Dump Trump - Teh Forum

From:	CHYRON (DSMITHHFX)	4 Mar 2016 10:35
To:	Drew (X3N0PH0N)	132 of 207

41641.132 In reply to 41641.131
America's political system is a victim and a prisoner of its economic system (predatory capitalism). If you can't fix the latter, the whole damn thing is going to blow up, a whole lot of people are going to get killed. It will get ugly, it will get vicious. Even more than it already is. ---- "American football is when a bunch over over paid American sports people frightened of being hurt strap on a ton of armour to play a game of rugby"

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	fixrman	5 Mar 2016 13:52
To:	Drew (X3N0PH0N)	133 of 207

41641.133 In reply to 41641.131

Good post, very well=thought out. Just a few comments:

Quote:

Hilary will literally say anything to anyone to get votes; Hilary is so far up the arse of big money; In any normal election Hilary would stand very little change [sic] in a general election, her unfavourables are ridiculously high

It is amazing to me that her supporters do not see her many negatives. Her trustworthiness factor should be much higher than it is, but I suspect that since so many obama supporters convinced themselves they were getting "free stuff" (many were convinced he would pay mortgages, for free iPhones, etc.) they also feel that HRC will be just like obama and all that largess will come. What they fail to realise is, obama and the clintons hate each other. The only reason HRC is trying to cozy up to obama is she thinks it will help her get the minority votes, despite the fact that she has also tried to distance herself from obama...

The fact that HRC is generally surrounded by a myriad of controversies involving coverups, corruption, lying and other questionable behaviour doesn't seem to bother many in the Democratic camp, yet those same people would decry very loudly the same behaviour of a Republican.

Trump is a bloviating buffoon, but the media loves him. Why? Because it keeps them on air flapping their gums as they love to do. I fear Donald Trump as a Loose Cannon, but against HRC or Bernie Sanders - if pressed to choose - I'll have to vote for Trump. My preference would be, however, for someone else. The only problem is, the someone else might not be able to win.

Hopefully time will change some things.For right now, I can't watch the circus. The Dem debates are usually held at some time when no one will watch them; they are about as interesting as a yawning festival. That protects HRC from snapping like an angry dog if Bernie decides to push her buttons.

The Republican debates are in Prime Time because that's what people want to see: ridiculousness, the latest "Trumpisms".

Did you ever see such a messed up situation in your whole life, son?

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	Drew (X3N0PH0N)	6 Mar 2016 09:46
To:	fixrman	134 of 207

41641.134 In reply to 41641.133
I don't think she's mainly associating herself with Obama for the black vote. I think it's mainly because his approval amongst democrats is extremely high (~80%). She'll no doubt distance herself from him should she get the nomination since nationally his approval is moderately low for a president at this point in their presidency. Cosying up to Obama certainly shores up the black vote but she seems to have it anyway as some sort of Bill Clinton proxy. I had strong doubts about her "firewall" but it's proven true so far, in the South at least. Be interesting to see whether it holds true in the North, too. Her support is fucking weird though, yeah. I get the distinct impression that no one actually likes her and yet she has huge support. Her unfavourables are really really bad. I think the DNC is just stacked with Clintonites who feel an affiliation to her regardless of her personality/abilities. In a way she is a great candidate though. She's very businesslike and serious but not without charisma and, as I said in the previous post, she's absolutely nailed that ability to make everyone think they heard what they wanted to hear. She's cosy with banking and big business which is important in terms of campaigning (or at least was in the pre-internet age, I think that's one of those things that's changing). And, and this is really important I think, when she talks foreign policy she sounds like a Republican - whether you agree with her or not she knows that stuff inside out, has the cabinet experience to back it up, and she sounds tough and serious. She's a really good candidate for the party establishment. She's exactly (favourability aside) what they've thought they've needed for years. I think times are changing though. The controversies... I don't think people really care. The Republicans make a big deal of it and the media chase it to an extent but I don't think voters really give a fuck. Also the Clintons just seem to have a sort of teflon quality to them with regard to controversy. The Democrat debates are fucking boring. They're far too afraid to be thought of as attacking that they barely disagree. It's horrible. They just end up as stump speech remixes. The Republican debates are hugely fucking entertaining. Not just because of the Trump freakshow, though that's part of it. But also because they actually disagree about policy and debate those disagreements. The level of debate is often not all that elevated but at least it exists. I believe there's a town hall coming up with Trump, Sanders and Clinton. That might be good. And I do hope that Bernie lays into Clinton a bit more during the next debate in Flint. I think he will, he kinda has to. But yeah, the democrat debates and town halls have been tightly controlled by the DNC in order to favour Clinton as much as possible. Sanders benefits from the exposure and Clinton doesn't really, not while she's ahead at least. It's kinda disgusting. Last thing I'll say in this stream of consciousness waffle is that I miss Rand Paul. An intelligent, thoughtful, compassionate Republican with actual integrity was a rare sight. Even if Trump doesn't get the nomination the rest of the field are clowns too, they just look good in comparison to Trump. , , , , , , , , , , `' (o,o) (o,o) (o,o) (o,o) (o,o) \ \|)__) \|)__) \|)__) \|)__) \|)__) ''`>-,--”-”---”-”---”-”---”-”---”-”---- ,'.*''`

