Here's How Donald Trump Could Become President

[toubab]

I call complete and utter bullshit on that. They are the only class that has the means and ability to protect itself from government taxation. All that The Donald is doing with rhetoric such as that is to woo the spurned and Berned...

There's nothing unusual about a political figure spreading bullshit, if that's what he was doing. Hillary and Bernie do it all the time. It's a time honored tradition in the American political process. And most voters eat it up.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Then maybe your post should have reflected that. No?



He's a loose cannon. I would discount what he says and examine what he does. So far, what he does is win and energize a base that both parties have told to go fuck itself.

 

[toubab]

Then maybe your post should have reflected that. No?



He's a loose cannon. I would discount what he says and examine what he does. So far, what he does is win and energize a base that both parties have told to go fuck itself.

No, it shouldn't have, because I don't know if he will actually try to do what he says if he wins. Only he knows that. On that issue, or any other. Same as with Hillary or Bernie, although I will admit I think Bernie could be more trusted to try to actually accomplish the things he's talking about than the other two. I'm quite sure he couldn't accomplish them, just as I said in my earlier post I'm quite sure Trump couldn't get his wealth tax through both houses of Congress, even if he tried.

Trump is a loose cannon. That's part of his appeal.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

He's going to negotiate the best deal for him, but at least he will negotiate.



The only times Obama has negotiated, it was in bad faith and he put the knife in Boehner's even before the ink was dry...

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

PS - I've said this before; his opening positions are outrageous. But that is what the Liberals have been doing for several decades now; staking out farther and farther positions to the left, then using the press to brow-beat the Republicans to compromise to the left because they start with a centrist counter-offer on [you name the issue here].

That is what Trump is doing. He doesn't need a wall, he just needs the law obeyed, even by "sanctuary cities" who think that they, unlike you are I can simply ignore Federal law. He means to pull the Liberals back to fucking sanity despite their best efforts to travel The Road to Serfdom.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Interesting article:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/features/donald-trump-conversation-politics-dark-898465

Michael Wolff

Some pull quotes:

...

One thing to understand about Trump is that, rather unexpectedly, he's neither angry nor combative. He may be the most threatening and frightening and menacing presidential candidate in modern life, and yet, in person he's almost soothing. His extreme self-satisfaction rubs off. He's a New Yorker who actually might be more at home in California (in fact, he says he usually comes to his home here — two buildings on Rodeo Drive — only once a year). Life is sunny. Trump is an optimist — at least about himself. He's in easy and relaxed form campaigning here in these final days before the June 7 California primary, even with Hillary Clinton's biggest backers and a city that is about half Latino surrounding him.

...

If onstage he calls people names, more privately he has only good, embracing things to say about almost everybody. (For most public people I know, it is the opposite.) He loves everybody. Genuinely seems to love everybody — at least everybody who's rich and successful (he doesn't really talk about anyone who isn't). Expressing love for everybody, for most of us, would clearly seem to be an act. But with Trump, it's the name-calling and bluster that might be the act.

I offer that there are quite a number of people in New York, some we know in common, who are puzzled that the generous, eager-to-be-liked and liking-everyone-in-return Donald has morphed into a snarling and reactionary public enemy, at least a liberal enemy. This, I suggest, might be a source of the continuing dialectic — or to some, wishful thinking — that he does not necessarily believe what he says.

...

It is this media frisson that, with countless other professional and amateur analyzers, I'm trying to plumb. Surely a big part of the answer lies in the nature of Trump's performance, an unself-consciousness so extreme that he has passed through hurdles of humiliation that would have destroyed nearly all others to emerge as though free of a private self. Trump is only fully alive in public. But another aspect is that, differentiating himself from every other candidate, he has a long, intimate relationship with nearly every significant player in the media and, indeed, lavishes copious praise on almost all of them. He may know few people in Washington, and care about them less, but he knows his moguls and where they rank on the modern suck-up-to list.

...

In this, he sees himself — and becomes almost eloquent in talking about himself — as a sort of performer and voter whisperer. He is, he takes obvious pride in saying, the only politician who doesn't regularly use a teleprompter. With a prompter, he says, you can't work the crowd. You can't feel it. "You got to look at them in the eye. Have you ever seen me speak in front of a large group of people? Have you ever watched?" He reflects on the lack of self-consciousness that's necessary to make spontaneous utterances before a crowd. He cites a well-known actor (whose name he asks me not to use, "I don't want to hurt anybody"), who had wanted to run for office but, without a script, was a blithering idiot. Trump was never fed lines on The Apprentice, he says. It was all him: "You have to have a natural ability."

 

[RobDownSouth]

No, it shouldn't have, because I don't know if he will actually try to do what he says if he wins. Only he knows that. On that issue, or any other. Same as with Hillary or Bernie, although I will admit I think Bernie could be more trusted to try to actually accomplish the things he's talking about than the other two. I'm quite sure he couldn't accomplish them, just as I said in my earlier post I'm quite sure Trump couldn't get his wealth tax through both houses of Congress, even if he tried.

Trump is a loose cannon. That's part of his appeal.

Call it the Botany Boy / Toubab Paradox

Both of you insist on revolutionary change, the two of you routinely bellow that anything less than 100% of goal is by definition a failure.

Yet at some level you both recognize that the general public as a whole does not embrace your revolutionary ideas. The general public recognizes the value of "compromise solution", a cornerstone of democracy, which appears to be toxic to your inflexible ideology.

 

[toubab]

Call it the Botany Boy / Toubab Paradox

Both of you insist on revolutionary change, the two of you routinely bellow that anything less than 100% of goal is by definition a failure.

Yet at some level you both recognize that the general public as a whole does not embrace your revolutionary ideas. The general public recognizes the value of "compromise solution", a cornerstone of democracy, which appears to be toxic to your inflexible ideology.

You are only partially correct. I am in favor of revolutionary change in some respects, true, but I'm fully cognizant of the fact our political system weighs against it, so it's very unlikely to occur no matter who becomes president.

 

[JeanLaFlu]

Billary and The Donald as nominees couldn't be more blatantly overt signs how completely polluted and corrupt the political situation the United Socialist State of America is today; there can be no doubt left in any logical patriot's mind that the Office of President as constituted by the revolutionary political philosophies of the framers in no way exists today, it being socialistically replaced by the newest edition of American Idol simply to sate lemming appetites.

Yet, like bozos whose partners continually betray them but assure them that was the last time (and then betray them once again), wannabes still hang on instead of taking the role of true American patriots and facing the reality of what IS ALREADY LOST, and then getting on with moving on so the building of the new can actually begin.

The 2016 election is nothing - NOTHING - more than just the latest veil thrown up to hopefully delay more the eventual full realization of the totalitarianism progressives have been working all along for, and every second a patriot keeps enabling these delays gives progressives even more time to keep stocking their socialist armories.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Victor Davis Hanson on the Press and Trump

http://www.nationalreview.com/node/436230/print

 

[toubab]

The Donald & The La Raza Judge

http://buchanan.org/blog/donald-la-raza-judge-125323

"Before the lynching of The Donald proceeds, what exactly was it he said about that Hispanic judge?

Stated succinctly, Donald Trump said U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel, who is presiding over a class-action suit against Trump University, is sticking it to him. And the judge’s bias is likely rooted in the fact that he is of Mexican descent.

Can there be any defense of a statement so horrific?

Just this. First, Trump has a perfect right to be angry about the judge’s rulings and to question his motives. Second, there are grounds for believing Trump is right."

 

[phrodeau]

One could argue that Pat Buchanan is a worse racist than Donald Trump.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

Sanders supporters are basically fanatics that want free stuff and have zero economic knowledge. They are sheep. To think they will stick to their guns and not vote Hillary is naive. They will turn. They will be herders just as the DNC will herd Bernie. Maybe not this week but by August for sure. Once they do Hillary will pull ahead again by double digits.

Will Trump be able to catch up? I doubt it but we shall see.

Anyone know if there are a set number of debates that have to be held or is it going to be Hillary dodging as many as possible?

 

[VaticanAssassin]

Never mind. I looked it up while not mandated 3 have been the norm since 1996.

Anyone want to bet there will be only 2 this time?

