Octopus Overlords

follow their advice

For that to happen, he'd have to admit that he might not be the smartest/most knowledgeable person in the room. Wouldn't that take a complete character change?

Moliere wrote: When was the last President who had active duty service in a combat zone?

George H.W. Bush was a WW2 navy pilot.

Bob Dole was also in WW2. Al Gore, John Kerry, and of course John McCain were all in Vietnam.

Holman wrote:

Mr. Trump said that his experience at the New York Military Academy, an expensive prep school where his parents had sent him to correct poor behavior, gave him “more training militarily than a lot of the guys that go into the military.”

He should try that line with actual soldiers.

He survived the "McCain isn't a hero" kerfuffle. He'll survive this.

tgb wrote:

Holman wrote:

Mr. Trump said that his experience at the New York Military Academy, an expensive prep school where his parents had sent him to correct poor behavior, gave him “more training militarily than a lot of the guys that go into the military.”

He should try that line with actual soldiers.

He survived the "McCain isn't a hero" kerfuffle. He'll survive this.

Besides, he will be so good at the military that your head will spin.

Moliere wrote:Trump's military experience

Mr. Trump said that his experience at the New York Military Academy, an expensive prep school where his parents had sent him to correct poor behavior...

yeah, that worked out well for him

Trump apparently used "End of the World as We Know It (And I Feel Fine)" when entering a rally yesterday. REM was none too thrilled about this.

Michael Stipe, the band’s singer, said in a statement to the Daily Beast: “Go f--k yourselves, the lot of you — you sad, attention-grabbing, power-hungry little men. Do not use our music or my voice for your moronic charade of a campaign.”

Trump also used "Rockin' in the Free World" without permission in his announcement gala.

One suspects the lyrics were were not closely examined.

Skinypupy wrote:Trump apparently used "End of the World as We Know It (And I Feel Fine)" when entering a rally yesterday. REM was none too thrilled about this.

Michael Stipe, the band’s singer, said in a statement to the Daily Beast: “Go f--k yourselves, the lot of you — you sad, attention-grabbing, power-hungry little men. Do not use our music or my voice for your moronic charade of a campaign.”

Trump goes after Fiorina's.... face?

"Look at that face!" Trump said while sitting with a Rolling Stone reporter as Fiorina appeared on TV. "Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president."

"I mean, she's a woman, and I'm not s'posedta say bad things, but really, folks, come on. Are we serious?" Trump said, according to the magazine.

And yet he's got the support of 33% of Republican women

Let's face it, they'd vote for Larry Flynt if he just uttered the words "Obama is an idiot!".

edit: Issie...Flynt is still alive, right?

hepcat wrote:Let's face it, they'd vote for Larry Flynt if he just uttered the words "Obama is an idiot!".

edit: Issie...Flynt is still alive, right?

Let's check.

Gamersgate should have asked Trump to front for them. They might have had better luck.

This guy is a complete ass. That he can say such shitty things about women (this is a constant theme of his for many years. There is no question in my mind that he thinks of women as objects) and get away with it is not reflecting well on your country. I realize those that like Trump don't give a shit about how the rest of the world views you, but it still sucks.

tgb wrote:

hepcat wrote:Let's face it, they'd vote for Larry Flynt if he just uttered the words "Obama is an idiot!".

edit: Issie...Flynt is still alive, right?

Let's check.

That was a joking callback to another thread.

GreenGoo wrote:Gamersgate should have asked Trump to front for them. They might have had better luck.

This guy is a complete ass. That he can say such shitty things about women (this is a constant theme of his for many years. There is no question in my mind that he thinks of women as objects) and get away with it is not reflecting well on your country. I realize those that like Trump don't give a shit about how the rest of the world views you, but it still sucks.

Rival Republicans won't attack Trump because he has so effectively hijacked their base. Democrats are biding their time because the truckloads of dirt will be more useful after his nomination.

Trump seems untouchable only because the real attacks haven't begun.

Holman wrote:Rival Republicans won't attack Trump because he so effectively hijacked their base. Democrats are biding their time because the truckloads of dirt will be more useful after his nomination.

Trump seems untouchable only because the real attacks haven't begun.

I'm not talking about politician reactions, I'm talking about the support Trump is getting from the public.

I realize that America has a special affection for the loud mouthed snook, for whatever reason. I can even understand it, to a certain extent. What I can't understand is the supposed belief that a loud mouthed snook would make a good president, or even giving the snook enough political clout (through public support) to affect who gets to be president.

The guy is a chump and he's not even a particularly savvy business man. Colourful is a great attribute for entertainment purposes, but the president shouldn't primarily be an entertainer.

I admit it, Trump offends my delicate Canadian sensibilities. That might be gleeful for a certain segment of the American population, but it seems a poor reason to give Trump this much power in your political process.

Exodor wrote:Trump goes after Fiorina's.... face?

"Look at that face!" Trump said while sitting with a Rolling Stone reporter as Fiorina appeared on TV. "Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president."

"I mean, she's a woman, and I'm not s'posedta say bad things, but really, folks, come on. Are we serious?" Trump said, according to the magazine.

Right, because this race is a beauty contest and he's quite a looker.

Trump truly does believe he's still a lady killer...not that he ever was, mind you. I remember listening to him on Howard Stern years ago (they're friends...probably one of the reasons I stopped listening to Stern a few years back...well...that and America's Got Talent) and they had on a young male tv star (can't remember who). Trump got into a pissing match with the guy over who had slept with the most beautiful women. Trump kept bizarrely stating that some magazine had compared him to the literary character Don Juan and had figured out that he had been with more beautiful woman than any other man in history. It was truly odd.

I really do think he's developmentally stunted.

Is there any polling that reflects how Trump is viewed by the general electorate rather than simply those who will be voting in the Republican primaries? Even there, I don't think Trump's polling numbers reflect one way or the other on Americans as a whole -- if he's polling at around 30%, that still leaves about 70% that don't support him (leaving aside that polling well this early in the primaries doesn't seem to be significant in a historical context).

I still think Trump isn't a likely choice for the nomination, let alone the presidency. He's a master of spectacle and attention, and this is the stage where spectacle and attention matter more than anything else. (That we even have such a stage is a sign of how broken the process is.) There's more drama because he has twisted the primary from a race into a genuine civil war.

He'll deflate when electability begins to matter most. And that will be the real drama: what will Trump do when a third-party run looks like the most effective way to keep up his ratings?

Max Peck wrote:Is there any polling that reflects how Trump is viewed by the general electorate rather than simply those who will be voting in the Republican primaries? Even there, I don't think Trump's polling numbers reflect one way or the other on Americans as a whole -- if he's polling at around 30%, that still leaves about 70% that don't support him (leaving aside that polling well this early in the primaries doesn't seem to be significant in a historical context).

I've seen a few that show him surprisingly close to Hillary in a general election.


As has been said though, the attacks on Trump haven't really started. There's a LOT of dirt to be thrown at Trump while everyone pretty much already knows about Hillary's skeletons.

If Trump does become the president, I predict that the entire nation will wake up with a hangover the next morning and look over to see him sleeping in the bed next to them before immediately swearing off alcohol for the rest of their lives.

Max Peck wrote:Is there any polling that reflects how Trump is viewed by the general electorate rather than simply those who will be voting in the Republican primaries? Even there, I don't think Trump's polling numbers reflect one way or the other on Americans as a whole -- if he's polling at around 30%, that still leaves about 70% that don't support him (leaving aside that polling well this early in the primaries doesn't seem to be significant in a historical context).

While that's true, more people support him than any other republican candidate. While I'm repulsed by some of those candidates, how can you accept the fact that more people pick Trump over, say, Jeb?

Sure, 30% isn't 100% or even a majority, but so what? The fact is that more people like Trump than any other candidate. That's pretty awful.

Only ~28% of eligible voters voted for Obama in 2012. Are you suggesting that the American people aren't responsible for him becoming president?

Look, I get political leadership is not always representative of the people who made them leaders, and even less so for those that didn't vote for him. That doesn't change the fact that if the polling is representative of who republicans want running for President on their side of the aisle, it would be Trump.

That's awful. No matter how unlikely it is to actually be him for the actual nomination.

Like it or not, leaders have a large influence on the reputation of those they are leading. A man who believes decrying the physical attractiveness of one of his opponents is relevant is leading in the polls. That to me means that many people agree with him. Hence America's perception on the world stage.

GreenGoo wrote: Sure, 30% isn't 100% or even a majority, but so what? The fact is that more people like Trump than any other candidate. That's pretty awful.

