The Art of the Donald Trumpocalypse

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 5:06 pm

gbasden wrote:
Smutly wrote: I don't support Trump. I just find him much less reprehensible than Hillary Clinton.
Oh, sure. Bragging about sexually assaulting women is way less reprehensible than made up issues about Benghazi! or some emails.

I think it's that as Secratary of State, she was in a unique position to make some serious coin off selling Uranium mines to Russia.

Defiant · Post by **Defiant** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 5:08 pm

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 5:17 pm

mori wrote:
I am not worried that Trump will win the election.

You should be.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 5:59 pm

Smoove_B wrote:
Kraken wrote:That's a good point. It's still the only way I can imagine him pulling this out of the fire, though. It's not like he can urge discussion of "the issues" without getting creamed there, too (insofar as there are any issues beyond the candidates' characters).
But even if he's somehow able to argue that morally speaking, he and Hillary are equals or at least, he's no worse than she is....he still hasn't in any way addressed his complete lack of ability to govern. Or understand policy. Or international issues. Or how anything in the public sector works. No matter how many times I add it all up, I cannot figure out how anyone could possibly consider him viable in any capacity other than he has an (R) after his name.

All true, yet none of those things have noticeably hurt him so far. In fact, his outsider bomb-throwing not-a-politician bluster seems to be the main thing he has going for him (besides the (R), that is). He's ridden it this far so that sure ain't gonna change.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 6:09 pm

Kraken wrote:
Smoove_B wrote:
Kraken wrote:That's a good point. It's still the only way I can imagine him pulling this out of the fire, though. It's not like he can urge discussion of "the issues" without getting creamed there, too (insofar as there are any issues beyond the candidates' characters).
But even if he's somehow able to argue that morally speaking, he and Hillary are equals or at least, he's no worse than she is....he still hasn't in any way addressed his complete lack of ability to govern. Or understand policy. Or international issues. Or how anything in the public sector works. No matter how many times I add it all up, I cannot figure out how anyone could possibly consider him viable in any capacity other than he has an (R) after his name.
All true, yet none of those things have noticeably hurt him so far. In fact, his outsider bomb-throwing not-a-politician bluster seems to be the main thing he has going for him (besides the (R), that is). He's ridden it this far so that sure ain't gonna change.

Nor should it. His anti-establishment maverick shtick is all he has left at this point.

At this point I have more doubts than ever about his being able to pull it off, he really needed some of the fringe supporters. That said the outrage vote was always his core supporters and now that is all he has left. Best thing he can do is hoist that flag over his head and run for the finish line and hope Erra has his back.

Scraper · Post by **Scraper** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 6:50 pm

Rip wrote:
Kraken wrote:
Smoove_B wrote:
Kraken wrote:That's a good point. It's still the only way I can imagine him pulling this out of the fire, though. It's not like he can urge discussion of "the issues" without getting creamed there, too (insofar as there are any issues beyond the candidates' characters).
But even if he's somehow able to argue that morally speaking, he and Hillary are equals or at least, he's no worse than she is....he still hasn't in any way addressed his complete lack of ability to govern. Or understand policy. Or international issues. Or how anything in the public sector works. No matter how many times I add it all up, I cannot figure out how anyone could possibly consider him viable in any capacity other than he has an (R) after his name.
All true, yet none of those things have noticeably hurt him so far. In fact, his outsider bomb-throwing not-a-politician bluster seems to be the main thing he has going for him (besides the (R), that is). He's ridden it this far so that sure ain't gonna change.
Nor should it. His anti-establishment maverick shtick is all he has left at this point.

At this point I have more doubts than ever about his being able to pull it off, he really needed some of the fringe supporters. That said the outrage vote was always his core supporters and now that is all he has left. Best thing he can do is hoist that flag over his head and run for the finish line and hope Erra has his back.

It seems reality finally has it's foot in Rip's door. Only ever so slightly.

mori · Post by **mori** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 7:38 pm

hepcat wrote:
mori wrote:
I am not worried that Trump will win the election.
You should be.

The only scenario I could see Trump winning is if Hillary got indicted on federal charges before election day.

tgb · Post by **tgb** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 7:51 pm

There's still a month to go and his core is as loyal as ever. Anything can happen.

Max Peck · Post by **Max Peck** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 8:04 pm

Leading into the debate, Trump takes the high road.

Before the second presidential debate, Donald Trump has appeared at an event with women who accused former President Bill Clinton of rape and unwanted sexual advances.

The Republican nominee did not take questions as he appeared with Paula Jones, Juanita Broaddrick and Kathleen Willey.

Jones is a former Arkansas state worker who filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against Bill Clinton in 1994 for allegedly exposing himself to her in a Little Rock hotel room.

She says of Trump, "He's going to make America great again."

Also at the event was Kathy Shelton, who was a raped as a 12-year-old. Hillary Clinton represented the suspect as a public defender.

What was that he was saying about distractions and important issues?

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 8:05 pm

mori wrote:
hepcat wrote:
mori wrote:
I am not worried that Trump will win the election.
You should be.
The only scenario I could see Trump winning is if Hillary got indicted on federal charges before election day.

What state are you voting in?

mori · Post by **mori** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 8:20 pm

Unagi wrote:
mori wrote:
hepcat wrote:
mori wrote:
I am not worried that Trump will win the election.
You should be.
The only scenario I could see Trump winning is if Hillary got indicted on federal charges before election day.
What state are you voting in?

MN

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 8:33 pm

mori wrote:
Unagi wrote:
mori wrote:
hepcat wrote:
mori wrote:
I am not worried that Trump will win the election.
You should be.
The only scenario I could see Trump winning is if Hillary got indicted on federal charges before election day.
What state are you voting in?
MN

Then you are seemingly free to use your vote to a finer nuance.

Does it buy you anything in the future, other than "I voted for who I really wanted?"
I think this year, there is a way to make your vote count *against* the hate behind the Trump campaign by putting your vote to his primary opponent. This guy needs to be shut down as hard as he can be. I agree he stands no chance of 'winning'.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 8:39 pm

Also at the event was Kathy Shelton, who was a raped as a 12-year-old. Hillary Clinton represented the suspect as a public defender.

Trump would be a moron to attack Clinton for this kind of public service. She was a lawyer and founder of the University of Arkansas law school's Legal Aid Clinic. A judge insisted that she take the case.

In her book Living History, Clinton recalls that Mahlon Gibson, a Washington County prosecutor, told her that the accused rapist “wanted a woman lawyer” to defend him, and that Gibson had recommended Clinton to Judge Maupin Cummings. “I told Mahlon I really didn’t feel comfortable taking on such a client, but Mahlon gently reminded me that I couldn’t very well refuse the judge’s request.”

Gibson corroborated Clinton’s story in a 2014 interview with CNN.

Maybe in Trump's America icky accused defendants no longer have a right to legal representation?

Kurth · Post by **Kurth** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 8:48 pm

Holman wrote:
Also at the event was Kathy Shelton, who was a raped as a 12-year-old. Hillary Clinton represented the suspect as a public defender.
Trump would be a moron to attack Clinton for this kind of public service. She was a lawyer and founder of the University of Arkansas law school's Legal Aid Clinic. A judge insisted that she take the case.

In her book Living History, Clinton recalls that Mahlon Gibson, a Washington County prosecutor, told her that the accused rapist “wanted a woman lawyer” to defend him, and that Gibson had recommended Clinton to Judge Maupin Cummings. “I told Mahlon I really didn’t feel comfortable taking on such a client, but Mahlon gently reminded me that I couldn’t very well refuse the judge’s request.”

Gibson corroborated Clinton’s story in a 2014 interview with CNN.
Maybe in Trump's America icky accused defendants no longer have a right to legal representation?

Of course they don't. And of course that's red meat to Trump's base. But, hopefully, it won't do him a bit of good with those non-deplorables outside his base.

Max Peck · Post by **Max Peck** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 9:09 pm

Harry Enten over at 538 doesn't seem to think this whole tacky tactic that Trump is trying is going to work well.

8:52 PM
Trump is now clearly trying to tie Clinton to her husband’s past affairs and indiscretions with women in the past. Polling indicates that’s a big mistake. According to an early August YouGov survey, 62 percent of voters said it would be inappropriate to use Bill Clinton’s past actions to attack Clinton. Perhaps worst of all for Trump is that he is playing to one of his opponent’s strengths. If the topic of discussion becomes women’s equality and women’s rights, about 70 percent of voters trust Clinton more than Trump on these issues, according to a June 2016 CNN/ORC survey.

But at least we know why Trump ditched his press pool back in New York. Safe spaces only for that one.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 11:03 pm

tgb wrote:There's still a month to go and his core is as loyal as ever. Anything can happen.

Not just loyal, but rabid. He can count on 100% deplorable turnout. I don't sense the same enthusiasm among Clinton backers, so she's really going to need the get-out-the-vote machine.

Trump needs a Brexit or Columbia scenario where actual voters dumbfound expectations. As those examples show, it's not unthinkable.

Carpet_pissr · Post by **Carpet_pissr** » Sun Oct 09, 2016 11:51 pm

Kraken wrote:Columbia scenario

Oh shit. What did we do now?! Please tell me you meant "Colombia".

Alefroth · Post by **Alefroth** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 12:26 am

Carpet_pissr wrote:
Kraken wrote:Columbia scenario
Oh shit. What did we do now?! Please tell me you meant "Colombia".

Kraken has no authorization to be speak of it. It's very deep cover.

hentzau · Post by **hentzau** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 12:38 am

John Oliver wrote:“I’ll put it this way: if American democracy is a computer game, and Hillary is completing women’s 100-year quest to get to the Oval Office, it kind of makes sense that this would be the final boss.”

Max Peck · Post by **Max Peck** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 12:47 am

There are those that say that Donald Trump had a genius for taking advantage of the tax codes back in 1995. If that's true, then he inherited that genius from his father. His name is Jack Mitnick.

If Mitnick had been hesitant with reporters at first, he quickly grew more forthcoming. He’d spent his career practicing at a Long Island accounting firm that specialized in helping the great New York real-estate families hold on to their wealth. He’d been Fred Trump’s accountant, and when Donald became an adult Mitnick did his taxes, too, for more than thirty years, until 1996. On one of the documents that the Times received (the paper was sent only the first pages of Trump’s 1995 New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut returns), the nine-figure amount entered under losses had looked unusual: the first two characters had been entered in a different font. Mitnick solved that mystery. The tax software he’d used at the time only allowed him to enter seven figures in the loss column (not unreasonably, it had probably not anticipated anyone claiming nine-figure losses), so he had added the first two digits with an I.B.M. Selectric typewriter.

Perhaps Mitnick sensed that there was a grander role for himself in this story: not just the clerk who verifies the papers but the counsellor as character witness. He told the Times that Donald Trump was brash and undisciplined, so unlike his scrupulous father, Fred. When Trump and his wife Ivana would come into his office to go over the returns, Mitnick said, it was almost always Ivana who asked more questions. On Wednesday, CNN interviewed Mitnick on air via satellite and asked him about the Trump campaign’s argument that avoiding taxes meant Trump had dealt with the tax code “brilliantly.” Mitnick said that Trump had “virtually zero” role in preparing his own taxes. His only contribution was to hire Mitnick. Here, Mitnick gave a grin. He was enjoying himself. “Those returns were entirely created by us,” Mitnick said.

tgb · Post by **tgb** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 12:53 am

Having just watched it, it appears Trump blew another one. Hillary was cool, collected, and (mostly) gave direct answers to the questions. More importantly, when the question came from someone in that audience, she addressed that person directly and seemed to look them in the eyes.

Trump looked and sounded like he'd just done an eightball. He paced nervously, was red in the face, and every time she had the floor he looked like he would explode with rage. I half expected him to drop to his knees and start going through the carpet. Worse, he used every question as an excuse to talk about his 3 favorite talking points - Bill, Benghazi, and emails.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 2:41 am

Alefroth wrote:
Carpet_pissr wrote:
Kraken wrote:Columbia scenario
Oh shit. What did we do now?! Please tell me you meant "Colombia".
Kraken has no authorization to be speak of it. It's very deep cover.