Name change rights for two months for any taker


Edit: exact rules: I get less than 3

 

[toubab]

Google working closely with Hillary Clinton presidential campaign: Julian Assange

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...dential-campaign-julian-assange-34780998.html

"WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange claims Google is working closely with Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign to promote the Democratic presidential candidate."

Assange appeared via video link from the Ecuadorian embassy in London as part of the 'New Era of Journalism: Farewell to Mainstream international media' forum in Moscow.

He said: "Google is directly engaged with Hillary Clinton’s campaign" and claimed the technology giant used the US State Department on a "a quid pro quo" basis.

"Of course when she is in power… she is a problem for freedom of speech. We know what she is going to do. And she made the chart for the destruction of Libya, she was involved in the process of taking the Libyan armoury and sending it to Syria."

Assange reiterated his claims that Clinton is a "war hawk" that "seemingly" wants to start wars.

"What we have with Clinton is someone who is a hawk but who has the tools of legal interventionism, a rhetorical cover to start wars, and someone who seemingly wants to start them… From WikiLeaks’ perspective Hillary Clinton is a problem in terms of war and peace."

He also pointed out that former Google CEO Eric Schmidt is now heading the Pentagon innovation board.

"Google is heavily integrated with Washington power, at personal level and at business level."

 

[sr71plt]

There's nothing unusual about a political figure spreading bullshit, if that's what he was doing. Hillary and Bernie do it all the time. It's a time honored tradition in the American political process. And most voters eat it up.

I call bullshit on your suggestion that any political figure--ever--in the United States has spread a third of the bullshit that Trump does.

You're right that there are a lot of dummies in the United States eating his bullshit up, though.

 

[sr71plt]

Anyone know if there are a set number of debates that have to be held or is it going to be Hillary dodging as many as possible?

Why would Hillary dodge a debate with Trump?

 

[toubab]

I call bullshit on your suggestion that any political figure--ever--in the United States has spread a third of the bullshit that Trump does.

You're right that there are a lot of dummies in the United States eating his bullshit up, though.

And I call bullshit on your bullshit. If the American people are stupid enough to believe Hillary Clinton and elect her president they will deserve whatever they get. It's unfortunate there is now no better alternative than Trump, but that's what it's come down to, incredibly. What a country.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

Why would Hillary dodge a debate with Trump?

Pretty much the same reasons she dodged Sanders as much as possible....x10

 

[sr71plt]

And I call bullshit on your bullshit. If the American people are stupid enough to believe Hillary Clinton and elect her president they will deserve whatever they get. It's unfortunate there is now no better alternative than Trump, but that's what it's come down to, incredibly. What a country.

So you must be one of Trump's chumps.

 

[sr71plt]

Pretty much the same reasons she dodged Sanders as much as possible....x10

That's pretty stupid. A, she didn't dodge Sanders; she swept by him (probably sooner than she should have, but he's certainly going down the tubes in tonight's primaries). And, B, if you think that Trump is anything like as debate capable as Sanders is you're dumb as a rock (which is quite possible).

She eviscerated Trump a couple of days ago and he hasn't managed a response yet (so far he's only said "wait for it") and we haven't even gotten to the national phase yet. She eviscerated him again tonight and he'll probably just twitter about what she was wearing when she did it.

 

[toubab]

So you must be one of Trump's chumps.

I can't support or vote for Hillary, so unless Trump does something to make it impossible for me to support him, I'll probably vote for him in November. He's the only viable alternative. It's better than being one of Hillary's idiots.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

Sanders supporters are basically fanatics that want free stuff and have zero economic knowledge. They are sheep.

Not even close to reality

 

[sr71plt]

I can't support or vote for Hillary, so unless Trump does something to make it impossible for me to support him, I'll probably vote for him in November. He's the only viable alternative. It's better than being one of Hillary's idiots.

I guess if there's nothing in what he's done and said so far that kills your voting for him, you will indeed be a Trump chump. Because there isn't much else left that he could do or say that isn't objectionable to everyone but the KKK.

 

[toubab]

I guess if there's nothing in what he's done and said so far that kills your voting for him, you will indeed be a Trump chump. Because there isn't much else left that he could do or say that isn't objectionable to everyone but the KKK.

Such as?