Re: The Art of the Donald Trumpocalypse
Posted: Wed Aug 17, 2016 11:57 pm
Dr Jen isn't the only one wondering about Trump's medical letter.
That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons bring us some web forums whereupon we can gather
http://garbi.online/forum/
BORNSTEIN--Jacob, M.D., 93, passed away peacefully at home on February 18. He was born in 1917 in Chelsea, Massachusetts to parents who had immigrated from Eastern Europe. His life was a tribute to the uniquely American concept of "anything is possible" if you are born here. He graduated from Harvard College (Phi Beta Kappa) in 1938 and from Harvard Medical School in 1942. After serving as a house officer at the Beth Israel Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts he spent three years as an officer in the United States Army during World War II. He came to New York City after the war where he was in the private practice of Internal Medicine for over sixty years. He spent his entire professional career as a staff member of the Department of Medicine at Lenox Hill Hospital, New York, NY. He devoted his entire life to the study and practice of medicine and was completely and unequivocally committed to the care of his patients, who loved and respected him. He is survived by his loving wife, Maida (Seltzer), of over sixty-five years, his son, Harold Bornstein, M.D., his daughters Bonnie (Hyken) and Gail (Wachtel), his daughter-in-law, Melissa (Brown-Bornstein), his sons-in-law, Richard Hyken and Dr. Clifford Wachtel, and ten grandchildren, Kimberly (Boland), Kari (Seletz), and Matthew (Wachtel), Samuel and Lauren (Hyken), Robyn, Joseph, M.D., Alix, Jeremee and Jackson (Bornstein). His medical practice at 101 East 78th Street, New York, NY will be continued in perpetuity by his son and in the future by his grandsons. Funeral services will be held on Friday, February 19th at 9am at the Riverside Memorial Chapel, 76th Street and Amsterdam Avenue.
Drumpf probably knows a guy who knows a guy who knows a guy that can make the doctor disappear.GreenGoo wrote:Has no one walked into the doctor's office and simply asked if he wrote the letter?
And if he did write the letter, to what purpose, as it wouldn't even count for an HR certified sick/healthy letter, and makes the doctor seem...terrible. On the national stage.
The article does some legwork to determine the doctor in question is not a member of the hospital mentioned, but how has no one tracked him down and spoken with him?
It goes up or down depending on his feelings.hepcat wrote:As with everything he says or does, its massive girth and length is implied.
But you want to. Everybody wants to. Itgb wrote:I'm not going to touch that.
Given how often he keeps shuffling his campaign staff, I'd say it's pretty clear that they don't think it will work.YellowKing wrote:It's strange to me that his campaign staff thinks this would work, when we've already seen that his "Teflon" coating in the primaries flaked off quickly when the general campaign started. Nothing about how he won the primaries and defied expectations is proving to work in an open race.
Expelling citizens for what (you say) they believe is unconstitutional and stupid. I guess the First Amendment people could do something about that.Trumpster Fire wrote:“What do we do when we find somebody that has extreme views?” Hannity asked in a town hall that was taped Tuesday but aired Wednesday so that it wouldn’t interfere with the live broadcast of Trump’s speech in Milwaukee. “Do we throw them the hell out?
“I'd throw him out,” Trump said of Mateen, who is a naturalized U.S. citizen. “If you look at him, I'd throw him out.”
I honestly think this is partially about ego and partially about losing on his own terms.Isgrimnur wrote:Given how often he keeps shuffling his campaign staff, I'd say it's pretty clear that they don't think it will work.YellowKing wrote:It's strange to me that his campaign staff thinks this would work, when we've already seen that his "Teflon" coating in the primaries flaked off quickly when the general campaign started. Nothing about how he won the primaries and defied expectations is proving to work in an open race.
Being offensive and shouting the crazy has brought him this far, and it's what comes naturally. He's bound to do it regardless of what his advisers advise. So, might as well double down and see where it goes. (As I said somewhere else) Even if he could manage to fake a professional campaign for the next three months, he'd lose some of his Trumpelos and he wouldn't fool anybody else, so there's nothing to gain by trying.GreenGoo wrote:I honestly think this is partially about ego and partially about losing on his own terms.Isgrimnur wrote:Given how often he keeps shuffling his campaign staff, I'd say it's pretty clear that they don't think it will work.YellowKing wrote:It's strange to me that his campaign staff thinks this would work, when we've already seen that his "Teflon" coating in the primaries flaked off quickly when the general campaign started. Nothing about how he won the primaries and defied expectations is proving to work in an open race.
Objectively it's clear that Drumpf cannot handle criticism, even well meaning and constructive criticism. He literally tells us that the guys he hires say nice things about him as one of the reasons he hires them in the first place. I think he would rather have rallies where everyone cheers insanely over the crazy stuff he spews than win the election. Of course he wants both, but if he had to choose, and he does, he'd choose screaming fans over the presidency. And that's what he's done. Imo.
So he gets his world view reinforced (I'm the best, people are telling me I'm the best) and when he loses he won't have to second guess himself. Of course publicly it will be someone else's fault. He doesn't have an ounce of humility. But internally he won't have to be pissed at himself for trying to be someone else and losing.
He just likes having yes men around him, and he wasn't getting enough people agreeing with him as his team tried to steer him in the right direction. It's probably as simple as that.
It has to be the former - I think he is just too vain to take one for the team. I have to wonder if he just blundered into a winning strategy for the primaries based on his personality being in sync with a crazy plurality in the GOP base.YellowKing wrote:Either Drumpf is one of the most incompetent nominees in history, or this is a calculated conspiracy to get Clinton elected. Neither possibility gives me the warm fuzzies.
Refer to the bingo card. 16 candidates are too damn many; you need to be rich or crazy or both to get any notice. None of the more acceptable choices got much traction and before long, you were left with nothing but unacceptable options.malchior wrote:It has to be the former - I think he is just too vain to take one for the team. I have to wonder if he just blundered into a winning strategy for the primaries based on his personality being in sync with a crazy plurality in the GOP base.YellowKing wrote:Either Drumpf is one of the most incompetent nominees in history, or this is a calculated conspiracy to get Clinton elected. Neither possibility gives me the warm fuzzies.
I'm almost certain it's this.malchior wrote:It has to be the former - I think he is just too vain to take one for the team. I have to wonder if he just blundered into a winning strategy for the primaries based on his personality being in sync with a crazy plurality in the GOP base.YellowKing wrote:Either Drumpf is one of the most incompetent nominees in history, or this is a calculated conspiracy to get Clinton elected. Neither possibility gives me the warm fuzzies.
Completely agree. It's a pattern too. Look at his comments about Putin - he basically said he had a relationship to the guy - why? "Because he said nice things about me".GreenGoo wrote: I think he would rather have rallies where everyone cheers insanely over the crazy stuff he spews than win the election. Of course he wants both, but if he had to choose, and he does, he'd choose screaming fans over the presidency. And that's what he's done. Imo.
Who gets to define the "lunatic fringe"? You? I can think of a couple of people right here at OO that probably consider you (and me) part of the "lunatic fringe".Jeff V wrote:
The lunatic fringe should not be allowed at the conference table. Whatever these people do, they are not going to switch teams. Let them bitch and moan about not being able to hoist a statute of Jesus at every public school at gun point. They should take every effort to just silence these asshats and make it clear they are not directing the direction of the party. Which means that those who are need to be purged. Then one or two more acceptable candidates should be anointed as the party's chosen ones, given a lot of party support, and every opportunity to interact with the public. Come 2020, they then might have a candidate that many people are both familiar with and inclined to accept.