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 8:07 am

hentzau wrote:
John Oliver wrote:“I’ll put it this way: if American democracy is a computer game, and Hillary is completing women’s 100-year quest to get to the Oval Office, it kind of makes sense that this would be the final boss.”

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 9:40 am

Wait But Why transcript.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 10:28 am

I'm thinking somebody is angling for a soon-to-be available position as Trump's VP...

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 10:37 am

...or wife number 4.

Too bad she's over 35.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 12:34 pm

Ryan digs in - Trump has hemmed him in entirely

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 12:51 pm

...and now I'm beginning to see some credibility in the conspiracy theory that Trump is on the DNC payroll.

Hamlet3145 · Post by **Hamlet3145** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 1:02 pm

Okay, seriously, at what point does "endorse" cease to have meaning? Ryan appears to be trying to have his cake and eat it too. It's not like Trump supporters are going to to see this as anything other than an abandonment. So, what is the point of still technically endorsing someone that you will not support, defend, or campaign for?

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 1:11 pm

In the event Trump wins, then Ryan can say down the road that he endorsed Trump.

#yaypolitics

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 1:30 pm

"I continue to endorse our party's candidate, whom I will not support."

Yeah. Something doesn't work there.

tgb · Post by **tgb** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 2:38 pm

He's just paving the way for 4 more years of obstructionism.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 2:41 pm

I will now simultaneously both obey and defy the laws of gravity.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 2:50 pm

I will say this, I really appreciate the neighbors that I have that are still willing to keep their Trump signs out. It makes it so much easier to identify those that I need not ever have contact with again.

Smutly · Post by **Smutly** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 2:57 pm

RunningMn9 wrote:I will say this, I really appreciate the neighbors that I have that are still willing to keep their Trump signs out. It makes it so much easier to identify those that I need not ever have contact with again.

Does this mean you support secession from the Union for those red states who don't want to belong to Hillary's United States? If Trump supporters are truly deplorable and beyond redemption and you're never going to ever have contact them again, then let's just rip the Union apart. Is that what you are saying?

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 2:58 pm

hepcat wrote:I will now simultaneously both obey and defy the laws of gravity.

I've always said you were pretty quarky.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 3:05 pm

Smutly wrote:
RunningMn9 wrote:I will say this, I really appreciate the neighbors that I have that are still willing to keep their Trump signs out. It makes it so much easier to identify those that I need not ever have contact with again.
Does this mean you support secession from the Union for those red states who don't want to belong to Hillary's United States? If Trump supporters are truly deplorable and beyond redemption and you're never going to ever have contact them again, then let's just rip the Union apart. Is that what you are saying?

No need to go to extremes. A wall on the Mason-Dixon line and extreme vetting ought to do it.

hepcat · Post by **hepcat** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 3:07 pm

I love extremist analogies.

"I don't like cheese."

"SO YOU WANT THE DAIRY INDUSTRY TO FAIL IN THIS COUNTRY!?"

Post by **ImLawBoy** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 3:07 pm

Smutly wrote:
RunningMn9 wrote:I will say this, I really appreciate the neighbors that I have that are still willing to keep their Trump signs out. It makes it so much easier to identify those that I need not ever have contact with again.
Does this mean you support secession from the Union for those red states who don't want to belong to Hillary's United States? If Trump supporters are truly deplorable and beyond redemption and you're never going to ever have contact them again, then let's just rip the Union apart. Is that what you are saying?

That's a perfectly reasonable conclusion you've drawn there. How RM9 interacts (or doesn't interact) with people in his neighborhood is directly comparable to supporting secession.

Post by **ImLawBoy** » Mon Oct 10, 2016 3:08 pm

hepcat wrote:I love extremist analogies.

"I don't like cheese."

"SO YOU WANT THE DAIRY INDUSTRY TO FAIL IN THIS COUNTRY!?"

Wait - what's wrong with cheese? It's delicious!