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	fixrman	6 Mar 2016 14:14
To:	Drew (X3N0PH0N)	135 of 207

41641.135 In reply to 41641.134

Quote: I get the distinct impression that no one actually likes her

That's because, unless talking about a specific set of people (mainly Democrats and low-information voters), she's not likeable. Older women don't like HRC and neither do young women.

Quote: In a way she is a great candidate though. She's very businesslike and serious but not without charisma

Hillary? Charisma? Are you sure you aren't talking about Bill C. in a dress?

Quote: The controversies... I don't think people really care.

I think they do care and will care more. She has honesty problems; the Email bit does actually have serious implications, especially considering David Petreaus' fate. What Clinton did - or allowed to have happen - is worse many times over. Clinton's problem is that she continued to lie about it, try to deflect it and of course - blame the ever present (to her) "vast Right-Wing Conspiracy". Uhuh. :-/

I'd wager a bet that soon Bernie Sanders does an about-face and begins attacking her, as he needs to do if he really wants to win.

Did you ever see such a messed up situation in your whole life, son?

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	Drew (X3N0PH0N)	7 Mar 2016 03:37
To:	fixrman	136 of 207

41641.136 In reply to 41641.135
She has some charisma. Not as much as Bill but she's not totally devoid of it like a lot of recent candidates have been. And yeah, tonight's debate just finished and Sanders is hitting her harder which is good to see. , , , , , , , , , , `' (o,o) (o,o) (o,o) (o,o) (o,o) \ \|)__) \|)__) \|)__) \|)__) \|)__) ''`>-,--”-”---”-”---”-”---”-”---”-”---- ,'.*''`

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	Harry (HARRYN)	22 Apr 2016 01:06
To:	ALL	137 of 207

41641.137
Maybe if we are lucky, there will be enough complaints about the primary elections that the "caucus" system states will convert to normal primary elections. This is a problem, almost regardless of your personal political views.

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	Peter (BOUGHTONP)	22 Apr 2016 20:44
To:	Harry (HARRYN)	138 of 207

41641.138 In reply to 41641.137

> Maybe if we are lucky...
> ...
> This is a problem...

:?

3.1415P265E589T932E846R64338

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	Harry (HARRYN)	25 Apr 2016 06:41
To:	Peter (BOUGHTONP)	139 of 207

41641.139 In reply to 41641.138
Hello Peter, The US election system has some interesting contortions, both in the main election, and in the primary elections. There is not any mandate or limitation on the number of political parties submitting a candidate for any elected office, but the two main parties are so dominant, that they do everything possible to drown out the smaller ones in the general (main) elections. The "Primary Elections", which is what we are in now, are "who will be the candidate from each party. The political parties are a lot like a corporation, and have successfully argued in court that the National Laws don't apply to them. They can choose more or less any method they like to select a candidate. They give voters "an opportunity to express their preference" during the primary elections, but are not legally bound to follow this "preference". Within the "Primary election system", there are two common methods used to determine if a candidate (within a party) wins a state primary election or not: - Normal Voting - one person, one vote, typically in a private booth at an official voting location, on an official form, fairly close to your home, in a very structured, organized, legal manner. Mistakes are made, but it is pretty scrutinized. - Caucus Voting - In this case, there can be as many, or as few as (one) location where people have to travel to in order to make their opinion / vote known. The location can be 2 - 4 hours drive away, and include pre-meetings that can last for hours, before the "vote" is taken. - The vote can be taken in any number of ways including a) someone writing down how many people are in a candidates "room" - counting noses at a particular moment in time - an actual vote count, but not necessarily with any privacy - voice vote, where the loudest group saying their preference wins - There may, or may not be any attempt to verify if the people in the room are registered voters or not - Votes might be collected and counted by a volunteer who happens to be in the room, with no prior experience with how it is organized - Voting can be done on a legal form, or paper napkins, as needed - There is only limited scrutiny of the results and procedures, and it is not uncommon for bags of "votes" to be found, in the trash and uncounted. - Just to add to the fun, it is on a work night, so the people who go, might spend the entire night there, and then be expected at work the next day. - Sometimes, a town will select "someone of good standing" to go the caucus and represent the opinion of the entire town. Incredibly, both systems are given equal weight in terms of who becomes the US President, and it is hard even for Americans to grasp just how manipulated this system is. This is what I mean when I indicated that I hope that the Caucus system of voting is someday eliminated.

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	Manthorp	26 Apr 2016 09:24
To:	ALL	140 of 207

41641.140
Trump fails really really bigly That's all we need. a POTUS with the vocabulary of a toddler. "We all have flaws, and mine is being wicked." James Thurber, The Thirteen Clocks 1951 www.mynameislegion.org

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	CHYRON (DSMITHHFX)	26 Apr 2016 13:34
To:	Manthorp	141 of 207

41641.141 In reply to 41641.140
I kind of believe his handlers' recent claim to the RNC that this sub-literate jackass persona is an act. Roland Skollani was sick of Pittsburgh. This city was the dead-end of his failed dreams and even dope didn’t help his choking fits no more. It had been a mistake to leave Hollywood and to follow Rita. Maybe it was a twist of fate, that there were only a few days left to leave his ex-wife’s house. Now he MUST act. Rita had a new lover and he didn’t mind, but why of all people did she choose this greedy, corrupt cop Lennon?

+1/1

Reply Quote

More

From:	Harry (HARRYN)	26 Apr 2016 14:02
To:	ALL	142 of 207

41641.142
I suspect that the real reason that the RNC and some big money donors don't want Trump as President, is that he knows which closets contain the skeletons. I do agree that he mostly likely uses "talk" to move topics in his preferred direction, which is really the primary power of a President. While I don't necessarily call myself "sold on Trump", it becomes easier to not worry about it when we look at the last 40 years of prior US Presidents, and the leaders of other countries. There have been some pretty mixed quality and policy politicians in just about every country, and most have survived. The more people bash Trump, the more I think he might be a decent candidate. Of course there are some details which are not ideal, but that is always true of any candidate. The financial institutions and intelligence community pretty much run the country anyway, so the country is more or less immune to the politicians. It is so interesting to see how passionate people in other countries are about US Politics. While it is interesting to watch the political process in other countries, I would not imagine actually becoming emotionally involved in foreign elections.

-1/1

Reply Quote

More

From:	CHYRON (DSMITHHFX)	26 Apr 2016 14:05
To:	Harry (HARRYN)	143 of 207

41641.143 In reply to 41641.142
"he knows which closets contain the skeletons" How? Roland Skollani was sick of Pittsburgh. This city was the dead-end of his failed dreams and even dope didn’t help his choking fits no more. It had been a mistake to leave Hollywood and to follow Rita. Maybe it was a twist of fate, that there were only a few days left to leave his ex-wife’s house. Now he MUST act. Rita had a new lover and he didn’t mind, but why of all people did she choose this greedy, corrupt cop Lennon?

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	milko	26 Apr 2016 14:26
To:	Harry (HARRYN)	144 of 207

41641.144 In reply to 41641.142
It's kind of important to pay attention to the USA from outside, since much of the world economy runs on US$ and a seemingly increasingly large part of it gets American bombs dropped on it too, with far-reaching consequences. Your stated rationale there for increasingly thinking he might be a decent candidate is frankly bizarre, but I'm sure there's more to it.

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	CHYRON (DSMITHHFX)	26 Apr 2016 15:01
To:	ALL	145 of 207

41641.145
"the real reason that the RNC and some big money donors don't want Trump ~~as President~~ to win the Republican nomination" (FTFY) ... is because if he does, Hillary wins by a landslide, Republicans will be purged from currently-held Congress and the Senate, and their party all but destroyed by bitter infighting. Some of the biggest 'traditional' Republican donors (e.g. Koch bros) are already making noises about switching their support to Hillary. So if you want another 'Republican Lite', elect another Clinton. If Cruz gets the nomination, Hillary wins by a landslide but the Republican Party will survive in a weakened state to fight another election (maybe), with Tea Party nutters (like Cruz) a discredited, spent force. Roland Skollani was sick of Pittsburgh. This city was the dead-end of his failed dreams and even dope didn’t help his choking fits no more. It had been a mistake to leave Hollywood and to follow Rita. Maybe it was a twist of fate, that there were only a few days left to leave his ex-wife’s house. Now he MUST act. Rita had a new lover and he didn’t mind, but why of all people did she choose this greedy, corrupt cop Lennon?

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	Drew (X3N0PH0N)	27 Apr 2016 01:15
To:	CHYRON (DSMITHHFX)	146 of 207

41641.146 In reply to 41641.145
I agree with the rest but I don't think Trump necessarily loses to Clinton in a general. And it's far too far out for polling on that to be relevant. Both candidates have very high unfavourables and both will motivate people to vote against them. I'm not sure whether apathy at two unlikeable candidates or desire to vote against one or the other would win out. Trump's demonstrated that his support crosses party lines which Hilary's certainly doesn't. And his support has shown no signs of hitting a ceiling. He also can't be smeared - attacks on him simply don't work (and, particularly from Clinton, would only go to make his anti-establishment narrative, bullshit as it may be, all the more compelling for the fuckwits who do/would vote for him). I think Trump getting the nomination would tear the party apart. But I'm not certain - the GOP is resilient as all fuck. But from the party's POV I don't think the problem is that he'd lose the general, it's that he might win. In which situation they'd have a republican president who doesn't really represent any of the republican core beliefs. I agree that they'd rather lose with Cruz than win with Trump (and rightly so). Still, the dems are also looking more strained than they have for a long time. There's definitely a desire for an actual progressive candidate and, moreover, for the democrats to be an actual progressive party. And, as you say, totem issues aside, Clinton is really a republican. I wouldn't even say 'lite', particularly on economic and foreign issues. Also worth bearing in mind: As soon as Sanders is out of the race (which probably won't be long now, sadly), Clinton's going to move back the right. Which makes the Republican's job easier come the general (left leaning independents stay at home (except those who can bring themselves to vote Clinton as an anti-Trump measure) and the GOP are far better at wooing even the soft-right independents). The dems are kinda shooting themselves in the foot. If Sanders were the nominee then he gets Clinton's support by default (because Clinton's support is party-loyal dems). If Clinton wins I suspect a large proportion of Sanders' support will just melt away - either not voting or voting green/similar. Clinton would be only marginally easier for them to vote for than, say, Kasich. It's a really interesting election though. In terms of just horse-race entertainment value it's fucking awesome. , , , , , , , , , , `' (o,o) (o,o) (o,o) (o,o) (o,o) \ \|)__) \|)__) \|)__) \|)__) \|)__) ''`>-,--”-”---”-”---”-”---”-”---”-”---- ,'.*''`

+1/1

Reply Quote

More

From:	koswix	27 Apr 2016 06:36
To:	Drew (X3N0PH0N)	147 of 207

41641.147 In reply to 41641.146

Urgh - so with the latest results that's Sanders out and (pretty much) Trump in, then.


 ▪                    
             ┌────┐    ┌────┐                      
          │    │    │    │ ▪                    
          │    └────┘    │                      
          │   ──┐  ┌──   │ ▪                    
   ┌──────┤    ▪    ▪    │                      
  ┌┘      │              │ ▪                    
┌─┤       └──┐  │  │  ┌──┘                      
│ │          │ ││  ││ │   ┌─┐                   
│ │          └─┼┤  └┴─┴───┘ │                   
│ │           ─┘│           │                   
│ │   ┌──────┐  └┬──────────┘                   
  │   │      │   │                              
  │   │      │   │                              
  └───┘      └───┘

If Feds call you and say something bad on me, it may prove what I said are truth, they are afraid of it.

