• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

President Trump: Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.

Why should it make any more difference than all the things that have been said about Trump by all the Republicans who have previously blasted him, then cravenly licked his boots on issue after issue?

I do believe Matttis has integrity - Trump let one slip there, but he won't care about some think tank conversation from last year. It will take something more here-and-now, that Mattis has direct authority over and refuses to do, to get Trump's attention.

I think the torture issue may yet prove to be it; the Thumbsucker-in-Chief says for now he'll go with what Mattis says, but like a spoiled, bored five-year-old who's run out of butterflies from which to pull off the wings, Trump may very well come back to it, and I could see Mattis resigning.
 
Last edited:
No, the fact she won by almost 3 million votes belies your assessment her campaign was weak.

You just bought the lies and you are still buying them.

I think it's fair to say one measure of a strength of a campaign would be the way it allocated resources. In that respect, Hillary's campaign showed weakness. Especially since she had more resources to allocate.
 
Last edited:
I really think the next 4 years are going good to be unsufferable with this raving lunatic in the White House. Doesn't he know how to shut up? I hardly agreed with anything the Bush,'s or Reagan proposed but I never thought they were insane. Trump is nuttier than my bowel movement after an Almond Roca. Every day he says something that is totally false or he proposes something that is totally illegal. For example, he just said that a priority is to be give to Christian refugees. Did Trump forget he just took an oath to preserve, protect and defend the US Constitution?

Apparently, he became bored before he could read the damn First Amendment. (There is absolutely no hope he will protect our laws when he never has read any of them.)

BTW, for those of you supporting this nut, the First Amendment prohibits making any laws or regulations based on religion. It is patently illegal.
 
Just so I know the score, are you planning on sitting up there on your high horse, sneering down your nose, and saying "I told you so" for the next four years?

I'm not Skeptic Ginger but I'll note that I'm giving serious consideration to exactly that. Should be fun.
 
The biggest mistake you are making is assuming anyone who wasn't in Hillary's camp bought into a false narrative.
I noted that's what people who were against Clinton would say and believe. I think I posted that.

The problem I have is, I've been involved in politics for more than a few decades. I know about Clinton's flaws and the false charges made against her. So when people say things like how flawed Clinton was as a candidate or that they believe she is corrupt or whatever, for the vast majority of the accusations the evidence supports the contrary.

Like I said, no sense debating this at this point. Of course when one says to another they believe a false narrative, they are not going to believe that person. I wouldn't believe you if you said I believed a false narrative with the exception, if you provided supporting evidence I might.


As for Trump, I don't believe he is mentally ill or stupid. I would describe him as narcissistic, certainly uninformed when it comes to government, and untrustworthy.
As a person in the medical profession, I know the difference between a narcissistic personality and a pathologic narcissistic personality disorder. And there is a difference.

Trump's obsession with the size of his inaugural crowd and his loss of the popular vote by almost 3 million people is not just a personality trait. If you are not yet convinced, keep watching.
 
I'm not asserting it, I'm saying it could have had an effect. You are admitting as much when you say it was used as a sound bite to elicit faux outrage, that's an effect. I don't think there is any way to prove that this comment made the difference in the election. What I do know is that Hillary said that this comment was a mistake, she wasn't wrong.

Like I said, people are saying and you can't prove it isn't true. :rolleyes:

The idea is to start with evidence that leads to an hypothesis not start with an hypothesis out of the blue because it could be true.
 
The Democrats have had a Blue Collar problem for along time; this is not the first time it has bit them in the butt.
Problem is that Trump's lifeline is fake.
Real problem is no politicans to tell the Blue Collars workers the Truth:The manfacutirng jobs are gone due much more to automation then going overseas;and they are not coming back,and then to offer them a REAL lifeline in the form of programs to retrain them for other jobs.

Exactly so.
 
From my POV, those people either had no clue just how mentally disturbed Trump actually was (which is why I'm asking people if they still hold that belief), or, they bought a completely false narrative about Clinton, or both.

I agree with this.
 
I think it's fair to say one measure of a strength of a campaign would be the way it allocated resources. In that respect, Hillary's campaign showed weakness. Especially since she had more resources to allocate.
This is more of the anti-Clinton narrative. Somehow she failed the blue collar worker, the rust belt, the real America, whatever. Michael Moore claims she didn't come to Michigan. Didn't Clinton make several visits to Flint?

In hindsight one can always say a campaign was weak in the states that ended up counting.

Clinton lost by a small margin in three states while winning a large margin in the popular vote altogether.

Clinton believes the Comey letter was the critical factor. I also believe failure to counter Comey's letter with the proper amount of outrage was the critical factor. It all comes down to marketing messages/narratives and the Democrats have yet to hire the best marketers for their POTUS campaigns while the Republicans have been spectacular at it since Reagan's Morning in America.

Obama vs McCain and Romney were the exceptions. I had so hoped Clinton learned from Obama but it would appear she hadn't.
 
...I hardly agreed with anything the Bush,'s or Reagan proposed but I never thought they were insane...

I know exactly what you mean. In fact I'd take it a step further. I'm a registered Democrat but there were things about Reagan I liked. And I thought the first Bush's handling of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait was masterful. Even George W., I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on the WMD until it became obvious it was manufactured. There were other times I liked W though. He could be pretty likeable at times,

But Trump is a nightmare. Literally. I still have a sense of disbelief that this is really happening. It's like a bad movie that I REALLY want to turn off. :(
 
I know exactly what you mean. In fact I'd take it a step further. I'm a registered Democrat but there were things about Reagan I liked. And I thought the first Bush's handling of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait was masterful. Even George W., I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt on the WMD until it became obvious it was manufactured. There were other times I liked W though. He could be pretty likeable at times,

But Trump is a nightmare. Literally. I still have a sense of disbelief that this is really happening. It's like a bad movie that I REALLY want to turn off. :(

I keep holding on to some kind of optimism that he won't be the train wreck I've been afraid of. He is so unbelievably arrogant and delusional it's hard to believe this moron is actually President. I keep hoping that there is a method to his madness which might result in some good policies. But that hope is dwindling because I really think this guy is seriously disturbed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom