Page 11 of 148 FirstFirst ... 9101112132161111 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 2214

Thread: Trump

  1. #151
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    9,313

    Default

    At a campaign event Tuesday in Ashburn, Va., Trump attacked Clinton for having a poor relationship with Putin, saying: 'This is a nuclear country we're talking about. Russia. Strong nuclear country.'

    'Their stuff is newer; they have a lot more,' he said. 'She wants to play the tough one. She's not tough.'
    Trump is making George Dubuya look like Oscar Wilde at this point.
    Αι ψυχαί οσμώνται καθ΄ Άιδην.

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    9,313

    Default

    BTW Vince McMahon would be just as viable a President as Trump, and slightly less galling too.
    Αι ψυχαί οσμώνται καθ΄ Άιδην.

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    17,864

    Default

    I've heard of a strong nuclear force, but a strong nuclear country is a new one on me.

    It's true that Russia has a marginally bigger nuclear arsenal than the USA, but when you're talking about states with the capability to wipe all life more complex than a cockroach many times over, a difference of a few warheads one way or the other is pretty academic.

    But yeah, bigging up the threat posed by some notional enemy and accusing your opponent of being insufficiently tough with respect to that enemy is surely one of the oldest tricks in the book for a good reason.
    Doin' the Lambeth Warp New: DISSENSUS - THE NOVEL - PM me your email address and I'll add you

  4. #154
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    9,313

    Default

    I guess Crowley's right, in that a large proportion of the electorate don't want to hear things even phrased more complicatedly than 'Their stuff is newer', let alone discussed.
    Αι ψυχαί οσμώνται καθ΄ Άιδην.

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    London
    Posts
    6,115

    Default

    Krugman raised the point that Hilary will be able to attack Trump on things that Republican's weren't able to in a debate. He gave the example of Hilary being able to attack Trump's business acumen. Republican's weren't able to do so because of the worship of "job creators" on the American right.

    I've seen a couple of people suggest that Trump will try and avoid debating Clinton one on one because he'll lose in that format.

    It's hard for me to personally have an opinion because I'm very much from the "nerdy fact remembering" school of debate. However, Ford's "no Soviet domination of Eastern Europe" gaffe shows that not understanding key issues can cost you electorally.

    The other hope is that seeing Clinton in a debate might help show people that she isn't the caricature that's been cultivated by the right wing media for two decades.

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    The Fear - Dublin
    Posts
    8,454

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luka View Post
    I agree. Celebrity death match. Trump argues like me. Home in on personal weakness. Win over the crowd. Put a label on someone they can't peel off. Ignore nerdy logic games and fact memorising contests.
    And the resemblance doesn't end there! Narcissism, arrogance, tiny hands/penis, bizarre personal appearance...

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    4,571

    Default

    trump hates to lose, but he also doesn't really want to give up his current life and do the hard work of being president. his ideal win-win situation would be to lose by a point or two, allowing him to both save face by blaming the rigged voting system AND not have to actually be president.

    if by some chance he wins, we'll basically have president pence with trump focused on ribbon cuttings and other ceremonial stuff (aka, making america great again).

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    The Fear - Dublin
    Posts
    8,454

    Default

    Clinton has just gone to 85% on the nowcast.

    http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...538twitter#now

    Presumably on the basis of persistent rumors that Trump plans to pull out.

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    9,313

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by droid View Post
    Clinton has just gone to 85% on the nowcast.

    http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...538twitter#now

    Presumably on the basis of persistent rumors that Trump plans to pull out.
    Wow! Is this an aberration?

    Where can I read about Trump planning to pull out? Is this swing anything to do with his remarks aimed at Khizr Khan?
    Αι ψυχαί οσμώνται καθ΄ Άιδην.

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    The Fear - Dublin
    Posts
    8,454

    Default

    Its a snapshot, so its prone to wild swings.

    My understanding is that the Republicans think trump has had an appalling 2-3 day period and are getting antsy - the failure to endorse Ryan is a major issue, but in general I think theyre realising that he is incapable of reining himself in.

