Corpsey

bandz ahoy
Truly terrifying

Roger Stone, a long time confidante of Trump, amplified these concerns in an interview with a far right wing radio show.

Stone said: “I think we have widespread voter fraud, but the first thing that Trump needs to do is begin talking about it constantly.”

Laying out a strategy for Trump to adopt, Stone added: “He needs to say for example, today would be a perfect example: ‘I am leading in Florida. The polls all show it. If I lose Florida, we will know that there’s voter fraud. If there’s voter fraud, this election will be illegitimate, the election of the winner will be illegitimate, we will have a constitutional crisis, widespread civil disobedience, and the government will no longer be the government.’”

He also promised a “bloodbath” if the Democrats attempted to “steal” the election.

On Monday night, Trump also escalated his rhetoric about Democratic rival Clinton. In a packed rally in a high school gym in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, he called the former secretary of state “the devil”.

The Republican nominee was also quoted in an interview with USA Today saying that if his daughter Ivanka was sexually harassed, “I would like to think she would find another career or find another company if that was the case.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...he-devil-and-suggests-election-will-be-rigged
 

CrowleyHead

Well-known member
Worst part is, he's got logic on his side from a Democratic p.o.v b/c Hillary power-played Sanders, as one does.

Its the subtle trick about Trump; he says a lot of things that are lies, but have enough basis in a logical argument when it comes to his opponent that he isn't just blowing smoke. Hillary is a TERRIBLE opponent for him to go up against as far as being a proper opposite, and in no way the figure of positive liberal change that a Barack had stood for symbolically. They can push her as the first female president for the US and simply not being a brazen rouser of the conservative working class in fascism, but she has built her career on numbers of questionable behavior that actually puts her closer to the boogeyman Trump concept beneath the veneer of 'goodness'.

Its one of the few things going for him; he points out the fraudulence of his foes, and the people respond to it with glee because the fact of the matter is, he's RIGHT. It doesn't make him himself a good candidate in reality, but its those little wins and (as I imagine his supporters/fans would describe it) the "balls" to say it, that gives him validation.

Still shocks me people are confused as to the hows and whys of his effectiveness sometimes. He's been the only guy playing smart this whole election rollout.
 

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
Yeah, he's an anti establishment figure, and he's exposed how in-pocket his competitors are.

It's just a shame he's also happens to be a bigoted, narcissistic, amoral bastard.

I wonder if Trump's campaign sets up the possibility of other billionaires running for office in the future? After all, he's proven you can get far with the 'I'm not beholden to anyone' argument. And (to make a huge generalisation), Americans respect money. Could we see a tech billionaire like Bill Gates running for President next time around?

I wish Obama could run for a third time. I realise he's been very unpopular but surely he would blow Trump out of the water?


Even many Republicans seemed to want him as president after this speech http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/07/28/obama_s_dnc_speech_praised_by_conservatives.html
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
Its one of the few things going for him; he points out the fraudulence of his foes, and the people respond to it with glee because the fact of the matter is, he's RIGHT. It doesn't make him himself a good candidate in reality, but its those little wins and (as I imagine his supporters/fans would describe it) the "balls" to say it, that gives him validation.

Still shocks me people are confused as to the hows and whys of his effectiveness sometimes. He's been the only guy playing smart this whole election rollout.

That's a great point. He pointed out the fraudulence of Rubio and Cruz to devastating effect. I'm convinced that Clinton will not win the debates in the straightforward way that many expect her to.

@Corpsey - Obama is a brilliant political orator. I'd back him to win a debate vs just about anyone these days.
 

CrowleyHead

Well-known member
It's just a shame he's also happens to be a bigoted, narcissistic, amoral bastard.

Why? "By the people, for the people, of the people" y'know?

@luka; you're not wrong, but he's never had to debate anyone with any value. Romney and McCain were never big threats. It'd be interesting if Trump had had to toe-to-toe with Obama and seeing just how that'd play out.
 

luka

Well-known member
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.
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
Obama debated Clinton and thrashed her in 2008, even when he was clearly nervous due to gap in experience between the two candidates. I prob overstated Obama's debate prowess as against his general oratory, but I still think he'd beat Trump too (who is certainly very dangerous in debates).

Trump just ignores what the other person says (granted, this is v effective in America) - don't think you do that Luka
 

CrowleyHead

Well-known member
Well Luka's not playing to a crowd for entertainment.

Proper debate is boxing, Politics is pro-wrestling. Trump gets over because he does the unthinkable, the daring, what needs to be done; he's not afraid to get his hands dirty and take that extra step to ensure he wins, because there's a point where people feel a relief at a man who says 'screw the rules', and think to themselves "Finally, a man who does what I lack the courage to do so." It doesn't matter that he doesn't actually say anything of value, he just wins.

12418041_1130111177008526_7205231270672089717_n.jpg
 

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
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.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
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.
 

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
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.
 

sadmanbarty

Well-known member
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.
 

droid

Well-known member
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...
 

Leo

Well-known member
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).
 

droid

Well-known member
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.
 
Top