Only ~28% of eligible voters voted for Obama in 2012. Are you suggesting that the American people aren't responsible for him becoming president?

30% of those polled for a primary is a fraction of 28% of eligible voters. A small percentage of the voting pool actually votes in primaries and they tend to be at the more extreme ends of spectrum making polls less reliable in terms of the actual Presidential election.

GreenGoo wrote:

Max Peck wrote:Is there any polling that reflects how Trump is viewed by the general electorate rather than simply those who will be voting in the Republican primaries? Even there, I don't think Trump's polling numbers reflect one way or the other on Americans as a whole -- if he's polling at around 30%, that still leaves about 70% that don't support him (leaving aside that polling well this early in the primaries doesn't seem to be significant in a historical context).

While that's true, more people support him than any other republican candidate. While I'm repulsed by some of those candidates, how can you accept the fact that more people pick Trump over, say, Jeb?

Sure, 30% isn't 100% or even a majority, but so what? The fact is that more people like Trump than any other candidate. That's pretty awful.

Only ~28% of eligible voters voted for Obama in 2012. Are you suggesting that the American people aren't responsible for him becoming president?

Look, I get political leadership is not always representative of the people who made them leaders, and even less so for those that didn't vote for him. That doesn't change the fact that if the polling is representative of who republicans want running for President on their side of the aisle, it would be Trump.

That's awful. No matter how unlikely it is to actually be him for the actual nomination.

Like it or not, leaders have a large influence on the reputation of those they are leading. A man who believes decrying the physical attractiveness of one of his opponents is relevant is leading in the polls. That to me means that many people agree with him. Hence America's perception on the world stage.

You need to direct your rant to those here who support him. Please, step up and speak now, anyone that supports Trump.

LawBeefaroni wrote:

GreenGoo wrote: Sure, 30% isn't 100% or even a majority, but so what? The fact is that more people like Trump than any other candidate. That's pretty awful.

Only ~28% of eligible voters voted for Obama in 2012. Are you suggesting that the American people aren't responsible for him becoming president?

30% of those polled for a primary is a fraction of 28% of eligible voters. A small percentage of the voting pool actually votes in primaries and they tend to be at the more extreme ends of spectrum making polls less reliable in terms of the actual Presidential election.

I understand how percentages work. I'm sorry if it seemed I was suggesting that Trump is more popular than Obama was. That was not my intent. I was simply illustrating the logic behind "it's only a small percentage of actual people" and how it applied to actually electing someone.

GreenGoo wrote:

LawBeefaroni wrote:

GreenGoo wrote: Sure, 30% isn't 100% or even a majority, but so what? The fact is that more people like Trump than any other candidate. That's pretty awful.

Only ~28% of eligible voters voted for Obama in 2012. Are you suggesting that the American people aren't responsible for him becoming president?

30% of those polled for a primary is a fraction of 28% of eligible voters. A small percentage of the voting pool actually votes in primaries and they tend to be at the more extreme ends of spectrum making polls less reliable in terms of the actual Presidential election.

I understand how percentages work. I'm sorry if it seemed I was suggesting that Trump is more popular than Obama was. That was not my intent. I was simply illustrating the logic behind "it's only a small percentage of actual people" and how it applied to actually electing someone.

I'm not overly alarmed since we're still talking about polls about 1.5 years before the election itself. Herman Cain was leading in the polls at one point early in the last election cycle, and he's only mildly less nutty than Trump.

Also, it is incredibly nutty that the U.S. has active campaigning 1.5 years before the election. Good god.

When the entire population of the United States decides to run for the GOP candidacy, it takes time to whittle down the numbers.

hepcat wrote:If Trump does become the president, I predict that the entire nation will wake up with a hangover the next morning and look over to see him sleeping in the bed next to them before immediately swearing off alcohol for the rest of their lives.

I remember hearing much of those same type sentiments when Reagan was running. I mean a stupid actor are you kidding? Then he won and now the Republicans think he was able to walk on water.

Tonight you my have a nightmare about him winning and not being terrible and in the future when your kids are our age the Republicans will look up to Trump as they do Reagan now.

LawBeefaroni wrote:

GreenGoo wrote: Sure, 30% isn't 100% or even a majority, but so what? The fact is that more people like Trump than any other candidate. That's pretty awful.

Only ~28% of eligible voters voted for Obama in 2012. Are you suggesting that the American people aren't responsible for him becoming president?

30% of those polled for a primary is a fraction of 28% of eligible voters. A small percentage of the voting pool actually votes in primaries and they tend to be at the more extreme ends of spectrum making polls less reliable in terms of the actual Presidential election.

Rationalize much?

Rip wrote:

hepcat wrote:If Trump does become the president, I predict that the entire nation will wake up with a hangover the next morning and look over to see him sleeping in the bed next to them before immediately swearing off alcohol for the rest of their lives.

I remember hearing much of those same type sentiments when Reagan was running. I mean a stupid actor are you kidding? Then he won and now the Republicans think he was able to walk on water.

Tonight you my have a nightmare about him winning and not being terrible and in the future when your kids are our age the Republicans will look up to Trump as they do Reagan now.

Reagan did have that minor intervening period where he was governor of the most populous state in the country.

Carpet_pissr wrote: You need to direct your rant to those here who support him.

No I don't.

Rip wrote:

LawBeefaroni wrote:

GreenGoo wrote: Sure, 30% isn't 100% or even a majority, but so what? The fact is that more people like Trump than any other candidate. That's pretty awful.

Only ~28% of eligible voters voted for Obama in 2012. Are you suggesting that the American people aren't responsible for him becoming president?

30% of those polled for a primary is a fraction of 28% of eligible voters. A small percentage of the voting pool actually votes in primaries and they tend to be at the more extreme ends of spectrum making polls less reliable in terms of the actual Presidential election.

Rationalize much?

Right. It's so likely that Trump is going to win the presidential election that I'm trying to assuage my fears using numbers and past elections to trump up (no pun intended) some improbable scenario where he doesn't actually have 30% of the general election vote.

hepcat wrote:When the entire population of the United States decides to run for the GOP candidacy, it takes time to whittle down the numbers.

Yes, I did think about the dilution effect that comes from splitting supporters across so many options.

El Guapo wrote: Reagan did have that minor intervening period where he was governor of the most populous state in the country.

Plus he had spent literally decades as a highly visible standard-bearer for movement conservatism. For the parallel with Trump to be valid, The Donald would need to have become a political public figure during the Gingrich Revolution.

Trump became political as a birther wackjob around 2012. In Reagan years, that's about 1961.

Rip wrote:

hepcat wrote:If Trump does become the president, I predict that the entire nation will wake up with a hangover the next morning and look over to see him sleeping in the bed next to them before immediately swearing off alcohol for the rest of their lives.

I remember hearing much of those same type sentiments when Reagan was running. I mean a stupid actor are you kidding? Then he won and now the Republicans think he was able to walk on water.

Dude, you were like, what, 3 years old when Reagan became president? You don't remember any such thing.

El Guapo wrote:

Rip wrote:

hepcat wrote:If Trump does become the president, I predict that the entire nation will wake up with a hangover the next morning and look over to see him sleeping in the bed next to them before immediately swearing off alcohol for the rest of their lives.

I remember hearing much of those same type sentiments when Reagan was running. I mean a stupid actor are you kidding? Then he won and now the Republicans think he was able to walk on water.

Tonight you my have a nightmare about him winning and not being terrible and in the future when your kids are our age the Republicans will look up to Trump as they do Reagan now.

Reagan did have that minor intervening period where he was governor of the most populous state in the country.

Not all that popular of one, and was often criticized for not even being qualified to be governor.

GreenGoo wrote:

Carpet_pissr wrote: You need to direct your rant to those here who support him.

No I don't.

Should.

GreenGoo wrote:

Rip wrote:

hepcat wrote:If Trump does become the president, I predict that the entire nation will wake up with a hangover the next morning and look over to see him sleeping in the bed next to them before immediately swearing off alcohol for the rest of their lives.

I remember hearing much of those same type sentiments when Reagan was running. I mean a stupid actor are you kidding? Then he won and now the Republicans think he was able to walk on water.

Dude, you were like, what, 3 years old when Reagan became president? You don't remember any such thing.

Thank you but I was punching holes in the ocean defending democracy during the Reagan presidency.

Carpet_pissr wrote:

GreenGoo wrote:

Carpet_pissr wrote: You need to direct your rant to those here who support him.

No I don't.

Should.

The forum is comprised of literally hundreds of threads that don't directly pertain to anyone on these forums.

I'm ranting wherever I feel like.