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	Drew (X3N0PH0N)	27 Apr 2016 07:21
To:	koswix	148 of 207

41641.148 In reply to 41641.147
Yup :( , , , , , , , , , , `' (o,o) (o,o) (o,o) (o,o) (o,o) \ \|)__) \|)__) \|)__) \|)__) \|)__) ''`>-,--”-”---”-”---”-”---”-”---”-”---- ,'.*''`

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	Drew (X3N0PH0N)	27 Apr 2016 07:25
To:	koswix	149 of 207

41641.149 In reply to 41641.147
I think Sanders will stay in at least until California, possibly to the convention because unlike normal candidates his funding isn't going anywhere anytime soon. I think he's intending to influence the platform at the convention and also sticking around just in case Clinton gets indicted. But yeah in terms of winning more delegates before the convention, unless something miraculous happens in California, he's out. , , , , , , , , , , `' (o,o) (o,o) (o,o) (o,o) (o,o) \ \|)__) \|)__) \|)__) \|)__) \|)__) ''`>-,--”-”---”-”---”-”---”-”---”-”---- ,'.*''`

0/0

Reply Quote

More

From:	CHYRON (DSMITHHFX)	27 Apr 2016 13:07
To:	Drew (X3N0PH0N)	150 of 207

41641.150 In reply to 41641.146
It's been a wild ride and can only get wilder as November approaches. "Clinton is really a republican. I wouldn't even say 'lite', particularly on economic and foreign issues." There's never been a lot of daylight between the two establishment parties' respective positions and power bases, especially since Bill Clinton, America's answer to Tony Blair, swept in. I've said it before: the Repugs hate the Clintons for stealing all their 'best' ideas. Dubya was a bit of an outlier and an extremist, but only in the sense that he handed US foreign policy on a silver platter to Dick Cheney, probably because 9-11 scared the hell out of him and he just couldn't face it. The Sanders campaign has always had a surreal (perhaps even moreso than Trump), rear-view mirror air to it. It never managed to broaden its appeal much beyond a nostalgic-progressive core, and took too much for granted, resulting in serial, egregious blunders that blindly and willfully ceded huge swaths of delegates to Hillary, just so Bernie could continue to be Bernie. I must assume he bears personal responsibility for his campaign's tone-deafness on issues such as gun control and endemic racism. He is truly trapped by a persona well past it's sell-by date, even if college kids just now discovered it, and think it's novel and cute. Sanders and Trump have both traded on widespread disaffection in the American hinterland first manifested by the tea party, the sense that the 'social contract', such as it was, has been abandoned and the middle class (now have-nots) with it. There's a lot of economic misery and fear afoot. Dangerous times. And speaking of fear, Clinton has a potent library of Trump's most toxic rants in her back pocket. All Trump has is: she's a woman, and she's a Clinton. I think we'll see how little traction that has outside of rabid conservatives. Roland Skollani was sick of Pittsburgh. This city was the dead-end of his failed dreams and even dope didn’t help his choking fits no more. It had been a mistake to leave Hollywood and to follow Rita. Maybe it was a twist of fate, that there were only a few days left to leave his ex-wife’s house. Now he MUST act. Rita had a new lover and he didn’t mind, but why of all people did she choose this greedy, corrupt cop Lennon?

+1/1

Reply Quote

More

From:	Harry (HARRYN)	28 Apr 2016 06:06
To:	ALL	151 of 207

41641.151
It is useful to think about how voters feel vs how party insiders and billionaire funders feel about US political positions. 1) Hillary - No matter if you like or dislike her personally or her political positions, she will be nearly impossible for anyone to beat. - Personally, I think she will be very effective if elected, because she is so well connected. - The problem I have, is that I dislike her policies. That is not a person dislike, really don't like her positions on things. - The attacks on her pretty much are ignored by her base, and frankly, most women - No matter how you shape it, she can draw in women votes from both sides of the aisle, just because she is a woman. - The are no remaining, nor hardly any even viable men or women in the republican party that can pull in those votes. - It "might" be possible to swing some women votes toward the republican candidate if the VP choice is a woman - She will certainly carry left leaning states in the main election, but it will be much harder for her to win key states like OH, MI, FL, and TX. 2) Sanders - What you perceive as his "weakness positions", are actually the reasons he has support from the "middle of the road voters", from both parties - His position on gun rights is far closer to mainstream America thinking than Hillary, and he foolishly backed down on this position, as it was actually one of the the keys to his backing. - Not everything he said was ideal, especially for someone like me who is more libertarian in thinking, but that is normal. - In some ways, his appeal crossed over party lines better than most any other candidate. - He has always had a big, uphill battle to cover against the Clinton stranglehold on the DNC, it is actually amazing that he has gotten this far. - The real question is - will his backers, who fairly strongly don't like Clinton, be willing to actually vote for Clinton ? I am not so sure. In some ways, they could be more likely moved to back Trump, or stay home.

0/0

Reply Quote

More