martin wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

martin wrote:

djsunyc wrote:trump is a showman.

he figured out how to touch the pulse of the disgruntled white man and folks in the south and he was able to parlay that to becoming the republican nominee. it really does show you how unhappy republicans were with their party.

but he also proved to be a grade A idiot b/c becoming the republican nominee was the tough part...pivoting to look more presidential would've won him the election since so many people don't like hillary. that was the EASY part and he just flat out blew it.

so he's either very very very dumb...or this run for president was for alterior motives (i.e. starting his own news channel).

if trump really cares about the country, then let's see what he does after he loses. 100% odds that hillary would still continue as a public servant if she loses. trump? well i'm not holding my breath and that will tell you if this guy was actually serious about helping america.

BINGO. Fox/Breitbart 2.0 BOOK IT

Don't you think it's a bit too elaborate a plot to start a TV channel?
He may not have been completely convinced when he started, but his ego is telling him everyday that he is the most important man in the world. This reasoning is tailor made for narcissists. He definitely believes he "deserves" to be president. He can't get enough of being rich, famous and powerful.

Not at all. I've been thinking this since the beginning. I don't think Trump ever thought he could win the Republican ticket, that he would give it a shot to increase his brand awareness and everything else was gravy. But then he found out that the other guys running were pussies and could be trampled. His test run for this was the Birther thing.

IMHO Trump really doesn't want the responsibility of running the country, it's really hard work but he does like the power and is drawn to it. IMHO this is all to get the eyeballs and build a constituency that will rake him in the $$$$. Look at what Hannity and Rush and Glen Beck and Bill O'Rielly have done. Those guys are pulling in some serious money and Trump will be all of those guys wrapped up into 1 under the umbrella of a TV/News network.

I've also been thinking Hilary in a landslide since the beginning but it was more of a gut thing than anything. It was almost inevitable that something was amiss with Trump's taxes and that SOMETHING would leak (how could it not?). Same with the lockerroom stuff. I am almost sure some very shady business ties will come out over the next weeks, this is one shoe that has not really dropped.

After he loses he will be the guy who took on the crooked Clintons and wasn't afraid to tell the nation just how bad they were. He wasn't afraid to call other countries out for not pulling their weight. He wasn't afraid to send back the Mexicans, Muslims, Syrians, whoever was going to be a drag on the goodness that is America. That will be his koolaid and there will be plenty of thirsty folks. I have always thought this was his endgame. He probably cant win because its rigged, but he can establish himself as a fighter, a global figure, a world player... Not my view but is there any doubt of how he sees and sells himself?

fishmike wrote:]No I think you have it. Don wants to make it a zero sum game because if all things are equal he is more likable (or so he and his campaign believes). The only way he can deal with the dirt that is surfacing is to add so much dirt to Hillary that people just cant see through the dirt. The old "they are both crooks, I am going with my gut feeling." These are the voters Don needs to have any chance. My knock on Hillary was by engaging in his attacks she inadvertently fuels that noise.

Well, I'll again suggest I don't that was ever a genuinely articulated, acted upon strategy. If it was, it was a bad one. Trump's unfavorable's has always been higher.

There was never a path that "adding more dirt" didn't exasperate this dynamic. In elections with the electorate as divided as ours is, there is always an opposite reaction, if not an equal one.

The media is mostly bringing down Trump. Clinton has commenting by has been laying the mines. Trump is laying his own mines. I think we see a difference in how much Clinton is engaging, and the polls seem to be corroborating her level of engagement has been effective.

The point is it was never a zero sum game, going negative/nuclear has price, there are no free lunches, and there wasn't enough upside in what dirt he has (so far) for the trade-off to be equitable.

He found an effective path, the evidence was there, he just didn't compete to win that way. I suspect he sensed ultimately the narrative would be to argue his campaign/Conway won the "be presidential" argument and victory or at least competitiveness wouldn't be credited to the Trump brand.

Knickoftime wrote:

fishmike wrote:]No I think you have it. Don wants to make it a zero sum game because if all things are equal he is more likable (or so he and his campaign believes). The only way he can deal with the dirt that is surfacing is to add so much dirt to Hillary that people just cant see through the dirt. The old "they are both crooks, I am going with my gut feeling." These are the voters Don needs to have any chance. My knock on Hillary was by engaging in his attacks she inadvertently fuels that noise.

Well, I'll again suggest I don't that was ever a genuinely articulated, acted upon strategy. If it was, it was a bad one. Trump's unfavorable's has always been higher.

There was never a path that "adding more dirt" didn't exasperate this dynamic. In elections with the electorate as divided as ours is, there is always an opposite reaction, if not an equal one.

