Trump could win presidency: Yes or No?

[PartSkeptic]

Now comes Trump's "pivot" to Presidential.

I seems that Hillary might have some serious weaknesses (among them might be mental and physical unfitness?).

 

[Foolmewunz]

Now comes Trump's "pivot" to Presidential.

I seems that Hillary might have some serious weaknesses (among them might be mental and physical unfitness?).

This is what, his sixth "pivot to presidential"? He's told us over and over that he is what we have been seeing and that he doesn't plan to change. When others have pivoted him by trying to spin his turds into topaz, he corrects them, e.g. "Make no mistake. I will build that wall... and who's gonna pay for it? Mexico", as the crowd cheers. E.g., "well I was being sarcastic or maybe I wasn't, but he is the founder of ISIS...."

Now? He doesn't have to pivot because he's given the campaign over to the direction of miscreants who agree with his most reprehensible positions. What they will do is try to simply LIE. It's the way Breitbart operates. Make crap up and repeat it and sufficient idiots will buy it.

My bet, because I've underestimated the US voting public a couple of times on this very topic, is that the country's not willing to go backwards six decades, to a Leave it to Beaver world that never existed in the first place. Eddie Haskell was not the hero of the piece, and we're not ready to vote for him.

What his Trumpiness doesn't recognize is that what's hurting him most is him being himself. And that's who his new handlers want to see. They actually, in spite of all the statistics telling them otherwise, believe that there's a rich vein of untapped White Boy Frustration out there and that it will carry him to the White House and them to control of the GOP.

 

[The Don]

Now comes Trump's "pivot" to Presidential.

I seems that Hillary might have some serious weaknesses (among them might be mental and physical unfitness?).

In one of the Hillary threads the mental and physical unfitness diagnosis is being discussed. Some key points to take away w.r.t. that:

• The doctor who made the diagnosis has not examined Hillary in person just looked at a handful of pictures and video clips
• The doctor who made the diagnosis doesn't specialise in any of the fields required to make the diagnosis that she made
• The doctor who made the diagnosis is a director of a poorly regarded (within the medical community) institution which is in effect a far-right lobbying organisation
• The doctor who made the diagnosis holds some highly dubious, well discredited, medical beliefs which - though consistent with aspects of right wing dogma - do not stand up to medical scrutiny

In short, the diagnosis is shaky at best.

 

[aleCcowaN]

The outcome of the election won't be a product of the noblest motivations but the lowest.

Most probably Clinton is gonna win by 2 or 3 points and 60 to 100 electoral votes. One of the main reasons is hate. Polls systematically inform that Trump is hated by 55% of the voters and Clinton is hated just by 44%. There's scarce public information about how many hate both at the same time and no publicly available poll I reached asks "who do you hate less?", but I'm certain there is some, let's say, 25% of the population who hates both in some degree and is divided in different ideological attachments, so there's a lot of combinations like "I hate Clinton but I've voted Democratic candidates most of my life but not exclusively. I have some objections about Trump but I dunno if I would like to vote for him". Maybe 5% of votes, to say just one number, can be mutually snatched by resourcing to pure hate. Hating one candidate tends to make the other one less unpalatable, and we'll see more hate in the campaign as I'm sure both candidates have the real McKay (McCoy if you like) in terms of poll and will act consequently.

Now comes Trump's "pivot" to Presidential.

Pivots involving Trump are more the Thelma & Louise kind, I suppose

My bet, because I've underestimated the US voting public a couple of times on this very topic, is that the country's not willing to go backwards six decades, to a Leave it to Beaver world that never existed in the first place. Eddie Haskell was not the hero of the piece, and we're not ready to vote for him.

Countries and other human collectives hardly ever work that way. That is an interpretation ex post facto and we should hear it once Trump loses ("it happened because the country didn't want to go back to a Leave it to Beaver world"). Neither the country wants to avoid the nostalgic return of those values nor the mosquitoes evolved to become DDT resistant.

In short, the diagnosis is shaky at best.

A gynaecologist certified Clinton is a c***, so he must be right by the power emanated from his diploma. On the other hand, no urologist was needed to confirm Trump is a dick.

 

[The Don]

A gynaecologist certified Clinton is a c***, so he must be right by the power emanated from his diploma.

Who was this ?

Are you suggesting that the "diagnosis" is medically accurate and that the points I raised are invalid ?

On the other hand, no urologist was needed to confirm Trump is a dick.

 

[Darat]

Now comes Trump's "pivot" to Presidential.

I seems that Hillary might have some serious weaknesses (among them might be mental and physical unfitness?).

No.

 

[Stacko]

No.