I believe he's talking about what direction the party should move in. Basically cut the Tea Partiers (as one example) loose because chances are they are gonna vote for you anyway, then pick a direction the mainstream can get behind and move forward from there.tgb wrote:Who gets to define the "lunatic fringe"? You? I can think of a couple of people right here at OO that probably consider you (and me) part of the "lunatic fringe".Jeff V wrote:
The lunatic fringe should not be allowed at the conference table. Whatever these people do, they are not going to switch teams. Let them bitch and moan about not being able to hoist a statute of Jesus at every public school at gun point. They should take every effort to just silence these asshats and make it clear they are not directing the direction of the party. Which means that those who are need to be purged. Then one or two more acceptable candidates should be anointed as the party's chosen ones, given a lot of party support, and every opportunity to interact with the public. Come 2020, they then might have a candidate that many people are both familiar with and inclined to accept.
Keep in mind that it wasn't the GOP base that carried him through the primaries. It was a huge number of new "GOP" primary voters that carried him through the primaries. Keep in mind that up until he was the last man standing, in addition to having the most votes "for" in a GOP primary, he also had the most votes "against" in a GOP primary.malchior wrote:crazy plurality in the GOP base.
Did anyone read the big Michael Moore conspiracy theory?malchior wrote:It has to be the former - I think he is just too vain to take one for the team. I have to wonder if he just blundered into a winning strategy for the primaries based on his personality being in sync with a crazy plurality in the GOP base.
Big shark. Biggest shark you ever saw. I saw it, folks. Huge. Police chief. Great guy, friend of mine. He KILLED it #TrumpExplainsMoviePlots
This guy, Aladdin- hes making terrible, the worst deals. Believe me folks, I would've got 4, 5, even 12 wishes #TrumpExplainsMoviePlots
Biff—great guy, good friend of mine—they ruin his life! Doc and Marty—total losers. Can't win without time machine. #TrumpExplainsMoviePlots
And finally.....
Little Frodo, very small guy, tries to destroy a ring, it takes forever, total loser. I'd do it quicker, believe me #TrumpExplainsMoviePlots
Finally watched Schindler's List. Loved it. Great, fantastic, wonderful. A lot of great ideas!" #TrumpExplainsMoviePlots
Yep - I totally agree. He rode the split to the top.RunningMn9 wrote:Keep in mind that it wasn't the GOP base that carried him through the primaries. It was a huge number of new "GOP" primary voters that carried him through the primaries. Keep in mind that up until he was the last man standing, in addition to having the most votes "for" in a GOP primary, he also had the most votes "against" in a GOP primary.malchior wrote:crazy plurality in the GOP base.
I actually believed that Trump was sabotaging himself in order to avoid taking on the job of POTUS...until Moore endorsed that theory too.YellowKing wrote: As much as I dislike Michael Moore, I kind of love this scenario.
Fitzy wrote:I think this thread needs some actual art
I hope Drumpf is busy burning bridges with his (former) allies. I hope all them bridges burn! I want his brand burned and his soil salted!
Starting.....now.Drumpf wrote:"But one thing I can promise you is this: I will always tell you the truth."
Lewandowski is not exactly actively supporting Trump.Max Peck wrote:It should be interesting to see whether Manafort acts like someone who was thrown under a bus, or if he continues to actively support the Trump campaign by other means (a la Roger Stone or Corey Lewandowski). I'm expecting the latter, although he might keep a low profile if he calculates that his Ukrainian shenanigans are drawing too much fire.
I disagree - IMO he defends Drumpf consistently on CNN. He was attacking Manafort but only as an individual and only when he was mostly out of favor. Otherwise he acts like a Drumpf surrogate that CNN pays.tjg_marantz wrote:Lewandowski is not exactly actively supporting Drumpf.
That's been my impression. I haven't been glued to CNN and therefore may have missed him being all objective and impartial, but everytime I have seen Lewandowski pop up as a CNN commentator he is saying good things about Trump.malchior wrote:I disagree - IMO he defends Drumpf consistently on CNN. He was attacking Manafort but only as an individual and only when he was mostly out of favor. Otherwise he acts like a Drumpf surrogate that CNN pays.tjg_marantz wrote:Lewandowski is not exactly actively supporting Drumpf.
Can't we just shorten that to "Trumpster fire"? Or 'Drumpfster fire' if you're not into the whole brevity thing?malchior wrote:Drumpf dumpster fire burns brightly