The media is mostly bringing down Trump. Clinton has commenting by has been laying the mines. Trump is laying his own mines. I think we see a difference in how much Clinton is engaging, and the polls seem to be corroborating her level of engagement has been effective.

The point is it was never a zero sum game, going negative/nuclear has price, there are no free lunches, and there wasn't enough upside in what dirt he has (so far) for the trade-off to be equitable.

He found an effective path, the evidence was there, he just didn't compete to win that way. I suspect he sensed ultimately the narrative would be to argue his campaign/Conway won the "be presidential" argument and victory or at least competitiveness wouldn't be credited to the Trump brand.

All I am saying is I were running his ship the only thing I could see that works is burying her in her own **** as well, so people cant tell the difference, and hope like hell she makes a big mistake they can pounce on. Polls aren't the most trustworthy... but I do think he's cooked and is just setting himself up for phase 2. How to make this all worth it. That should actually be the easy part.

fishmike wrote:All I am saying is I were running his ship the only thing I could see that works is burying her in her own **** as well, so people cant tell the difference, and hope like hell she makes a big mistake they can pounce on. Polls aren't the most trustworthy...

Polls aren't. Scientific aggregate of polls seems to be a fairly reliable field.

I'm not sure how much we disagree, I'll only reiterate September WAS the most effective general month he had. The anti-Hillary convention did not work, however.

There is evidence there that there was in fact another path, that something else was working.

And this doesn't include the Central Park Five, the birther stuff, etc.

BRIGGS wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:Man, the media is starting to go medieval on Trump's ass.

just starting? They've been at him 1 day after republican nomination.

The most damaging blows have been playing Trumps own words back to him.

Hillary Clinton's run for President has been the most corrupt process in the history of politics. She's a criminal who does not deserve to be President.

Of the two nominees, Donald Trump is the only one of them that has admitted to committing an unlawful act.

So there's that.

More relevant to this exchange, however, was how wrong you were to bet on the Trump horse.

It wasn't enough to prefer Trump, it was your prediction he'd win. That you like so many other were so unable to anticipate what was going to occur.

Even if you play the same 'liberal media' victim card like that right has been doing for decades, you like Trump clearly misjudged how impotent he'd be about altering or overcoming the dynamic.

A majority of Liberty students, faculty, and staff feel as we do. Donald Trump received a pitiful 90 votes from Liberty students in Virginia’s primary election, a colossal rejection of his campaign. Nevertheless, President Falwell eagerly uses his national platform to advocate for Donald Trump. While he occasionally clarifies that supporting Trump is not the official position of Liberty University, he knows it is his title of president of the largest Christian university in the world that gives him political credentials.

Associating any politician with Christianity is damaging to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. But Donald Trump is not just any politician. He has made his name by maligning others and bragging about his sins. Not only is Donald Trump a bad candidate for president, he is actively promoting the very things that we as Christians ought to oppose.

A recently uncovered tape revealed his comments bragging about sexually assaulting women. Any faculty or staff member at Liberty would be terminated for such comments, and yet when Donald Trump makes them, President Falwell rushes eagerly to his defense – taking the name “Liberty University” with him. “We’re all sinners,” Falwell told the media, as if sexual assault is a shoulder-shrugging issue rather than an atrocity which plagues college campuses across America, including our own.

It is not enough to criticize these kinds of comments. We must make clear to the world that while everyone is a sinner and everyone can be forgiven, a man who constantly and proudly speaks evil does not deserve our support for the nation’s highest office.

Jesus tells a story in the Bible about a man who tries to remove a speck of dust from his brother’s eye, while he has a log stuck in his own. “You hypocrite,” Jesus says, “first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.”

We Liberty students are often told to support Donald Trump because the other leading candidate is a bad option. Perhaps this is true. But the only candidate who is directly associated with Liberty University is Donald Trump.

Because our president has led the world to believe that Liberty University supports Donald Trump, we students must take it upon ourselves to make clear that Donald Trump is absolutely opposed to what we believe, and does not have our support.

We are not proclaiming our opposition to Donald Trump out of bitterness, but out of a desire to regain the integrity of our school. While our president Jerry Falwell Jr. tours the country championing the log in his eye, we want the world to know how many students oppose him. We don’t want to champion Donald Trump; we want only to be champions for Christ.

Knickoftime wrote:

holfresh wrote:Democrats are too afraid to actually do anything to help the middle calls...

You want to elaborate?

What are they unilaterally empowered to do?

martin wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

holfresh wrote:Democrats are too afraid to actually do anything to help the middle calls...

You want to elaborate?

What are they unilaterally empowered to do?

Obamacare should have been much tighter. I think that's the biggest one.

Much tighter but Democrats were afraid..

martin wrote:

Powerful!!