Trump could win presidency: Yes or No?

[Joey McGee]

As this article points out:

Super far left online rag paints Obama as conservative compared to.. themselves. Hilarious. Obama gave up on promoting a single-payer system because he knew it would never fly in this day and age in America, not because he's not a true liberal. That website is so full of **** I stand in awe.

 

[Myron Proudfoot]

The ineffably sad thing is that "Nixon on steroids" wouldn't be that bad compared to either Clinton or Trump. As this article points out:



Nixon was more progressive than Obama has been or Hilly ever dreamed of being.

most of that was done because Congress passed it and Nixon didn't want a veto over-ridden. He was a proud conservative, and HATED blacks, liberals, and anti-war protestors. But he could count the votes and knew enough not to pick fights with Congress he'd lose if he could avoid it.

 

[dudalb]

Heyk the one reason I am pulling for Hilary instead of Bernie is because I think she has a better chance of taking down Trump in the general election.

 

[Trebuchet]

most of that was done because Congress passed it and Nixon didn't want a veto over-ridden. He was a proud conservative, and HATED blacks, liberals, and anti-war protestors. But he could count the votes and knew enough not to pick fights with Congress he'd lose if he could avoid it.

Nixon was a consummate politician. Trump isn't. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it's going to come back to bite him in the end. As a corporate executive, he's used to giving orders and having them obeyed. Politics doesn't work that way.

 

[ChristianProgressive]

Super far left online rag paints Obama as conservative compared to.. themselves. Hilarious. Obama gave up on promoting a single-payer system because he knew it would never fly in this day and age in America, not because he's not a true liberal. That website is so full of **** I stand in awe.

Plenty of articles in other places saying the same thing.

And single-payer is what the people want Polifact shows it, so does the Kaiser Poll.

Same with other progressive issues. When asked about policies there is large support for progressive positions.

Oh, and your attempt at ad hom argumentation only proves you know you lose on the facts.

Not to mention you deliberately falsified who was being compared to who. They were comparing Obama's record on results vs NIXON's record on results.
.

Try again, amaeture

 

[ChristianProgressive]

And it's over in MO: Trump by one-tenth point, and Clinton by two-tenths point. 100% vote counted 12:10AM CDT.

 

[Eddie Dane]

The ineffably sad thing is that "Nixon on steroids" wouldn't be that bad compared to either Clinton or Trump. As this article points out:



Nixon was more progressive than Obama has been or Hilly ever dreamed of being.

Nixon may have been a paranoid nut. He was a highly intelligent nut.

Didn't Kissinger talk him out of nuking 'Nam, though?

 

[The Don]

I think he could easily move to the middle. If he can espouse two opposing viewpoints in the same day, then adopting a viewpoint closer to the middle is child's play. The question is how many of those people in the middle will board Trump's crazy train.

I think one of the things I'm beginning to realise is that Donald Trump can say things convincingly without being emotionally invested in them. One of the problems most politicians face is that they can paint themselves into a corner by becoming too emotionally invested in what they've said which forces them to defend it no matter how much damage that may eventually cause.

Donald Trump doesn't have that problem, he's happy to contradict something he said last year, month or week (or even something at the start of the sentence) because he doesn't feel obliged to support it. Furthermore by being so willing to change he doesn't come across as a flip-flopper (who would defend their original position before being forced to change) or intransigent. He's managed to make a positive out of changing.

I think he could be very successful just by saying "you don't have to like me to vote for me. You just have to believe that I can make America great again. Look, you might think I am a complete a-hole, but sometimes things get so FUBARed that you need a complete a-hole to step up and make things right. I will make America great again." (That is a perfect Trump speech: the only three-syllable word is America.) Personally, I would even bring up "the kind of guy you would want to have a beer with" stuff from one of those GW Bush campaigns and spin it in the opposite direction. He's not the kind of guy you want to have a beer with - he's a tough-as-nails leader who is ready to lead this country.

Good point, that image has been beautifully burnished through several seasons of The Apprentice. It doesn't matter whether it's true or not and attempting to attack it is tough because you're attempting to attack people's perception (in which they are emotionally invested) rather than facts. There's a danger that you come across as attacking the electorate.

If this whole thing is deliberate on the part of Donald Trump then it's a work of genius. If it isn't then he's lucky and many will attempt (IMO unsuccessfully - it really is very difficult to be that convincing when you yourself are not convinced) to copy his approach.

 

[Joey McGee]

Plenty of articles in other places saying the same thing.

Gee if you hang out on AlterNet I wonder what these other places are?

