• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Ed Is Humayun Khan Trump's Turning Point?

ponderingturtle said:
Unless they get rid of him I would think most republicans will still vote for him.
Click to expand...

Just "most republicans" would get him wrecked.

Last Gallup poll had party identification as 28R, 42I, 28D with the I's even split 43/43 on which way they lean.

So if the baseline for Trump is he gets most of the R vote (say 25 of 28%) and the majority of R leaners (say 15 of 21%) That's just 40% of the popular vote which is probably generous since several recent national polls have him in the 30s in a 4 way race.
 
Last edited:
The Atheist said:
It really is!

The turning point, that is.

And it need not have been, but Trump's parlaying the stupidity by attacking the Khan family hasn't just backfired, it's exploded in his face.

When puppy-dog Chris Christie calls him out at the same time as the GOP is attempting to cut him off at the mouth, I'd say his day is well and truly done.

Who will vote Trump now?

The loons.
Click to expand...

How did you conclude that the number of loons in the US is too small to elect a president?


Up until Trump's dick move in responding to the Khans as he did I wouldn't have bet a dime on the US election.

Now, I'd happily bet my life
Click to expand...

Strong words.
 
dudalb said:
A number of people are saying that Khan's DNC appreance....and Donald's reaction..have Donnie's "Have you no decency" moment.
Click to expand...

I absolutely believe it. The parrallels are unmistakable. McCarthy had risen fast in popularity with his take no prisoners witchunt. Time and again McCarthy made unsupported accusations and only rose in popularity. But eventually he placed one too many straws on rhetoric back ofb this horse. There he was on National TV which was huge in the 1950s when there was only a few channels. McCarthy recklessly attacked a young lawyer of a GOP law firm looking into Communist infiltration into the military which they found no evidence.
Instead of accepting the findings McCarthy pivoted attacking the investigators singling out this one young lawyer. And Joe Welch stood up for the lawyer and with those words "have you no decency sir" basically turned the tide.

Trump blew it big time. All he needed to say was "I honor the Khan's sacrifice and feel for their loss, (And look like he meant it) but the world is facing a great threat to its stability under the guise of this religion". But Trump showed no empathy at all or expressed any respect for the Khans and their sacrifice. He just attacked and felt surprise that he couldn't attack the Khans. He never understood their sacrifice meant that they were untouchable. Trump could have pivoted to his message. I don't know if it was the biggest blunder by a major party nominee but I can't think of anything that comes close.
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
But he was a lawyer. Not a politician.
Click to expand...

Neither is Trump. Not really. Trump doesn't need politics. If he loses, he can continue making money however he used to make it, enhanced by fat speaking fees from right-wing groups. And Cohn's strategy has served Trump pretty well, so far. I expect Trump to lose in November, but "crash and burn?" Not a chance.
 
Ladewig said:
How did you conclude that the number of loons in the US is too small to elect a president?
Click to expand...

It's a tough call, but since the said loonies will only be white loonies + Ben Carson, I think sanity still squeaks in.

sunmaster14 said:
You might want to set him straight about the consequences of betting on "sure" things.
Click to expand...

I'm a professional gambler who has worked as a bookmaker.

I understand how odds work as well as anyone on the planet, which is why I'd happily lay my life on this one.
 
Trump blew it big time. All he needed to say was "I honor the Khan's sacrifice and feel for their loss, (And look like he meant it) but the world is facing a great threat to its stability under the guise of this religion". But Trump showed empathy at all or expressed any respect for the Khans and their sacrifice. He just attacked and felt surprise that he couldn't attack the Khans. He never understood their sacrifice meant that they were untouchable. Trump could have pivoted to his message. I don't know if it was the biggest blunder by a major party nominee but I can't think of anything that comes close.
Click to expand...

He wouldn't even need to look like he meant it; what he needed to do was shut up and let it go. He totally blew up his own outhouse for no reason.
 
Bob001 said:
No one can say for sure it was fake. But considering all the facts and the atmosphere of the times, it certainly looks suspicious and we can say so, just as we can raise questions about Trump's shady business dealings, even if nobody went to jail.
Click to expand...

I agree.

I objected to Skeptic Ginger's bold statement that the bone spurs were "fake".

I don't object to pointing out that these spurs were mighty convenient for Trump and that the diagnosis might well be suspicious.
 
Babbylonian said:
With certainty, no. But he's a notorious liar and con artist, and there is absolutely no reason to think that this is something that only started recently.
Click to expand...

Sure, the diagnosis is suspicious. I'll buy that. I merely asked Skeptic Ginger why she was so certain that the diagnosis was false.
 
Bob001 said:
Neither is Trump. Not really. Trump doesn't need politics. If he loses, he can continue making money however he used to make it, enhanced by fat speaking fees from right-wing groups. And Cohn's strategy has served Trump pretty well, so far. I expect Trump to lose in November, but "crash and burn?" Not a chance.
Click to expand...

No Trump is a politician. Just not a good politician.
 
phiwum said:
Sure, the diagnosis is suspicious. I'll buy that. I merely asked Skeptic Ginger why she was so certain that the diagnosis was false.
Click to expand...
I suspect that one reason is that bone spurs usually develop later in life and require frequent/prolonged stress to develop even then. A 22-year-old with symptomatic heel spurs would probably be a pretty rare case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom