“They’ll flip their top, and they’ll flip their panties...” read the subject line of a recent news release from Emily’s List, a group that works to elect Democratic women who support abortion rights. The quote came from comments Mr. Trump made about women on “The Howard Stern Show” in the 1990s, unearthed by BuzzFeed last month.
Those types of comments, spoken by Mr. Trump over the years as he served as a tabloid regular and reality TV star, could help Mrs. Clinton excite suburban women and young women who have been ambivalent or antagonistic toward her candidacy....
But as Democrats hold their breath for the next sexist comment, they also acknowledge a problem that opposition research cannot fix: Mr. Trump and Mrs. Clinton are polar opposite politicians, and Mr. Trump’s direct and visceral style could prove difficult for Mrs. Clinton, whose inclination is detailed policy talk and 12-point plans....
It will be hard for Mrs. Clinton to focus on policy and stay above the fray as her opponent and her own operation dig in for a brutish campaign.
March 1, 2016
"While Mrs. Clinton radiates positive energy on the trail, Democratic groups are beginning to coalesce around a strategy to deliver sustained and brutal attacks on Mr. Trump."
Write Amy Chozick and Patrick Healy in a NYT piece, "Inside the Clinton Team’s Plan to Defeat Donald Trump."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
131 comments:
She "radiates positive energy"?
Since when?
She radiates little energy and little of that tiny amount can remotely be called positive.
Minor details for the marks being conned by Trump.
America. Great. Wall. Trade. China. Mexico.
"Mrs. Clinton radiates positive energy..." is a polite way of saying she is sweating vodka from her pores.
I am Laslo.
The first line of this post made me LOL.
This Amy Chozick and Patrick Healy, have they never heard "Mrs. Clinton" speak?
What's with the Mrs. Clinton. Distancing her from the disastrous SOS Clinton?
Rope a dope by the Doper herself.
She will have to do something about that harridan voice if she wants people to see her as under brutal attack by a MAN BRUTE.
Rescuing the Damsel in distress from a Dragon is so Feminist a theme that it seems like one of Bill Clinton's seductions.
"Mr. Trump and Mrs. Clinton are polar opposite politicians"
People get paid to write this stuff? How much are they paid?
I don't know whether I'm more entertained or depressed about a Clinton/Trump matchup. But while I think Clinton has an edge on Trump, they won't be able to destroy him like they think they can--and she is woefully ill-equipped to respond to his attacks. I think the margin will be as tight as the last few elections.
... and when Hillary isn't radiating positive energy, there is Chelsea speaking to 75 people.
"sustained and brutal attacks"
Hmmmm....sounds ugly.
Trump is going to turn any criticism of sexism by Democrats into a referendum on Bill Clinton's mistreatment of women and Hillary's silence (and other Democrats). Trump will be campaigning with Juanita Broderick and Kathleen Wiley.
No one is going to enjoy this general election campaign than Obama.
The shrillster has the edge on no one. I love this magical thinking wherein Trump is suddenly rendered hapless by the deftly dancing cankled one.
Why would they telegraph a punch like this and try and sway Republicans not to vote for trump?
If you want to face Trump, shouldn't you be doing the exact opposite?
I wish someone would keep track of all of this so that when the election comes, we can determine how prescient some were, and how utterly wrong others were.
As an example.
Yesterday Hugh Hewitt, on twitter and on his radio show kept saying Trumps comments on the KKK and David Duke were his 47%. He said 47% brought down Romney and that interview with Tapper will bring down Trump. Even though his callers were disagreeing he kept insinuating he knew better.
But if you go back to his transcripts and blog on September 17-18 of 2012, he was laughing at what a nothing burger the 47% was. Claiming it was just a further attempt of the MSM to bring down Romney that wouldn't work. And days later he was quoting Andrew Sullivan on what a terrible debate Obama had and how Romney was rising in the polls.
My point is, they haven't got a clue. They didn't then, and they don't now.
It's like the stock market. Every day, someone writes an article about why it's up or why it's down. Not because they know. But because they have to write something and look like they know.
My takeaway from the NYT quote is: Hilary Clinton is smart but Donald Trump is mean.
The only entertainment that this sad election will give me is watching the burning dumpster fire that will be the Hillary campaign as they try all sorts of goofy things to stop Trump. Gotta take the happiness where you can I guess.
Bill the raper is going to accuse Trump of being sexist
Chelsea "Republicans are racist sexist homophobes" is going to accuse Trump of being a hater. (Republicans are 50% of the country, Chelsea. But feel free to urge people to hate this fringe group.)
The only possibly effective attack is "Trump is a Democrat" and that seems strange when you see that the Democrats say he will undo Obama's whole legacy as well as all that makes us human. Oh, funhouse days.
Of course Hillary's spotless skeleton-free closet will remain unexplored, not!
We could start by following her around as the zombie corpses of the drowned refugees, drowned fleeing from her Libya debacle. We could call ourselves "corpse men."
I bet Hillary Clinton didn't radiate positive energy on her wedding day. Where do they get this stuff?
This one is in the bag (so to speak) for Hillary. If Trump wins the nomination, there will be a new third party candidate. This will siphon off enough votes to beat Trump. If Trump losses, he will become the third party candidate. Same result either way.
Mrs. Clinton sure does radiate something, but I don't think it's "positive energy." I'd say what she radiates is more like what radiates from a hog farm.
Bloomberg might run but in the event he will siphon off from Hillary.
The others won't run if Trump is a popular Republican candidate and what if he makes a deal with some of the potential 3rd party people.
Many times here I have commented on the dirt the Dems would roll out on Donald. Althouse even asked me about the dirt and I replied.
I had no idea about those Howard Stern tapes but I suspected stuff like that.
The Dems will do targeted ads on Google and Facebook to woman. Trump's defeat will be massive.
Same thing with other groups. Vietnam vets and all military people will get the audio of Trump describing his personal Vietnam screwing women in the jungles of NYC. Unprotected sex was the moral equivalent of the Hanoi Hilton, you see.
Repeat for different demographic groups.
I'm really, really surprised the Dems would tip their hand. Don't say I didn't warn you.
for Mrs. Clinton, whose inclination is detailed policy talk and 12-point plans....
Yeah, she just loves talking policy. That's why she hasn't taken questions from her press corp since Dec 9, 2015. "Talking policy" means Hillary lecturing the rest of us.
Whatever Trump's problems may be, "inaccessibility" sure as hell ain't one of them. The man will start a conversation with a fire plug if it'll hold still to listen. He's everywhere on the talk shows, and he'll take questions from reporters, crowds, hecklers, whatever. However many of us wish he might join the Carthusians & take a vow of silence, Trump will argue with anyone, anytime, anywhere. Unlike the !Hillary!.
Hillary is the dumpster fire candidate.
Mot juste of the month.
I am an anti Hillary zealot but I have to concede she has a surprising amount of energy and endurance for her alleged geriatric and "vodka soaked" state. No doubt those who pontificate about her supposed vodka tippling, fragile health and early bed time are guilty of wishful thinking.
The democrat lady candidate has considerable tenacity in her decades old drive to the oval office.
She is laser beam focused. Not easy for one to fake if she was truly burdened by her many "frailties".
She appears a formidable candidate to me.
If the feminists follow this line of attack they will eventually run up against Melania. Her calm, intelligent beauty is the archetype of every woman's vision for herself. Hillary is your mother, the woman you most want to avoid emulating.
There might be several independent runs. The general election debates might look like the primary debates. Probably a number of candidates who could win a few states. There is clearly a demand for a socialist as well as a Romney-like spineless free trade, low wages fuck the working class except please keep joining the military because I need non upper class kids like my kids and grandkids to get killed in our stupid miltary adventures
mccullough, I have a son who is considering the military as a career.
In other words, shut your pie-hole.
Positive energy? What are they smoking?
Mr. Begley, I'm one of those Viet Nam veterans, and I don't care.
Trump has gotten where he is by catering to that fairly small plurality of Republican primary voters who don't care if he is a blustering goofball. Their vote is a middle finger to the Republican establishment. That small plurality won't matter all that much when the candidate is exposed on the national stage as a bit of a clown, a guy who can't really talk about policy very coherently. That 30% of half the electorate will stay with him, but most of the rest will probably conclude that an incompetent and meaner version of Richard Nixon is better than an ignoramus.
By the time Hillary and Co. get finished trashing Trump and he finishes retaliating, everything will be different. The Clintons are dirty and everyone knows it. They seem to think they can call Trump dirty without anything happening - as if he were Mitt Romney and they were Obama.
@David Begley:Many times here I have commented on the dirt the Dems would roll out on Donald.
What are they going to say about Trump that is going to change anyone's opinion of him? The man's been a celebrity for 30 years.
When Bill Clinton finally admitted to what he did with Monica Lewinsky, 90% of the nation had already assumed he did it and forgiven it, and he's been consistently popular ever since.
What good did digging up that dirt do?
The Clinton campaign is one thing; the MSM something else. Have you watched CBS News this last week? Full campaign mode. Damn the torpedoes and full steam ahead! quite independent of the Democrat Party or "the campaign."
Bob Ellison,
Recoomend to your son to become a cop in Baltimore instead if he's interested in public service. A lot of good people in those communities need help from the thugs.
Scott A
With all due respect, some Vietnam vets do. John McCain is probably one.
Gaberiel
Trump's been in the public eye but who was paying attention to all this stuff if one lived west of NYC?
You are both rationalizing.
Hagar said...
The Clinton campaign is one thing; the MSM something else...
Actually, no.
@Begley:Trump's been in the public eye but who was paying attention to all this stuff if one lived west of NYC?
You don't think people west of NYC listen to Howard Stern, watch the Apprentice, or read People?
@Amanda:among registered voters
Polls of registered voters don't mean much.
She still aint no wayzz tyrreed.
Maybe she feels the drive to get ahold of government before government gets ahold on her.
Hillary will likely beat Trump. But Trump will make her radioactive among even the people who vote for her.
A weak Hillary who won a low turnout election and majority of Americans strongly disliking her with a GOP Congress opposing her is the best case scenario for the GOP.
Gabriel, people west of NYC don't listen to Howard Stern, don't watch the Apprentice (what is that, anyway?), and don't read People.
The old media is dying. It's based on a coastal concept: NYC and LA are all that matter. Look at the Oscars from the other night: ratings are down.
Dying or dead already.
Unless tonight turns out to be a big surprise it seems Trump is going to be the nominee. No matter what I vote on the 15th in Fl and if Cruz is still on the ballot I'm voting for him, if he is not, then Rubio. All the same I'll vote for Trump in the general if he is the candidate.
The point I'm trying to make is that the conservatives and all others opposed to Trump in the Republican camp are not going to sit it out in November. They will vote for Trump while voting for Republicans downstream. Nearly eight years of Obama have shown all but the braindead that not voting or going third party guarantees you more of the same from the Left.
The Democrats will no doubt throw all the feces they can at Trump but Trump has the advantage that no matter how dirty he is (and I wouldn't be surprised if turns out he has a lot of dirt on him) the Clinton's are far dirtier than he is. Trump may pay bribes but Hillary got rich taking bribes. Plus she is a traitor. So what are her supporters going to say? This time it's important, vote for the treasonous criminal grifter champaign communist!
Yeah, that's gonna win an election.
Hillary will just calmly explain her sensible policies which are to continue Obama's sensible policies.
Continue to refuse to acknowledge the true unemployment rate
Continue to allow unchecked immigration to take the few jobs being created here
Continue to destroy the coal industry and do not acknowledge the human disaster unfolding among the miners - a whole group dying younger.
Continue to destroy fracking.
Continue to refuse to acknowledge the disaster that is Obamacare - if you liked your doctor, you kept your doctor right? and premiums went down, right?
Continue to watch the collapse of Libya caused by Hillary
Continue to have no strategy while ISIS burns the Middle East down and migrants flood out
Continue to bring 100,000 unvetted Muslims into the US and blame the ensuing massacres on the NRA
Continue to order colleges to meet quotas for successfully accusing young men of rape; continue to support the hook-up culture
Continue to support Planned Parenthood's lowering of the black birth rate to below replacement level; continue to replace blacks with Hispanics
Continue to borrow from China
This is being sensible. This is Hillary's plan for America
@Bob Ellison:on't watch the Apprentice (what is that, anyway?)
I'm not sure that I am the one out of touch here. It's been on NBC for 12 years. The first year 20 million people watched it. Last year only 7.5 million did. 47 million people read People. That's why it's at the checkstand.
Yes, old media is shrinking and dying, but it's not dead yet. Do you know how many people are still using AOL? Bet you though that was dead, but 2 million people still subscribe. 15% of American adults don't use the internet at all. That's a lot bigger than the margin of victory in any Presidential election I lived through--and the overlap with Trump's base is pretty significant there.
She radiates awkwardness and entitlement, IMHO. I haven't sen a political woman this out of her element since Reno appeared on SNL's "Janet Reno Dance Party."
mccullough said...
Hillary will likely beat Trump. But Trump will make her radioactive among even the people who vote for her.
A weak Hillary who won a low turnout election and majority of Americans strongly disliking her with a GOP Congress opposing her is the best case scenario for the GOP.
3/1/16, 10:49 AM"
Your assumption of Hillary winning against Trump is Amanda grade optimistic. Just look at the turnouts so far in the primaries. But even if she were to get elected with a Republican House and Senate the impeachment proceedings will be sure to follow and with her criminality more than enough for even the squishiest Republican Senator to convict her. Think of Hillary as a Nixon in drag but without any of Nixon's virtues and competences.
Gabriel said, "47 million people read People."
That would be about 16% of the populace. Do you believe that to be true? 47 million people are reading that magazine every week?
A day's work in the world of publishing would disabuse you of that myth.
Two million on AOL? I still have a free AOL account. I don't use it. It's there, though, and it's in their total. Do you believe in it?
Gabriel, people west of NYC don't listen to Howard Stern, don't watch the Apprentice (what is that, anyway?), and don't read People.
Actually, a lot of them do. I don't, but I'm pretty atypical. And anyone who doesn't know what the Apprentice is is even more atypical than me.
I wonder if the Clinton camp gave the NYT's a list of acceptable phrases to use. Like "radiates positive energy". Normal people don't write stuff like that. Promoters do, advocate do, but not normal people.
Dave Begley you are correct in your assumption of what the Dem-Media-Academy will throw at Donald. However, NO ONE has ever challenged Hillary on all the crap she's pulled over the years and Trump is a good street fighter as we have learned. All the things the MSM has tried so hard to hide over the years is going to come out and Hillary will be (1) hiding from the press as she is wont to do, (2) hoping like hell she is not indicted or exposed by the Obama admin. Meanwhile Trump will be on every channel (1) asking "where is Hillary?" and (2) exposing her disgusting record of hounding women her husband preyed on and all the other crap from "Unindicted Co-conspirator Number 2" onward. Try to recall Dave, that Hillary was under investigation by a grand jury while Bill was running for the nomination.
Winning is her ticket out...again.
Losing means jail.
Cubanbob,
Not optimistic. Realistic. Trump is worse poison than Hillary. People will choose the least toxic. What will be coming out against Trump will make Clinton look like Pollyanna.
"Your assumption of Hillary winning against Trump is Amanda grade optimistic. Just look at the turnouts so far in the primaries. But even if she were to get elected with a Republican House and Senate the impeachment proceedings will be sure to follow and with her criminality more than enough for even the squishiest Republican Senator to convict her. Think of Hillary as a Nixon in drag but without any of Nixon's virtues and competences."
The primary turnouts are an apples and oranges comparison--the GOP has a closer race than the Dems do (despite the Bern's embarrassingly strong numbers) and Democratic turnout in the fall will have a lot to do with how well Hillary planned for it and how motivated their base is by having Trump to oppose. But Hillary's baggage and weakness as a candidate will be enough to keep the election close (plus, people tend to gravitate back to their parties).
"Not optimistic. Realistic. Trump is worse poison than Hillary. People will choose the least toxic. What will be coming out against Trump will make Clinton look like Pollyanna."
The only question is how the soft-Dems and soft-Republicans will go. A lot of Dems can't stand Hillary but I could see them tolerating her if it means stopping Trump. I don't see quite as many Republicans doing the equivalent.
Cubanbob,
Most general election voters don't vote in primaries. Higher turnout or lower turnout among the true believers is interesting but doesn't tell you much about the general election. Polls do. Trump and Hillary are well known. Events could change that would make things more or less favorable for one of them. Most likely a lot of people will stay home and not vote for either of them. Maybe Trump's base is more numerous than Hillary's base. We shall see.