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    The Fear - Dublin
    Posts
    8,454

  12. #162
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    9,313

    Default

    In the event of a disastrous result for Trump, what will become of the Republican party? You can't help but wonder if (and hope that) they've shot themselves in the foot/head by pandering to the FOX News demographic for so many years. By so doggedly courting and cultivating stupidity, they've created a Frankenstein's monster (no bolts, one toupee) who is far too stupid to be elected. Trump crushed his competitors in the primaries, so why wouldn't he (or some other similarly unelectable wingnut) do so again in four years' time? After all, it's not as if his competitors for the race were particularly sane even in comparison to the Donald.
    Αι ψυχαί οσμώνται καθ΄ Άιδην.

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    4,571

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Corpsey View Post
    In the event of a disastrous result for Trump, what will become of the Republican party? You can't help but wonder if (and hope that) they've shot themselves in the foot/head by pandering to the FOX News demographic for so many years. By so doggedly courting and cultivating stupidity, they've created a Frankenstein's monster (no bolts, one toupee) who is far too stupid to be elected. Trump crushed his competitors in the primaries, so why wouldn't he (or some other similarly unelectable wingnut) do so again in four years' time? After all, it's not as if his competitors for the race were particularly sane even in comparison to the Donald.
    the GOP situation is a bit deceiving. while they've sucked at presidential campaigns of late, they have held majorities in both the senate and house (although looks like the senate may fall back to the dems this year). but their real strength is in state legislatures, where lots of laws are made. 31 of 50 states have GOP governors and a good number of those states have legislatures (state rep/state senate) that are also both controlled to the GOP. that's where the koch brothers put their contributions, enabling their favored candidate to hugly outspend and crush a local democratic opponent.

    obviously the presidency is the big deal but the GOP has to this day been pretty successful in pushing the conservative agenda on a state level.

    also, i think trump is a one-in-a-lifetime character, not likely the next wingnut will have the reality tv show huckster character and popularity that's driven trump's campaign forward.

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    9,313

    Default

    That's interesting. So from an American perspective, what power does the President have that trumps all that state legislature? Foreign policy?

    (Forgive my sophomoric questions, I've only very belatedly taken an interest in politics and it's a half-baked enterprise on my part.)

    http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-d...m_medium=email

    “Putin is convinced that absolutely everything in this world is done for money. He is a religious fanatic, and money is his god. With money, it is possible to solve any problem, buy any interlocutor. He bought the Olympic Games, he bought the World Cup. It will be easy to deal with Trump. He won’t need to use words in negotiations, only figures. When they don’t agree, it will only be necessary to find the right price.”

    Vladimir Putin is a cunning and cynical reader of his adversaries. He notices that Trump does not know the difference between the Quds Force and the Kurds, or what the “nuclear triad” is; that his analysis of Brexit was based in part on what might be good for his golf courses in Britain; that his knowledge of world affairs is roughly that of someone who subscribes to a daily newspaper but doesn’t always have time to get to it. Overwhelmed with his own problems at home, Putin sees the ready benefit in having the United States led by an unlettered narcissist who believes that geostrategic questions are as easy to resolve as a real-estate closing. Putin knows a chump when he sees one.
    Αι ψυχαί οσμώνται καθ΄ Άιδην.

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    4,571

    Default

    that new yorker quote is frightening, and probably entire true.

    RE: presidential power...yes, certainly foreign affairs and military actions. there's also the president's ability to appoint people to cabinet positions who have certain views and thus influence an administration's direction and policy. george bush had lifers from the big oil companies in his department of energy and even department of environmental affair, so you can imagine how those special interests guided our energy and environmental policies during those years.

    more indirectly, it's also the authority of the president to nominate supreme court justices (although our checks and balances system require congressional approval of the selection). the supreme court has the power to uphold or strike down state laws.

    for instance, a GOP governor and state legislature might pass a law banning gay marriage, but if the law is challenged and makes it to the supreme court, the court can (and has) overturn(ed) the state law. it can't tell states what to do, but it can overrule state rulings when the law violate the constitution.

    hence the ongoing battle of presidents trying to stock the supreme court bench with justices who will tend to interrupt the constitution from either a conservative or liberal viewpoint.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •