Passing Peak Trump? - Page 8

jhunter1163 · 3rd August 2016, 04:39 PM

Originally Posted by Armitage72

He also threw a group of AARP members out of his recent rally because they were conducting a silent protest. A Republican candidate who sufficiently alienates senior citizens is all but dead in the water.

Any candidate who alienates the AARP does so at his peril. AARP is, by far, the largest advocacy group in the country (23 million members; half again as big as the NRA). And they vote.

Ladewig · 3rd August 2016, 04:39 PM

Originally Posted by Distracted1

And for well over a year Trumps' fortunes have been on the rise.
Why would he have changed a thing over the last year as he won primaries, and climbed in the polls?
Now his campaign is faced with a downturn, is it entirely unreasonable to expect that the campaign was waiting to get negative results before altering strategy

I suppose that is possible.
However, I put no stock in it. If Trump has more than one style and he hasn't started using the new style yet, I am doubtful he ever will. No, the way I look at the body of evidence, Trump cannot pivot. I will be amazed to the point of speechlessness if Trump displays a new style, approach, or message by the end of August.

But, different viewpoints of the same events are what keeps this sub-forum humming.

acbytesla · 3rd August 2016, 05:13 PM

Originally Posted by Stacko

They're taking advantage of his need to hit back with that ad as it also features his comments on Megyn Kelly from the debates. Guess what he'd been re-litigating at every rally? Those incidents which puts them back in the news. It interesting that he insists on helping them get their message out. Wait to the ads featuring his attacks on the Khans start airing.

How the hell did this guy make so much money? Who in their right minds think any of this is smart.

The guy has diarrhea of the mouth and absolutely doesn't understand the effectiveness of good negative ads. He is giving the Clinton campaign a gold mine of material to work with.

I have always felt that Hillary would win but it would be a horse race. Trump has to find a way to get with 5 points of Hillary within 14 days or its over and it's going the other way. The press stories right now are all about disarray in the party and with his campaign, none of which helps.

Trump no longer can afford to dodge the debates. He needs something in his favor or else it's just running out the clock. Hillary would just say "fine, if Trump is such a coward, cancel them. I have better things to do with with my time than debating a loon."

Foolmewunz · 3rd August 2016, 07:50 PM

Originally Posted by Stacko

They're taking advantage of his need to hit back with that ad as it also features his comments on Megyn Kelly from the debates. Guess what he'd been re-litigating at every rally? Those incidents which puts them back in the news. It interesting that he insists on helping them get their message out. Wait to the ads featuring his attacks on the Khans start airing.

A reporter commented just Monday that in their recent "one-on-one" interview, Trump shushed him three different times so he could catch something on TV news. He's obsessed with the coverage he gets and has to strike back. If he doesn't hit Facebook or Twitter, he works it into his routine.

He did the re-cap again in Orlando yesterday, bringing up the Kelly fiasco, the dancing muslims, and the follow up to that, the reporter he mocked. Fox, even, reporting on this, asked the rhetorical question, "Do you really have to give them new material every day?" When you see O'Reilly, Kelly, et al looking bemused and shrugging, you've got a problem.

My question is which Fox anchor/star is going to be the first to actually disown Trump on the air. I'd think that O'Reilly, whose show has turned into a cottage industry of Bill O'Reilly, Inc., could take his show to any network willing to give him the time and I'd bet that MSNBC or CNN would give him a slot. I could also see Megyn Kelly becoming a big bucks host for one of the broadcast networks' morning shows. Her street cred with moderate viewers has improved immensely since the Trump Wars.

Whomever.... I think it likely that one or the other makes headlines by actually dumping Trump on air, or taking a new job because they disagree with the network's blind vision. I can't imagine Hannity or Greta doing so. Hannity because he's too busy holding up Trump photos with one hand, and Greta because I don't think she has the following to take her act on the road.

acbytesla · 3rd August 2016, 08:17 PM

Originally Posted by Foolmewunz

A reporter commented just Monday that in their recent "one-on-one" interview, Trump shushed him three different times so he could catch something on TV news. He's obsessed with the coverage he gets and has to strike back. If he doesn't hit Facebook or Twitter, he works it into his routine.

This is biggest problem at the moment. Trump is reacting, instead of setting his own path. The Clinton camp is going to bait him until he can show he has the discipline not to react. What's more the Clinton camp at the moment doesn't have to. The media is doing it for them.

Not because they are taking sides but because a train wreck makes good copy.

Distracted1 · 4th August 2016, 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by Ladewig

I suppose that is possible.
However, I put no stock in it. If Trump has more than one style and he hasn't started using the new style yet, I am doubtful he ever will. No, the way I look at the body of evidence, Trump cannot pivot. I will be amazed to the point of speechlessness if Trump displays a new style, approach, or message by the end of August.

But, different viewpoints of the same events are what keeps this sub-forum humming.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016...-hours-n622216

let the Pence campaign begin?
If intervention is successful, I think we are about to get inundated with anti-Hillary messages to extents only dreamed of in Talk-radio land.

dudalb · 4th August 2016, 12:21 PM

Originally Posted by Distracted1

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016...-hours-n622216

let the Pence campaign begin?
If intervention is successful, I think we are about to get inundated with anti-Hillary messages to extents only dreamed of in Talk-radio land.

But now they are denying there was ever a Intervention planned...

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...vention-226661

Man the GOP circular firing squad just keeps getting better. It is pretty clear that Giulaini hates Gingrich's guts,and I am betting the feeling is mutual.

Jrrarglblarg · 4th August 2016, 06:37 PM

Rudi could have just said "we're not doing that" without throwing Gingrich under the bus.

We begin to see the stress: infighting, blame throwing, poor message control. The GOP has lost the plot.

Minoosh · 4th August 2016, 09:02 PM

Originally Posted by jhunter1163

Any candidate who alienates the AARP does so at his peril. AARP is, by far, the largest advocacy group in the country (23 million members; half again as big as the NRA). And they vote.

In 2013 NRA membership was given at 4.5M members. Don't know how many have joined since them, but I think AARP might have a bigger advantage than you indicate.

Jrrarglblarg · 4th August 2016, 09:28 PM

A substantial portion of NRA "members" on their rolls are honorary, like George Zimmerman, paying no dues and taking no benefit from membership.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...a2e2_blog.html

Ladewig · 4th August 2016, 11:25 PM

Originally Posted by Distracted1

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016...-hours-n622216

let the Pence campaign begin?

Fine.
Of course there is a chance that Trump will be bothered by Pence getting more screen time and more column-inches. And even if that doesn't bother Trump, he is going to negate almost everything Pence says. That is how it has worked up until now.

Quote:

If intervention is successful, I think we are about to get inundated with anti-Hillary messages to extents only dreamed of in Talk-radio land.

OK.
Interventions are successful only if the person has the desire and the power to change. I assert Trump has neither.

Trump can run all the anti-Hillary ads he wants (or more precisely, can run all the anti-Hillary ads he can afford), Clinton has a ground game and is using poll data to target voters very precisely. Trump, however, wants to run his campaign and Trump is against using data, he believes rallies are the key to victory. Also, Clinton can outspend him.

As I said, if we see a new Trump I will gladly admit to being wrong and will not whine if you say "I told you so."

Foolmewunz · 5th August 2016, 12:48 AM

Mandatory Clock Disclaimer: My morning here is your "night before". I am 11 hours ahead of Eastern Daylight Time.

This morning, your Thursday night, the lead story on Megyn Kelly's show on the All Trump Network. "Trump stays on message for one speech.... but can it continue."

The ironic thing is that Fox has been lambasting the media for all the negative coverage of Trump's repeated slip-ups, but whether they have someone on to do a segment about the economy, the money to Iran, Hillary's liberties with the interpretation of Comey's comments,.... each and every guest is asked to comment about the unfair treatment in the mainstream [read: Librul] media and each then does more time discussing the same stories than they give to whatever issue they were invited on to discuss.

They even gave time to "discrediting" the Melanija/Illegal Immigrant story, but repeated the story and all the evidence and then editorialized that it was shameless, but gave their editorializing less time than they gave the story.

Distracted1 · 5th August 2016, 03:25 AM

Originally Posted by Ladewig

Fine.
Of course there is a chance that Trump will be bothered by Pence getting more screen time and more column-inches. And even if that doesn't bother Trump, he is going to negate almost everything Pence says. That is how it has worked up until now.

OK.
Interventions are successful only if the person has the desire and the power to change. I assert Trump has neither.

Trump can run all the anti-Hillary ads he wants (or more precisely, can run all the anti-Hillary ads he can afford), Clinton has a ground game and is using poll data to target voters very precisely. Trump, however, wants to run his campaign and Trump is against using data, he believes rallies are the key to victory. Also, Clinton can outspend him.

As I said, if we see a new Trump I will gladly admit to being wrong and will not whine if you say "I told you so."

I am not suggesting we will start seeing a "new" Trump. Rather, we may start seeing/hearing much less from the old Trump. His team must surely realize that the only path left is to make this election a lot less about him- and a lot more about Hillary.

Upchurch · 5th August 2016, 03:51 AM

Originally Posted by Distracted1

His team must surely realize that the only path left is to make this election a lot less about him- and a lot more about Hillary.

His team may realize that, but what good will that do? Trump would have to not focus on himself and not respond to bait from anyone. I'd give that lower chances than his getting elected.

Ladewig · 5th August 2016, 06:55 AM

Originally Posted by Distracted1

I am not suggesting we will start seeing a "new" Trump. Rather, we may start seeing/hearing much less from the old Trump. His team must surely realize that the only path left is to make this election a lot less about him- and a lot more about Hillary.

Originally Posted by Upchurch

His team may realize that, but what good will that do? Trump would have to not focus on himself and not respond to bait from anyone. I'd give that lower chances than his getting elected.

Agreed.
Team Trump figured that out over 10 months ago. After individuals pointed it out, they either chose to leave or were asked to leave. To put it more metaphorically, all the mice might agree that putting a bell around the cat's neck would help everyone. But no mouse wants to volunteer for that job.

In short, if he irrationally and publicly attacks Republicans who have influence and who can help his campaign, imagine how irrationally he must attack campaign workers behind the scenes.

Regnad Kcin · 5th August 2016, 08:47 AM

I can't be the first to wonder if his family, advisors, Republican colleagues and the like have made an impression and what we've been seeing for awhile is the tempered, reserved, modest Trump. If so, what must he be like if fully turned loose?

acbytesla · 5th August 2016, 08:52 AM

You know things are bad ...(good?) when Republicans are making a movie about Trump called "The Sociopath"

Distracted1 · 6th August 2016, 06:32 AM

Originally Posted by Ladewig

Agreed.
Team Trump figured that out over 10 months ago. After individuals pointed it out, they either chose to leave or were asked to leave. To put it more metaphorically, all the mice might agree that putting a bell around the cat's neck would help everyone. But no mouse wants to volunteer for that job.

In short, if he irrationally and publicly attacks Republicans who have influence and who can help his campaign, imagine how irrationally he must attack campaign workers behind the scenes.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/05/politi...rse-paul-ryan/

And here comes the pivot.

A Donald Trump presidency would likely be disastrous but it is far from inconceivable at this point.

steve s · 6th August 2016, 06:44 AM

Originally Posted by acbytesla

You know things are bad ...(good?) when Republicans are making a movie about Trump called "The Sociopath"

I thought you were joking.

https://www.gofundme.com/thesociopath

acbytesla · 6th August 2016, 06:50 AM

Originally Posted by steve s

I thought you were joking.

https://www.gofundme.com/thesociopath

Funny, isn't it?

Garrison · 6th August 2016, 07:20 AM

The remarks about the Japanese 'sitting in front of their Sony TVs' if the USA was attacked suggested any intervention by his campaign was short-lived in its effect. The stupidity of the comments is epic. He doesn't understand the historic reasons for the limits on the Japanese military, or the destabilizing effects on the Asia-Pacific region if they did change their constitution.

ChristianProgressive · 6th August 2016, 09:48 PM

^Yep. But the American people after ~80 years are forgetting what happens when the Japanese rotweiller gets of it's leash.

Upchurch · 7th August 2016, 05:01 AM

Originally Posted by Distracted1

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/05/politi...rse-paul-ryan/

And here comes the pivot.

A Donald Trump presidency would likely be disastrous but it is far from inconceivable at this point.

We'll see, but it may be too little, too late, presuming the McCain and Ryan even want Trump's endorsement at this point. *shrug*

Trump winning may not be inconceivable, but it appears to be very unlikely and might require Donald Trump to not act like Donald Trump. This is Clinton's race to lose, at this point, and I'm not honestly sure what she'd have to do to look worse than Trump.

Stacko · 7th August 2016, 05:02 AM

Why's this phase so damaging? After Dems spent convention week saying bad things about Trump, Trump spent the next week demonstrating them.

Upchurch · 7th August 2016, 05:05 AM

Originally Posted by Stacko

Why's this phase so damaging? After Dems spent convention week saying bad things about Trump, Trump spent the next week demonstrating them.

Which phrase is that?

Stacko · 7th August 2016, 05:07 AM

Originally Posted by Upchurch

Which phrase is that?

Phase not phrase.

Upchurch · 7th August 2016, 05:18 AM

Originally Posted by Stacko

Phase not phrase.

Derpity derp.

Craig4 · 7th August 2016, 05:28 AM

Originally Posted by jhunter1163

Any candidate who alienates the AARP does so at his peril. AARP is, by far, the largest advocacy group in the country (23 million members; half again as big as the NRA). And they vote.

Well, that's Florida lost for him. There's 29 electoral votes worth of immigrants and old people down here.

applecorped · 2nd February 2017, 12:01 PM

Are we past Peak Trump now?

theprestige · 2nd February 2017, 12:44 PM

Oh man. This thread is a gold mine of armchair quarterbacking. My favorite so far:

Originally Posted by Ladewig

Clinton has a ground game and is using poll data to target voters very precisely. Trump, however, wants to run his campaign and Trump is against using data, he believes rallies are the key to victory. Also, Clinton can outspend him.

Although, to be fair to Ladewig:

Quote:

As I said, if we see a new Trump I will gladly admit to being wrong and will not whine if you say "I told you so."

I won't say "I told you so", because I didn't. I didn't even see the Trump win coming, until it actually happened.

I never put much weight in the "outspend" argument in political campaigns. It seems like once you have enough money to clear the barrier to entry into the campaign, diminishing returns set in very quickly. By August, it was clear that Trump was getting all the publicity and coverage he needed, at a fraction of what Hillary was spending.

What I don't think any of us knew until after the election was over, was that the Clinton team didn't have a ground game, and that their reliance on targeting models was fatally misguided.

Belz... · 2nd February 2017, 01:02 PM

Originally Posted by applecorped

Are we past Peak Trump now?

Just about.

ChristianProgressive · 5th February 2017, 05:36 PM

While I agree that Clinton's ground game (really the Neo-liberal ground game in general) had a fatal flaw (namely writing off whites, working class, and men) that had a powerful impact on the outcome, I feel constrained to point out that even with Papa Putin pulling every string he could that Clinton won the popular outright and only lost the EC by around 100,000 votes across 3-5 states. Everyone is buying into the Big Red Map and only seeing win/loss and not margin.

applecorped · 18th May 2017, 06:55 AM

Originally Posted by Argumemnon

Just about.

How about now?

Belz... · 18th May 2017, 07:33 AM

Originally Posted by applecorped

How about now?

Yes, absolutely.

a_unique_person · 18th May 2017, 08:55 AM

Originally Posted by applecorped

How about now?

I wanted to bump this thread.

Beelzebuddy · 18th May 2017, 09:21 AM

Peak Trump happened just before his first executive order was shot down.

Despite his japes and buffoonery, we had elected a clown to the highest office in the land. That first week of office brought a general indrawing of breath, as he squatted out toxic EOs like a chimp with the runs. We began to worry that maybe he was the evil kind of clown, the kind with the menacing and the homicide.

Then he started hitting himself in the face with pies.

Belz... · 18th May 2017, 09:23 AM

Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy

Then he started hitting himself in the face with pies.

Reminds me of the monks in Monty Python and the Holy Grail who hit themselves in the face with planks, but funnier.

dudalb · 18th May 2017, 10:16 AM

Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy

Peak Trump happened just before his first executive order was shot down.

Despite his japes and buffoonery, we had elected a clown to the highest office in the land. That first week of office brought a general indrawing of breath, as he squatted out toxic EOs like a chimp with the runs. We began to worry that maybe he was the evil kind of clown, the kind with the menacing and the homicide.

Then he started hitting himself in the face with pies.

Yeah, he has gone from the Joker to Crusty the Clown.

applecorped · 4th December 2017, 11:27 AM

Originally Posted by hgc

First of all, yes this topic needs its own thread. This is about the long-term trend in Donald Trump's position in this race relative to the competition for the GOP nomination.

The thread title is inspired by an event that Trump did yesterday in South Carolina where the room was not even half filled and the cable news networks gave scant live coverage. The purpose of this thread is to track Trump's progress in poll standings and speculate on his evolving chances of being the nominee.

I'm not saying that Trump is definitely not going to win this nomination. But if he's not going to win it, then we will see a slide somewhere, sometime. Has that slide started now? Trump is a creature of the obsessive coverage by the political and entertainment media, which is a milieu where he generally is the most capable exploiter of the features of the landscape. But when the media coverage starts to slacken, if for no other reason than that the entertainment gets stale, he's probably going to suffer in his popularity.

Thoughts?

I don't think we've passed Peak Trump yet

WilliamSeger · 4th December 2017, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by applecorped

I don't think we've passed Peak Trump yet

Sure looks like he's tobogganing down the backside to me. Listen for screaming when he hits the treeline.

3rd August 2016, 04:39 PM	#281
jhunter1163 beer-swilling semiliterate Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Connecticut, or King Arthur's Court. Hard to tell sometimes. Posts: 25,317	Originally Posted by Armitage72 He also threw a group of AARP members out of his recent rally because they were conducting a silent protest. A Republican candidate who sufficiently alienates senior citizens is all but dead in the water. Any candidate who alienates the AARP does so at his peril. AARP is, by far, the largest advocacy group in the country (23 million members; half again as big as the NRA). And they vote.
	__________________ A møøse ønce bit my sister

3rd August 2016, 04:39 PM	#282
Ladewig I lost an avatar bet. Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 28,095	Originally Posted by Distracted1 And for well over a year Trumps' fortunes have been on the rise. Why would he have changed a thing over the last year as he won primaries, and climbed in the polls? Now his campaign is faced with a downturn, is it entirely unreasonable to expect that the campaign was waiting to get negative results before altering strategy I suppose that is possible. However, I put no stock in it. If Trump has more than one style and he hasn't started using the new style yet, I am doubtful he ever will. No, the way I look at the body of evidence, Trump cannot pivot. I will be amazed to the point of speechlessness if Trump displays a new style, approach, or message by the end of August. But, different viewpoints of the same events are what keeps this sub-forum humming.
	__________________ I lost an avatar bet to Doghouse Reilly.

3rd August 2016, 05:13 PM	#283
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 28,591	Originally Posted by Stacko They're taking advantage of his need to hit back with that ad as it also features his comments on Megyn Kelly from the debates. Guess what he'd been re-litigating at every rally? Those incidents which puts them back in the news. It interesting that he insists on helping them get their message out. Wait to the ads featuring his attacks on the Khans start airing. How the hell did this guy make so much money? Who in their right minds think any of this is smart. The guy has diarrhea of the mouth and absolutely doesn't understand the effectiveness of good negative ads. He is giving the Clinton campaign a gold mine of material to work with. I have always felt that Hillary would win but it would be a horse race. Trump has to find a way to get with 5 points of Hillary within 14 days or its over and it's going the other way. The press stories right now are all about disarray in the party and with his campaign, none of which helps. Trump no longer can afford to dodge the debates. He needs something in his favor or else it's just running out the clock. Hillary would just say "fine, if Trump is such a coward, cancel them. I have better things to do with with my time than debating a loon."
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

3rd August 2016, 07:50 PM	#284
Foolmewunz Grammar Resistance Leader TLA Dictator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Pattaya, Thailand Posts: 41,468	Originally Posted by Stacko They're taking advantage of his need to hit back with that ad as it also features his comments on Megyn Kelly from the debates. Guess what he'd been re-litigating at every rally? Those incidents which puts them back in the news. It interesting that he insists on helping them get their message out. Wait to the ads featuring his attacks on the Khans start airing. A reporter commented just Monday that in their recent "one-on-one" interview, Trump shushed him three different times so he could catch something on TV news. He's obsessed with the coverage he gets and has to strike back. If he doesn't hit Facebook or Twitter, he works it into his routine. He did the re-cap again in Orlando yesterday, bringing up the Kelly fiasco, the dancing muslims, and the follow up to that, the reporter he mocked. Fox, even, reporting on this, asked the rhetorical question, "Do you really have to give them new material every day?" When you see O'Reilly, Kelly, et al looking bemused and shrugging, you've got a problem. My question is which Fox anchor/star is going to be the first to actually disown Trump on the air. I'd think that O'Reilly, whose show has turned into a cottage industry of Bill O'Reilly, Inc., could take his show to any network willing to give him the time and I'd bet that MSNBC or CNN would give him a slot. I could also see Megyn Kelly becoming a big bucks host for one of the broadcast networks' morning shows. Her street cred with moderate viewers has improved immensely since the Trump Wars. Whomever.... I think it likely that one or the other makes headlines by actually dumping Trump on air, or taking a new job because they disagree with the network's blind vision. I can't imagine Hannity or Greta doing so. Hannity because he's too busy holding up Trump photos with one hand, and Greta because I don't think she has the following to take her act on the road.
	__________________ Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.

3rd August 2016, 08:17 PM	#285
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 28,591	Originally Posted by Foolmewunz A reporter commented just Monday that in their recent "one-on-one" interview, Trump shushed him three different times so he could catch something on TV news. He's obsessed with the coverage he gets and has to strike back. If he doesn't hit Facebook or Twitter, he works it into his routine. This is biggest problem at the moment. Trump is reacting, instead of setting his own path. The Clinton camp is going to bait him until he can show he has the discipline not to react. What's more the Clinton camp at the moment doesn't have to. The media is doing it for them. Not because they are taking sides but because a train wreck makes good copy.
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

4th August 2016, 12:17 PM	#286
Distracted1 Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 5,621	Originally Posted by Ladewig I suppose that is possible. However, I put no stock in it. If Trump has more than one style and he hasn't started using the new style yet, I am doubtful he ever will. No, the way I look at the body of evidence, Trump cannot pivot. I will be amazed to the point of speechlessness if Trump displays a new style, approach, or message by the end of August. But, different viewpoints of the same events are what keeps this sub-forum humming. http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016...-hours-n622216 let the Pence campaign begin? If intervention is successful, I think we are about to get inundated with anti-Hillary messages to extents only dreamed of in Talk-radio land.
	__________________ The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.

4th August 2016, 12:21 PM	#287
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 50,545	Originally Posted by Distracted1 http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016...-hours-n622216 let the Pence campaign begin? If intervention is successful, I think we are about to get inundated with anti-Hillary messages to extents only dreamed of in Talk-radio land. But now they are denying there was ever a Intervention planned... http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...vention-226661 Man the GOP circular firing squad just keeps getting better. It is pretty clear that Giulaini hates Gingrich's guts,and I am betting the feeling is mutual.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein. Last edited by dudalb; 4th August 2016 at 12:22 PM.

4th August 2016, 06:37 PM	#288
Jrrarglblarg Guest Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12,673	Rudi could have just said "we're not doing that" without throwing Gingrich under the bus. We begin to see the stress: infighting, blame throwing, poor message control. The GOP has lost the plot.
Jrrarglblarg Guest Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12,673

4th August 2016, 09:02 PM	#289
Minoosh Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 12,330	Originally Posted by jhunter1163 Any candidate who alienates the AARP does so at his peril. AARP is, by far, the largest advocacy group in the country (23 million members; half again as big as the NRA). And they vote. In 2013 NRA membership was given at 4.5M members. Don't know how many have joined since them, but I think AARP might have a bigger advantage than you indicate.

4th August 2016, 09:28 PM	#290
Jrrarglblarg Guest Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12,673	A substantial portion of NRA "members" on their rolls are honorary, like George Zimmerman, paying no dues and taking no benefit from membership. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...a2e2_blog.html
Jrrarglblarg Guest Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12,673

4th August 2016, 11:25 PM	#291
Ladewig I lost an avatar bet. Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 28,095	Originally Posted by Distracted1 http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016...-hours-n622216 let the Pence campaign begin? Fine. Of course there is a chance that Trump will be bothered by Pence getting more screen time and more column-inches. And even if that doesn't bother Trump, he is going to negate almost everything Pence says. That is how it has worked up until now. Quote: If intervention is successful, I think we are about to get inundated with anti-Hillary messages to extents only dreamed of in Talk-radio land. OK. Interventions are successful only if the person has the desire and the power to change. I assert Trump has neither. Trump can run all the anti-Hillary ads he wants (or more precisely, can run all the anti-Hillary ads he can afford), Clinton has a ground game and is using poll data to target voters very precisely. Trump, however, wants to run his campaign and Trump is against using data, he believes rallies are the key to victory. Also, Clinton can outspend him. As I said, if we see a new Trump I will gladly admit to being wrong and will not whine if you say "I told you so."
	__________________ I lost an avatar bet to Doghouse Reilly.

5th August 2016, 12:48 AM	#292
Foolmewunz Grammar Resistance Leader TLA Dictator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Pattaya, Thailand Posts: 41,468	Mandatory Clock Disclaimer: My morning here is your "night before". I am 11 hours ahead of Eastern Daylight Time. This morning, your Thursday night, the lead story on Megyn Kelly's show on the All Trump Network. "Trump stays on message for one speech.... but can it continue." The ironic thing is that Fox has been lambasting the media for all the negative coverage of Trump's repeated slip-ups, but whether they have someone on to do a segment about the economy, the money to Iran, Hillary's liberties with the interpretation of Comey's comments,.... each and every guest is asked to comment about the unfair treatment in the mainstream [read: Librul] media and each then does more time discussing the same stories than they give to whatever issue they were invited on to discuss. They even gave time to "discrediting" the Melanija/Illegal Immigrant story, but repeated the story and all the evidence and then editorialized that it was shameless, but gave their editorializing less time than they gave the story.
	__________________ Ha! Foolmewunz has just been added to the list of people who aren't complete idiots. Hokulele It's not that liberals have become less tolerant. It's that conservatives have become more intolerable.

5th August 2016, 03:25 AM	#293
Distracted1 Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 5,621	Originally Posted by Ladewig Fine. Of course there is a chance that Trump will be bothered by Pence getting more screen time and more column-inches. And even if that doesn't bother Trump, he is going to negate almost everything Pence says. That is how it has worked up until now. OK. Interventions are successful only if the person has the desire and the power to change. I assert Trump has neither. Trump can run all the anti-Hillary ads he wants (or more precisely, can run all the anti-Hillary ads he can afford), Clinton has a ground game and is using poll data to target voters very precisely. Trump, however, wants to run his campaign and Trump is against using data, he believes rallies are the key to victory. Also, Clinton can outspend him. As I said, if we see a new Trump I will gladly admit to being wrong and will not whine if you say "I told you so." I am not suggesting we will start seeing a "new" Trump. Rather, we may start seeing/hearing much less from the old Trump. His team must surely realize that the only path left is to make this election a lot less about him- and a lot more about Hillary.
	__________________ The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.

5th August 2016, 03:51 AM	#294
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 32,467	Originally Posted by Distracted1 His team must surely realize that the only path left is to make this election a lot less about him- and a lot more about Hillary. His team may realize that, but what good will that do? Trump would have to not focus on himself and not respond to bait from anyone. I'd give that lower chances than his getting elected.
	__________________ "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.

5th August 2016, 06:55 AM	#295
Ladewig I lost an avatar bet. Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 28,095	Originally Posted by Distracted1 I am not suggesting we will start seeing a "new" Trump. Rather, we may start seeing/hearing much less from the old Trump. His team must surely realize that the only path left is to make this election a lot less about him- and a lot more about Hillary. Originally Posted by Upchurch His team may realize that, but what good will that do? Trump would have to not focus on himself and not respond to bait from anyone. I'd give that lower chances than his getting elected. Agreed. Team Trump figured that out over 10 months ago. After individuals pointed it out, they either chose to leave or were asked to leave. To put it more metaphorically, all the mice might agree that putting a bell around the cat's neck would help everyone. But no mouse wants to volunteer for that job. In short, if he irrationally and publicly attacks Republicans who have influence and who can help his campaign, imagine how irrationally he must attack campaign workers behind the scenes.
	__________________ I lost an avatar bet to Doghouse Reilly.

5th August 2016, 08:47 AM	#296
Regnad Kcin Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: New York Posts: 10,268	I can't be the first to wonder if his family, advisors, Republican colleagues and the like have made an impression and what we've been seeing for awhile is the tempered, reserved, modest Trump. If so, what must he be like if fully turned loose?
	__________________ My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

5th August 2016, 08:52 AM	#297
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 28,591	You know things are bad ...(good?) when Republicans are making a movie about Trump called "The Sociopath"
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

6th August 2016, 06:32 AM	#298
Distracted1 Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 5,621	Originally Posted by Ladewig Agreed. Team Trump figured that out over 10 months ago. After individuals pointed it out, they either chose to leave or were asked to leave. To put it more metaphorically, all the mice might agree that putting a bell around the cat's neck would help everyone. But no mouse wants to volunteer for that job. In short, if he irrationally and publicly attacks Republicans who have influence and who can help his campaign, imagine how irrationally he must attack campaign workers behind the scenes. http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/05/politi...rse-paul-ryan/ And here comes the pivot. A Donald Trump presidency would likely be disastrous but it is far from inconceivable at this point.
	__________________ The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.

6th August 2016, 06:44 AM	#299
steve s Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 5,865	Originally Posted by acbytesla You know things are bad ...(good?) when Republicans are making a movie about Trump called "The Sociopath" I thought you were joking. https://www.gofundme.com/thesociopath
steve s Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 5,865	__________________ "Nature abhors a moron." -- H. L. Mencken

6th August 2016, 06:50 AM	#300
acbytesla Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 28,591	Originally Posted by steve s I thought you were joking. https://www.gofundme.com/thesociopath Funny, isn't it?
	__________________ Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me. .

