupid things. Winning four or five of those states was obviously too hard for Romney, and the party was unified behind Romney. The only thing he was missing was the passionate racist vote. I'd like to believe that the passionate racist vote isn't enough.

Not to mention that we know Trump is woefully behind on campaign logistics, money, etc. compared to Clinton. So he's not only having to do everything you described above, but do it without the proper tools and funding against a divided party and using a campaign team that is steadily imploding.

Smoove_B wrote:

Rip wrote:Meh, pales in comparison to the things that get yelled at Trump supporters by protesters.

While it is sad to see children giving the finger and yelling "F--you!", I'm not quite sure that is on the same level as hearing a Trump supporter give a hearty Sieg Heil! during a rally. We can agree to disagree on the matter of degree.

Don't let him Rip you! He's avoiding the discussion of the terrible things being said at Trump rallies with his typical dodge and weave.

RunningMn9 wrote: While there is time, I don't see any scenario where time doesn't hurt Trump. More time is more opportunity to say stupid things. Winning four or five of those states was obviously too hard for Romney, and the party was unified behind Romney. The only thing he was missing was the passionate racist vote. I'd like to believe that the passionate racist vote isn't enough.

And there's the flip side: educated whites and minority voters are fired up to defeat Trump. 2012 had lower Democratic turnout than 2008 or 2004, but Obama still beat Romney and a unified GOP. 2016 is going to be a high-turnout election.

YellowKing wrote:

Captain Caveman wrote:While there is time, I don't see any scenario where time doesn't hurt Trump. More time is more opportunity to say stupid things. Winning four or five of those states was obviously too hard for Romney, and the party was unified behind Romney. The only thing he was missing was the passionate racist vote. I'd like to believe that the passionate racist vote isn't enough.

Not to mention that we know Trump is woefully behind on campaign logistics, money, etc. compared to Clinton. So he's not only having to do everything you described above, but do it without the proper tools and funding against a divided party and using a campaign team that is steadily imploding.

First, I didn't say that.

But back on topic: I've seen recent reports that insiders in the campaign feel like Trump's only remaining hope for winning the election depends upon outside events. Some terrible scandal for Clinton, increasing civil unrest, etc. So in that respect, more time is good for him. If the election were today, he'd get crushed.

Scraper wrote:The latest Fox News poll has Trump down by 10. Add in Gary Johnson and he's still down by 9. That's not a good sign for Trump. If Fox News can't Trump up a poll in their favor then who can?

I wound up watching some Fox News this morning while I was bringing my car in for repairs. They talked about this poll, though they spent most of the time talking about a sub-finding of the poll that found that voters trust Trump over Hillary on the economy by a 50-45 margin. Guess that was the ray of sunshine that they could find.

It hasn't even been a week since the Democratic convention. I'll take these polls with a pinch of salt.

El Guapo wrote:They talked about this poll, though they spent most of the time talking about a sub-finding of the poll that found that voters trust Trump over Hillary on the economy by a 50-45 margin. Guess that was the ray of sunshine that they could find.

Yeah, on the issues, Clinton had a double digit lead on almost every issue. A few ties, and a -5 on the economy. I think there was one more, maybe dealing with ISIS? Of course, the poll did show that the two most important issues are the economy and terrorism.

Defiant wrote:It hasn't even been a week since the Democratic convention. I'll take these polls with a pinch of salt.

Fo' sure.

538 is saying to use their Nowcast™ to see the trend of recent events (in this case the DNC convention superimposed with Trump's take {and the GOP's reaction to} on vets), but continue to use their (highly damped) Polls-Plus forecast for expectations for results in November.

There's value in the polls today, but only if you're trying to forecast a hypothetical election taking place today. You need today's polls plus yesterday's polls plus incorporate a lot of history if you want to make predictions for three months from now.

Captain Caveman wrote:

YellowKing wrote:

Captain Caveman wrote:While there is time, I don't see any scenario where time doesn't hurt Trump. More time is more opportunity to say stupid things. Winning four or five of those states was obviously too hard for Romney, and the party was unified behind Romney. The only thing he was missing was the passionate racist vote. I'd like to believe that the passionate racist vote isn't enough.

Not to mention that we know Trump is woefully behind on campaign logistics, money, etc. compared to Clinton. So he's not only having to do everything you described above, but do it without the proper tools and funding against a divided party and using a campaign team that is steadily imploding.

First, I didn't say that.

But back on topic: I've seen recent reports that insiders in the campaign feel like Trump's only remaining hope for winning the election depends upon outside events. Some terrible scandal for Clinton, increasing civil unrest, etc. So in that respect, more time is good for him. If the election were today, he'd get crushed.

Trump isn't going to allow himself to be crushed. He couldn't abide such a thing. If the numbers don't turn around as the day gets closer, look for him to drop out, using "rigged" elections as the excuse.

I look forward to watching the R's trying to get a viable candidate on the ballots in mid-September.

Or he stays and blames rigged elections, the lack of support from the RNC, lack of organized funding, and bad decisions by his advisors for his loss.

He will then say "Look at what I accomplished even though all of this stacked against me."

My fear as that he will the encourage the mob into not so civil disobedience using the same deceptions the mob is spewing today.

I don't get the feeling that Trumpaloo loyalty extends to picking up arms in his defense.

The Meal wrote:There's value in the polls today, but only if you're trying to forecast a hypothetical election taking place today. You need today's polls plus yesterday's polls plus incorporate a lot of history if you want to make predictions for three months from now.

To be clear, I'm not making predictions per se. However, the current polls are a snapshot of where the race stands today, coming out of both conventions, and augmented by Trump's vet stupidity. To win the Presidency, he will have to reverse those trends, in a lot of places.