Anyone unironically talking about Donald pivoting two days after he hired the head of a white nationalist website to be his campaign CEO is ignoring the writing on the wall.

 

[ddt]

A gynaecologist certified Clinton is a c***, so he must be right by the power emanated from his diploma. On the other hand, no urologist was needed to confirm Trump is a dick.

No, actually no gynaecologist has certified that Hillary is a woman, and Trump has questioned that claim. Or was that a parody? I can't find a link, and I have increasingly problems keeping real-Trump and parodies apart.

 

[aleCcowaN]

A gynaecologist certified Clinton is a c***, so he must be right by the power emanated from his diploma. On the other hand, no urologist was needed to confirm Trump is a dick.

Who was this ?

Are you suggesting that the "diagnosis" is medically accurate and that the points I raised are invalid ?

No, actually no gynaecologist has certified that Hillary is a woman, and Trump has questioned that claim. Or was that a parody? I can't find a link, and I have increasingly problems keeping real-Trump and parodies apart.

Does the phrase "a gynaecologist certified Clinton is a c***..." resist any logical analysis? ANY? Bedarwinisus! I'm not gonna leave a trail of emoticons like Little Thumbling for anyone to understand what any of my texts means. Use your brains!

What should I've said instead? That "the mental and physical unfitness diagnosis" wasn't to be considered serious at all and reply the occassional stupid quoting such post of mine and telling me I'm not a doctor and the diagnosis is serious? Gee! Aitch!! I!!! Jay!!!!

 

[The Don]

Does the phrase "a gynaecologist certified Clinton is a c***..." resist any logical analysis? ANY? Bedarwinisus! I'm not gonna leave a trail of emoticons like Little Thumbling for anyone to understand what any of my texts means. Use your brains!

I'd consider it courteous, not least because what you were saying wasn't that much different from what the right wing press and even the Trump campaign has need saying.

Considering the lengths you've gone to to to claim that The Donald is not a climate change denier - against what appears to be overwhelming evidence that he is - it's not beyond reason to consider that you may be a Trump supporter.

What should I've said instead? That "the mental and physical unfitness diagnosis" wasn't to be considered serious at all and reply the occassional stupid quoting such post of mine and telling me I'm not a doctor and the diagnosis is serious? Gee! Aitch!! I!!! Jay!!!!

I don't understand this bit.

I was attempting to point out to PartSkeptic that the evidence to support his/her claim that Hillary is physically and/or mentally unfit wasn't that good. You responded to my post with:

A gynaecologist certified Clinton is a c***, so he must be right by the power emanated from his diploma. On the other hand, no urologist was needed to confirm Trump is a dick

I'm not sure what kind of a point you were trying to make.

Were you trying to say that we shouldn't rely on someone's qualifications ? If so that's why I also pointed out that no direct examination was carried out.

Were you perhaps contrasting the position Hillary supporters take regarding her situation against those they take towards Trump (where they are happy to make all kinds of diagnoses themselves without either necessary qualifications or direct examination) ?

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

I'm not sure what kind of a point you were trying to make.

Were you trying to say that we shouldn't rely on someone's qualifications ? If so that's why I also pointed out that no direct examination was carried out.

Were you perhaps contrasting the position Hillary supporters take regarding her situation against those they take towards Trump (where they are happy to make all kinds of diagnoses themselves without either necessary qualifications or direct examination) ?

No. Keep guessing.

 

[aleCcowaN]

I'm not sure what kind of a point you were trying to make.

If I had to spell it out (I shouldn't): I was supporting your post by "doubling the bet" and by saying a ridiculous remark some would wrongly call satire of sarcasm "a gynaecologist called Clinton a c*** and he must be right because of his professional background" telling about the obvious ill-intention of the spurious diagnosis. It was an informal reductio ad absurdum followed by the sarcastic remark of nobody needing a professional opinion to characterize Trump as a dick.

As for me possibly being a Trump supporter <...aleC laughs out loud during several minutes and tries to collect himself...> well, what can I say. I think Trump is the president the USA deserves departing from the campaign, the media and what every citizen who is member of these forum are saying and doing. Another usually astray member who may reply to this in a few days thinks that my previous assertion comes from a wish to see the USA on their knees <... aleC laughs even more and have to become composed because after 25 years of heavy smoking he can't physically finance so many laughs...>. If something I'm trying to do is to trigger some reflection and induce people to leave for an instant their cultural corsets and take a look to things in a different way.

It is an utter shame that millions and millions should decide whether Clinton or Trump, and nobody else, is gonna be, for four years, the slightely-less-than-a-monarch of the self advertised as "the best country in the world". Patriotism shouldn't hide the essential ridicule in that.