6th August 2016, 07:20 AM	#301
Garrison Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: UK Posts: 5,567	The remarks about the Japanese 'sitting in front of their Sony TVs' if the USA was attacked suggested any intervention by his campaign was short-lived in its effect. The stupidity of the comments is epic. He doesn't understand the historic reasons for the limits on the Japanese military, or the destabilizing effects on the Asia-Pacific region if they did change their constitution.
	__________________ So I've started a blog about my writing. Check it out at: http://fourth-planet-problem.blogspot.com/ And my first book is on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077W322FX

6th August 2016, 09:48 PM	#302
ChristianProgressive Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 2,846	^Yep. But the American people after ~80 years are forgetting what happens when the Japanese rotweiller gets of it's leash.

7th August 2016, 05:01 AM	#303
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 32,467	Originally Posted by Distracted1 http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/05/politi...rse-paul-ryan/ And here comes the pivot. A Donald Trump presidency would likely be disastrous but it is far from inconceivable at this point. We'll see, but it may be too little, too late, presuming the McCain and Ryan even want Trump's endorsement at this point. shrug Trump winning may not be inconceivable, but it appears to be very unlikely and might require Donald Trump to not act like Donald Trump. This is Clinton's race to lose, at this point, and I'm not honestly sure what she'd have to do to look worse than Trump.
	__________________ "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.

7th August 2016, 05:02 AM	#304
Stacko Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 10,837	Why's this phase so damaging? After Dems spent convention week saying bad things about Trump, Trump spent the next week demonstrating them.

7th August 2016, 05:05 AM	#305
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 32,467	Originally Posted by Stacko Why's this phase so damaging? After Dems spent convention week saying bad things about Trump, Trump spent the next week demonstrating them. Which phrase is that?
	__________________ "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.

7th August 2016, 05:07 AM	#306
Stacko Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 10,837	Originally Posted by Upchurch Which phrase is that? Phase not phrase.

7th August 2016, 05:18 AM	#307
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 32,467	Originally Posted by Stacko Phase not phrase. Derpity derp.
	__________________ "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.

7th August 2016, 05:28 AM	#308
Craig4 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: I live in a swamp Posts: 22,846	Originally Posted by jhunter1163 Any candidate who alienates the AARP does so at his peril. AARP is, by far, the largest advocacy group in the country (23 million members; half again as big as the NRA). And they vote. Well, that's Florida lost for him. There's 29 electoral votes worth of immigrants and old people down here.

2nd February 2017, 12:01 PM	#309
applecorped Banned Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 20,145	Are we past Peak Trump now?
applecorped Banned Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 20,145

2nd February 2017, 12:44 PM	#310
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 50,623	Oh man. This thread is a gold mine of armchair quarterbacking. My favorite so far: Originally Posted by Ladewig Clinton has a ground game and is using poll data to target voters very precisely. Trump, however, wants to run his campaign and Trump is against using data, he believes rallies are the key to victory. Also, Clinton can outspend him. Although, to be fair to Ladewig: Quote: As I said, if we see a new Trump I will gladly admit to being wrong and will not whine if you say "I told you so." I won't say "I told you so", because I didn't. I didn't even see the Trump win coming, until it actually happened. I never put much weight in the "outspend" argument in political campaigns. It seems like once you have enough money to clear the barrier to entry into the campaign, diminishing returns set in very quickly. By August, it was clear that Trump was getting all the publicity and coverage he needed, at a fraction of what Hillary was spending. What I don't think any of us knew until after the election was over, was that the Clinton team didn't have a ground game, and that their reliance on targeting models was fatally misguided.

2nd February 2017, 01:02 PM	#311
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In a post-fact world Posts: 92,076	Originally Posted by applecorped Are we past Peak Trump now? Just about.
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness "My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward

5th February 2017, 05:36 PM	#312
ChristianProgressive Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 2,846	While I agree that Clinton's ground game (really the Neo-liberal ground game in general) had a fatal flaw (namely writing off whites, working class, and men) that had a powerful impact on the outcome, I feel constrained to point out that even with Papa Putin pulling every string he could that Clinton won the popular outright and only lost the EC by around 100,000 votes across 3-5 states. Everyone is buying into the Big Red Map and only seeing win/loss and not margin.

18th May 2017, 06:55 AM	#313
applecorped Banned Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 20,145	Originally Posted by Argumemnon Just about. How about now?
applecorped Banned Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 20,145

18th May 2017, 07:33 AM	#314
Belz... Fiend God Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: In a post-fact world Posts: 92,076	Originally Posted by applecorped How about now? Yes, absolutely.
	__________________ Master of the Shining Darkness "My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward

18th May 2017, 08:55 AM	#315
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open. Posts: 43,081	Originally Posted by applecorped How about now? I wanted to bump this thread.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. “Perception is real, but the truth is not.” - Imelda Marcos