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

Trump runs for POTUS / Trumped Up! Part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tony Stark said:
Donald is going to get destroyed in the debates so badly. I cannot wait.
Click to expand...

That's what they said about Al Gore vs. W. Bush *sigh*

And Gore did soundly beat him, but it's all about managing expectations and spin. I recall reading an article written by a champion debater who rated one of Trump's primary performances an F. The crowd certainly didn't see it that way. He just needs zingers. I recall one from Bush after Gore rattled off some statistics, "Not only did he invent the Internet, but also the calculator."

Probably the worst thing they can is make him study. Fill his head with facts and ideas, he's more liable to have a Rick Perry moment. In the run up, the Clinton team may implant the idea in the press that Trump fails to get into specifics, and that'll be what people watch for. Trump's followers seem to think Hillary is going to "short-circuit" because of her allegedly dire health (exactly the wrong expectation to set, but those people are beyond reason).
 
Cain said:
That's what they said about Al Gore vs. W. Bush *sigh*

And Gore did soundly beat him, but it's all about managing expectations and spin. I recall reading an article written by a champion debater who rated one of Trump's primary performances an F. The crowd certainly didn't see it that way. He just needs zingers. I recall one from Bush after Gore rattled off some statistics, "Not only did he invent the Internet, but also the calculator."

Probably the worst thing they can is make him study. Fill his head with facts and ideas, he's more liable to have a Rick Perry moment. In the run up, the Clinton team may implant the idea in the press that Trump fails to get into specifics, and that'll be what people watch for. Trump's followers seem to think Hillary is going to "short-circuit" because of her allegedly dire health (exactly the wrong expectation to set, but those people are beyond reason).
Click to expand...


This won't be a repeat of that. I guarantee that Clinton will be prepared for the craziness that is Trump.

When Trump tries to devolve this into zingers, I bet Hillary will have a few of her own. And I don't think she's going to let Trump just call her names, my bet is she is going to bait him and bait him and bait him until Trump says something moronically stupid. I think what makes this very different from AL Gore, George W Bush is that neither of these 2 people are either one of those people.

Of course, none of us know for sure how the public will react, but my guess is that she will increase her lead or stay the same in the polls after the debate. My bet is that the debates will swing at least 2 States Clinton's way.
 
acbytesla said:
This won't be a repeat of that. I guarantee that Clinton will be prepared for the craziness that is Trump.

When Trump tries to devolve this into zingers, I bet Hillary will have a few of her own. And I don't think she's going to let Trump just call her names, my bet is she is going to bait him and bait him and bait him until Trump says something moronically stupid. I think what makes this very different from AL Gore, George W Bush is that neither of these 2 people are either one of those people.

Of course, none of us know for sure how the public will react, but my guess is that she will increase her lead or stay the same in the polls after the debate. My bet is that the debates will swing at least 2 States Clinton's way.
Click to expand...

I agree with most of this, especially the baiting part. It's been proven to work time and time again. He's shown he has no self control at all.
 
acbytesla said:
This won't be a repeat of that. I guarantee that Clinton will be prepared for the craziness that is Trump.

When Trump tries to devolve this into zingers, I bet Hillary will have a few of her own. And I don't think she's going to let Trump just call her names, my bet is she is going to bait him and bait him and bait him until Trump says something moronically stupid. I think what makes this very different from AL Gore, George W Bush is that neither of these 2 people are either one of those people.
Click to expand...

Yes, except people said Bush's obvious ignorance would show voters he's unqualified and they would reject him. Didn't happen. People said Trump would have a meltdown in the primary debates, and it didn't happen. Talk about Trump saying something "moronically stupid" is ridiculous. He's already been there, done that. Hugh Hewitt asked about "priority" vis-a-vis the "nuclear triad," and Trump demonstrated that he had no clue where to begin, babbling:

TRUMP: I think -- I think, for me, nuclear is just the power, the devastation is very important to me.

Now maybe that kind of nitwit response gets amplified in the general election debate. There are always "moments" that will be remembered, even if it's just checking the time, but importance is really attached to them after the election. Everyone seems to know exactly what happened in retrospect. However, I will say this notion that Trump's going to get "destroyed" is just silly. These debates are sold as prizefights, and you seem to think you'll see something akin to a knockout.

You're also setting yourself up for failure if you think there's going to be a grand baiting precisely it's because that's what people expect. The "moments" that are talked about attract attention because they're things people could never predict (e.g. Al Gore creeping up on Bush).

I expect most viewers to say Clinton turned in the better performance, and she should go on to win the general election by a healthy margin, as indicated by almost every poll. Trump making wildly stupid claims will just be the norm. He's already said plenty of things most everyone thought would doom his candidacy, from calling Mexicans rapists to saying he likes heroes who don't get caught to blood coming out of her 'whatever' to an impression of a disabled man. None of those occurred during debates. Maybe the craziest he got was when he said he had a big cock, but Rubio's the one brought up hand size (and later apologized for it).

Trump regularly sticks his foot in his mouth, and guess what, he ain't winning. He can do it again and again and again. The most exciting narrative is if Clinton gets tripped up because it could make the race interesting.
 
acbytesla said:
Not sure when it [the GOP] started to really go downhill but it's been on this path for awhile.
Click to expand...

I'd cite two events that brought its bigotry into explicit political policy. First would be Johnson's civil rights legislation (Civil Rights and Voting Rights) that drove the Dixiecrats out of the Democratic Party. Johnson himself noted that his policies probably cost the Democrats the South for a generation (what an optimist! :( ).

Next, of course, came Nixon but more importantly for this discussion, Lee Atwater and his Southern Strategy. Atwater explicitly brought southern resentments and racism into GOP election strategy in a very successful manner. He recognized Johnson's astute observation and rather than let Southern anger fade away in a few decades he fanned the flames into a raging inferno that burns to the very day.

Beyond that one can recognize explicit GOP actions that continued Atwater's ideas. Probably the most notable would be Reagan's opening of his 1980 post-convention campaign in Philadelphia, Mississippi. There is NO reason to open a campaign in this small Mississippi backwater than to highlight one pillar of his campaign, namely, state's rights. Philadelphia, of course, is where three civil rights activists were murdered for their advocacy on behalf of blacks which led to nationwide attention to the effort to eliminate Jim Crow.

Now we see this strategy come into full flower with Trump. He's different from previous prominent GOP politicians only in that he crudely and explicitly gives voice to these lingering resentments. He doesn't need buzz words and dog whistles, he just puts it out there for all to see. But, again, this is differs from past election only in its blatancy, not in its substance.

To finish this too long post, after Trump its not clear where the GOP goes. The white angry male can only carry them so far and worse, sows the seeds of its own destruction. But the tens of millions who will vote for Trump won't go back into the woodwork after the election. How that cohort is handled may well set the path for both the Democrats and Republicans for decades into the future.

Done! Whew.
 
Cain said:
Yes, except people said Bush's obvious ignorance would show voters he's unqualified and they would reject him. Didn't happen. People said Trump would have a meltdown in the primary debates, and it didn't happen. Talk about Trump saying something "moronically stupid" is ridiculous. He's already been there, done that. Hugh Hewitt asked about "priority" vis-a-vis the "nuclear triad," and Trump demonstrated that he had no clue where to begin, babbling:

TRUMP: I think -- I think, for me, nuclear is just the power, the devastation is very important to me.

Now maybe that kind of nitwit response gets amplified in the general election debate. There are always "moments" that will be remembered, even if it's just checking the time, but importance is really attached to them after the election. Everyone seems to know exactly what happened in retrospect. However, I will say this notion that Trump's going to get "destroyed" is just silly. These debates are sold as prizefights, and you seem to think you'll see something akin to a knockout.

You're also setting yourself up for failure if you think there's going to be a grand baiting precisely it's because that's what people expect. The "moments" that are talked about attract attention because they're things people could never predict (e.g. Al Gore creeping up on Bush).

I expect most viewers to say Clinton turned in the better performance, and she should go on to win the general election by a healthy margin, as indicated by almost every poll. Trump making wildly stupid claims will just be the norm. He's already said plenty of things most everyone thought would doom his candidacy, from calling Mexicans rapists to saying he likes heroes who don't get caught to blood coming out of her 'whatever' to an impression of a disabled man. None of those occurred during debates. Maybe the craziest he got was when he said he had a big cock, but Rubio's the one brought up hand size (and later apologized for it).

Trump regularly sticks his foot in his mouth, and guess what, he ain't winning. He can do it again and again and again. The most exciting narrative is if Clinton gets tripped up because it could make the race interesting.
Click to expand...

Oh dear, a Cain post that I agree with - perhaps it's time to start taking the dried frog pills.....

I agree with the main sentiments:

  • Trump can trip up a thousand times but a single Hillary mis-speak will create headlines
  • The media needs it to be a close enough race for it to be interesting (and attract viewers/readers)
  • Attempting to debate Trump is like wrestling fog, how can you debate an effective counter when he say five contradictory things in a single sentence ?
  • Trump is shameless. Where anyone else would be embarassed or defensive he ploughs on regardless
  • Expectations for Trump in the debate are so low that he cannot help but exceed them

I hope I'm wrong :(
 
Trump's numbers are bad - he's the one who needs a boost from the Debates.
All Clinton has to do is look more presidential, starting with her hair.
Seriously, appearance will be critical for her, more than for Trump.
 
Donald will do so poorly in the first debate that he might not even show for the other two, crying about how everything is so unfair and rigged against him.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Trump's numbers are bad - he's the one who needs a boost from the Debates.
All Clinton has to do is look more presidential, starting with her hair.
Seriously, appearance will be critical for her, more than for Trump.
Click to expand...
Far out man.

Hair

I agree. But it ain't half sad
 
The Don said:
Oh dear, a Cain post that I agree with - perhaps it's time to start taking the dried frog pills.....

I agree with the main sentiments:

  • Trump can trip up a thousand times but a single Hillary mis-speak will create headlines
  • The media needs it to be a close enough race for it to be interesting (and attract viewers/readers)
  • Attempting to debate Trump is like wrestling fog, how can you debate an effective counter when he say five contradictory things in a single sentence ?
  • Trump is shameless. Where anyone else would be embarassed or defensive he ploughs on regardless
  • Expectations for Trump in the debate are so low that he cannot help but exceed them

I hope I'm wrong :(
Click to expand...

I disagree with this although lots of people who have said it. I like the fog analogy. Hillary Clinton's campaign manager described arguing the issues with Trump is like wrestling Jell-O. So they decided 6 months ago NOT to DO IT.

Step back and look at the campaign. What actual issues have they been discussing? Chasing Trump is like trying to follow a fart in a windstorm. So the Clinton campaign has made this entire election a referendum on Trump's temperament. 8 out of 10 stories is about "crazy Trump".

I don't expect Hillary to debate the issues with Trump but to point out that Trump changes directions more often than a ping pong ball. Her job is to look steady and to keep baiting the hook and see just how crazy Trump can get.
 
Last edited:
Punishing chicks who have an abortion

Deporting 11 million people.

Look forward to hearing his views now
 
There's a sitcom/comedy movie meme that I would like to see someone apply.

The meme is that parties A&B will be making plans, like two parents discussing their teenagers, comedy bad guys discussing what to do with the hostages, etc.... "We should do X.... ground 'em, send 'em to camp, tie 'em up, whatever", and one of the leads/stars then says, "You know, we're right here. We can hear you."

I'd like someone to cut from Donald speaking to white audiences about black people to a living room with a black family and one of them saying, "You know, we're right here; we can HEAR you."

I'd suggest they do it from a rally site, but they were evidently only able to find sufficient dark faces to "paper-the-house" in Austin. In his subsequent speeches in Jackson, Pensacola and Iowa, they're back to that same old proud white audience. And in Jackson, that requires some organizing, lemme tell ya. The population of Jackson is almost 75% black.

?? Don't we have an African-American conservative here? Is anyone buying his overture to the mud races??
 
Trump campaign's réponse to Clinton calling him a racist is the late senator Robert Byrd. Seriously?

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/08/27/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-kkk/

I assume everyone here probably already knows, but Byrd was a KKK member back in the 1940s. He later apologized for it and called it "the greatest mistake of my life". It's very, very old news but one it seems Republicans never fail to trot out.
 
I would like Hillary's campaign to create some ads focused on Trump and his racism. Little shots of Trump saying that African Americans will vote for Trump and then show African-Americans saying "No we wont" and then little vignettes with African-Americans discussing Donald's racism. And ten finally maybe a wide shot of hundreds even thousands of people saying "No Donald, we're not with you! We're with Her"!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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