And single-payer is what the people want Polifact shows it, so does the Kaiser Poll.

Gee, this sounds like ********. *gets out trusty Google*

In 2009, with the Obamacare bill being pushed in Congress, filmmaker Michael Moore said a majority of Americans favored a single-payer system. PolitiFact National rated his statement False.

Ouch! There goes your argument, right into the garbage!

I predict you will say that things are different today.

Americans Don't Know What ‘Single Payer’ Means

And when they find out, they don’t like it.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/a...-have-no-idea-what-single-payer-means/471045/

Same with other progressive issues. When asked about policies there is large support for progressive positions.

I bet your facts about how Obama is a secret conservative anti-democratic leader are all the same as this one... Would you like to try using some facts?

Oh, and your attempt at ad hom argumentation only proves you know you lose on the facts.

I'm stating my opinion on the quality of your favorite news source. I also have a poor opinion of infowars and drudge report. This is a fact, that my opinion is, crazy people write for them.

Not to mention you deliberately falsified who was being compared to who. They were comparing Obama's record on results vs NIXON's record on results.
.

Try again, amaeture

I deliberately falsified it! Priceless! I'm making a point that they are simply delusional and obviously biased... and now I'm lying! Amateur!

 

[Ladewig]

If this whole thing is deliberate on the part of Donald Trump then it's a work of genius. If it isn't then he's lucky and many will attempt (IMO unsuccessfully - it really is very difficult to be that convincing when you yourself are not convinced) to copy his approach.

I agree there will be imitators and I agree that there will never gain enough momentum to do anything. It took years if not decades for Trump to position himself and craft himself into this persona.

ETA
And I am agreed on his not being invested enough in any position to cause a problem when he jumps to the opposite position. I am surprised more people are not referencing H.G. Frankfort's book: "On *********." Trump is the consummate BSer. Somewhere along the line he realized that when selling a name instead of a tangible product, it is all about the BS. He has perfected the fast, simple, repetitive patter of the carnival barker and used it to create a billion-dollar empire.

And somewhere along the line he decided that bald people are not as trustworthy or believable when selling a name so he created the worst combover of any living American.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

No different than guaranteeing a Clinton victory. They are equally unfavorable in my estimation.

Wow, I don't know what to say to that, and I'm hardly a robust Hillary supporter.

 

[ChristianProgressive]

Gee if you hang out on AlterNet I wonder what these other places are?

Ad homming again.

Ouch! There goes your argument, right into the garbage!

Not so fast. They debunked Moore's claim that the support went back over 70 years. They did not debunk the fact that Americans strongly support single-payer/universal health care of some sort.

Nice try at a bait and switch.

I bet your facts about how Obama is a secret conservative anti-democratic leader are all the same as this one... Would you like to try using some facts?

Fact: most of the key responders appointed by Obama to fight the Meltdown were Wall Street insiders who helped CAUSE the Meltdown in the first place under Bush (Bernanke, Geitman, Summers, et al)
Fact: as a result, the big banks were not broken up and re-regulated
Fact: as a result, the CEOs of the banks and mortgage companies that almost caused a global economic collapse walked away with many billions of dollars in bonuses paid out through TARP emergency funding
Fact: as a result, the promised criminal prosecutions have largely been absent. Only a few low-level players have been jailed
Fact: nearly all of the Stimulus money went to business and corporations, while millions of American homeowners, workers, and personal savers were ruined and left to fend for themselves
Fact: Obama has continued (and in some ways widened) the wars he promised to get us out of through the drone programs.
Fact: Obama's administration has been more secretive than Bush's ever dreamed of being with secret trade deals (TPP), increasing the surveilance state without public oversight, waging war on "whistle-blowers", etc

Shall I continue?

I deliberately falsified it! Priceless! I'm making a point that they are simply delusional and obviously biased... and now I'm lying! Amateur!

The article EXPLICITLY lays out the record of achievement of Obama vs NIXON, not against some phantom standard. Both records are documented.

This is explicityly laid out in the article itself, and you ignored it. In short: you lied. Period.

 

[Joey McGee]

Ad homming again.

False, I'm making fun of your "other places" argument from popularity by implying that if they are as biased and loopy as AlterNet you're not helping your case. You should have just not made the argument from popularity in the first place...

Not so fast. They debunked Moore's claim that the support went back over 70 years. They did not debunk the fact that Americans strongly support single-payer/universal health care of some sort.

False. The politifact article concludes "In fact, one could make a strong argument that those very polls suggest there is more support for private insurance options than for a single-payer system. And so we find Moore's statement False." So your claim that Obama is a conservative because he pushed a compromised plan instead of what the people wanted is false.

Nice try at a bait and switch.

I'm no "amateure" here ok, you clearly don't know what a bait and switch even is, nor could you logically describe how I factually pulled one...

Fact: most of the key responders appointed by Obama to fight the Meltdown were Wall Street insiders who helped CAUSE the Meltdown in the first place under Bush (Bernanke, Geitman, Summers, et al)

Bernanke became chairman under Bush. Is your argument really that people who weren't involved in finance in any way should have been brought in to consult on how to fix it? You really think that responsibility lies solely at their feet?

Shall I continue?

I"d rather talk about bigfoot than deal with that Gish Gallop of crap.

you lied. Period.

OK buddy, Enjoy the Clinton Presidency! Try to get some good rest and if you have to sleep with a mouth guard to protect your teeth, it's only for minimum four years.

 

[ponderingturtle]

I just watched the guy rush the stage, Trump handled it well. Situations like that are going to reinforce his inevitable presidency.

Tony at least he hasn't gotten anyone killed like Hillary has.

Being that long in the development and construction industry? Seems likely he has.

 

[Mader Levap]

Plenty of articles in other places saying the same thing.

Gee if you hang out on AlterNet I wonder what these other places are?

Ad homming again.

Protip: saying "your sources are unreliable and untrustworthy" is not ad hominem.

 

[Beerina]

[X] I am scared either will win, or Sanders, or Cruz.

 

[Belz...]

Misleading thread title!!!

I came to vote "yes, he could" and I don't even have that choice.

 

[dudalb]

And it's over in MO: Trump by one-tenth point, and Clinton by two-tenths point. 100% vote counted 12:10AM CDT.

I was right:It was the Office Sloths from "Zootopia" who were counting the votes in Missouri...

 

[ChristianProgressive]

False, I'm making fun of your "other places" argument from popularity by implying that if they are as biased and loopy as AlterNet you're not helping your case. You should have just not made the argument from popularity in the first place...

Not my fault that a quick Google show plenty of other sources documenting the same thing. Nixon would not be electable by today's Republican standards becasue he was "too liberal". Obama's record of governance is (if I'm being generous) that of a "Conserva-crat", like Hillary.

False. The PolitiFact article concludes "In fact, one could make a strong argument that those very polls suggest there is more support for private insurance options than for a single-payer system. And so we find Moore's statement False." So your claim that Obama is a conservative because he pushed a compromised plan instead of what the people wanted is false.
I'm no "amateur" here ok, you clearly don't know what a bait and switch even is, nor could you logically describe how I factually pulled one...

I know a bait and switch when I see it quite well, and the Polifact article attempts a pretty poor one by nit-picking, parsing, and otherwise distoring the poll findings to try to make it what they want the data to say, rather than what it does, in fact, say.

Bernanke became chairman under Bush. Is your argument really that people who weren't involved in finance in any way should have been brought in to consult on how to fix it? You really think that responsibility lies solely at their feet?

Obama retained Bernanke, and is responsible for that extremely poor choice.

You don't hire a burglar to investigte the very crimes he committed.

I suggest to any third parties reading this exchange (since I know you on't bother doing the research) as a good starting point the following:

"Inside the Meltdown" (PBS/Frontline) - 4-part investigative series into the causes and (lack of) effective responses to the Wall Street-caused 08 crisi

"Inside Job" (independent documentary) - based on the book of the same name by Charles Ferguson (who wrote the book by the same name) about the crisis and (lack of) response

"Predator Nation: Corporate Criminals, Political Corruption, and the Hijacking of America" - also by Ferguson

"All The Devils are Here" - by Joe Nocera

"Pity the Billionaire", "The Wrecking Crew", and "Listen Liberal: Or Whatever Happened to the Party of the People" - all by Thomas Frank

I"d rather talk about bigfoot than deal with that Gish Gallop of crap.

Concession accepted. All of the (lack of) action is part of the public record. The documentaries and books listed above even go into some of them in detail.

OK buddy, Enjoy the Clinton Presidency! Try to get some good rest and if you have to sleep with a mouth guard to protect your teeth, it's only for minimum four years.

And, if anyone needed definitive proof you have no argument...

 

[ChristianProgressive]

Protip: saying "your sources are unreliable and untrustworthy" is not ad hominem.

Actually, it is. Instead of debating the facts, he's simply saying "you can't trust the source", which is the classic ad hom: disclaiming the source.