About Trump believing in global warming: he does know it is happening, and he has conveniently inform that. He is saying the contrary as part of his political persona, so I'll extend what I told Varwoche to anyone whose foot fits the same shoe: the actors don't believe what their characters say; the screen or play-writers don't believe what they force their characters to say. Donald Trump, the would-be president doesn't believe what Donald Trump the candidate say in rallies, twitter and media. "I'll always tell you the truth", he doesn't believe that either. Is it so difficult to understand?

 

[The Atheist]

Donald Trump, the would-be president doesn't believe what Donald Trump the candidate say in rallies, twitter and media. "I'll always tell you the truth", he doesn't believe that either. Is it so difficult to understand?

Heck, I understood it the first time.

That paragraph I quoted is exactly what Michael Moore said a couple of days ago, and on the evidence of actions, you might both be right.

 

[grunion]

With the huge distraction that is Bannon and the resignation of Manafort, the biggest change to the team has been flying relatively under the radar - that is of Fox News Letch-In-Chief Roger Ailes now on the "advisory team." Regardless of Trump's affinity for teleprompters, the TV rollout of the New Trump has begun in earnest. A lot more people watch commercials than watch the news footage of Trump being a buffoon or turn out at rallies.

 

[aleCcowaN]

Heck, I understood it the first time.

That paragraph I quoted is exactly what Michael Moore said a couple of days ago, and on the evidence of actions, you might both be right.

Wow! I said the same that lovely pain in the arse lefty did? Great!

I watched an interview to Penn Jillette last night. He competed in Celebrity Apprentice and has first hand experience dealing with Trump (He was the first to say Trump's hair looks like cotton candy) He's going to vote for Johnson. His reflections were that Obama is intellectually, let's say, a 10, as Bill Clinton and Bush Senior were, but he sees Hillary like an 8 and Trump like a 6. The figures are an approximation, as he told "I see him being here" and used his hand to demonstrate the notion of a level.

 

[phiwum]

In one of the Hillary threads the mental and physical unfitness diagnosis is being discussed. Some key points to take away w.r.t. that:

• The doctor who made the diagnosis has not examined Hillary in person just looked at a handful of pictures and video clips
• The doctor who made the diagnosis doesn't specialise in any of the fields required to make the diagnosis that she made
• The doctor who made the diagnosis is a director of a poorly regarded (within the medical community) institution which is in effect a far-right lobbying organisation
• The doctor who made the diagnosis holds some highly dubious, well discredited, medical beliefs which - though consistent with aspects of right wing dogma - do not stand up to medical scrutiny

In short, the diagnosis is shaky at best.

Absolutely agree that the diagnosis is "shaky at best".

I imagine that you would say the same regarding Trump's alleged personality disorder.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Diagnosing a person using the media is very shaky at best. However, Trump does come across as a very disturbed individual.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Absolutely agree that the diagnosis is "shaky at best".

I imagine that you would say the same regarding Trump's alleged personality disorder.

God damn you're fixated on this. It's actually quite weird...

Here's the difference: no one claiming Trump has a personality disorder is claiming to be doing so in a professional capacity, whereas, I believe, the doctor who made the claims about Clinton apparently did.

But damn if it isn't painfully obvious that Trump suffers some level of narcissistic personality disorder. It's almost textbook.

 

[Foolmewunz]

God damn you're fixated on this. It's actually quite weird...

Here's the difference: no one claiming Trump has a personality disorder is claiming to be doing so in a professional capacity, whereas, I believe, the doctor who made the claims about Clinton apparently did.

But damn if it isn't painfully obvious that Trump suffers some level of narcissistic personality disorder. It's almost textbook.

There's a yuger difference.... you cannot diagnose the disorders being credited to Hillary by looking at video of her behavior. You can actually diagnose a personality disorder by viewing the subject's behavior. It's defined by behavior, essentially.

 

[PartSkeptic]

(snip)

But damn if it isn't painfully obvious that Trump suffers some level of narcissistic personality disorder. It's almost textbook.

It is very obvious to me that Trump is a very confident business person who has leadership qualities.
That scares the elite because he is unlikely to be "controllable" or "bought".
Hillary is ideally suited in those two regards.

Here is a test of bias (inspired by a comments section on some site or other).
A. You are in an elevator with Trump, Hitler and Stalin. You have a gun with two bullets. What would you do?
B. You are in an elevator with Hillary, Hitler and Stalin. You have a gun with two bullets. What would you do?

There is a further upcoming test on which of the answers you find humorous.

Note: I am not advocating violence. This is humor.
There are plenty of "triggers" for nuts out there. Or are there nuts in this forum?