The others won't run if Trump is a popular Republican candidate and what if he makes a deal with some of the potential 3rd party people.
I think all bets are off this year. There is a large portion of the Republican block that won't vote for Trump. Someone will step up to fill that void. I think a third party candidate is almost guaranteed at this point. The party is basically in civil war mode.
Oh, and I know at least one person who is still using AOL. To a lot of older people AOL is pretty much synonymous with the Internet. Its the interface they know, and they have zero interest in learning a new one.
You know, at&t continued to rent land line phones to people for years after it became possible to just buy a phone and plug it into the jack in your house.
For younger people I will explain. When at&t was a government sanctioned monopoly you were prohibited from plugging a phone into the phone jack in your home unless it was acquired from at&t and you did not buy the phone, you rented it, much like cable boxes today.
After at&t was broken up the company continued the arrangement with a lot of elderly people who did not realize that the situation had changed and that they could just buy a phone. at&t made millions from that.
Their rational, when questioned about the practice, was that they included free service for internal phone wiring with the rental.
Trump is the candidate they wanted all along. What's not to like?
Amanda said...
Cubanbob,
Not optimistic. Realistic. Trump is worse poison than Hillary. People will choose the least toxic. What will be coming out against Trump will make Clinton look like Pollyanna.
3/1/16, 11:12 AM"
What will be coming out against Trump that makes treason and corruption look like Pollyanna?
There is nothing realistic in your position. It's not just the FBI investigating her, now its the DoJ looking into her as well. Whatever the Trumps dirt is, it isn't treason and as for paying bribes, Hillary took bribes. She and Bill didn't take in $150 million in speeches because of their special wisdom. No, Hillary is without question the worse of the poisons.
Brando,
My hunch is, I think far less soft Democrats or Sander's followers will go for Trump in the end. By the time November is here Trump will have been raked over the coals, for real. Not half hearted attacks like we've been seeing. The Clinton machine will roll over him in a very smart sophisticated manner. In addition to what the Clinton's and the Democratic Party will do to him, and the the worst of it is, what he may actually do to himself. His latest mistake of waffling on rejecting the endorcement of a known KKK Grand Dragon is just a hint of what he could do to himself. The man isn't as smart as he is brash. During the debates with Clinton, he will be exposed as the misogynist ignoramus he is. He flubbed on the Nuclear Triad thing during the Republican debate, during the debates between he and Clinton he will be so diminished by Clinton, he may lose some of that air of 'strong man'. I believe she has it in her wherewithal to make him look very small, very dumb, and very unsuited to be President.
"While Hillary radiates positive energy from the campaign trail..."
This strikes as one of those plans that doesn't survive contact with the enemy. Kasich has been managing this because he is no threat to anybody.
Cubanbob, the mistake conservatives make is overblowing the FBI I investigation, or any DOJ investigation. Nothing will come of it. It's nothing more than wishful thinking. There is no there there, sorry to break it to you and I'm not a Clinton fan.
during the debates between he and Clinton he will be so diminished by Clinton,
And Iraq will be a "cake walk." But you do study up and regurgitate Democrat Party talking points flawlessly Amanda. Thing is we can read them anywhere. As a matter of fact we just did! In the New York Times!
I still use AOL. (of course I am 50)
Tim in Vermont,
I read much "regurgitated" stuff here from Breitbart and Limbaugh, from you most often.
There is no there there - Amanda
Amanda, were you one of those people all up in arms about Valerie Plame? I am just curious why you think that having the names of intelligence operatives on an insecure server is not a problem. I agree with you that the Justice Department, run by the same corrupt organization that has used the IRS against political enemies will not charge her, but don't look for Trump to leave this story buried from the national consciousness. If I were you, I would go with Bernie. Because if it comes down to mud slinging, Hillary has plenty of it on her already, starting with taking $100,000 from a lawyer representing chicken shit producer Tyson Chicken, the pollution from which was regulated by her husband ending with the thousands of corpses and millions of refugees from her policies in the ME.
read much "regurgitated" stuff here from Breitbart and Limbaugh, from you most often.
That's pretty funny because I don't listen to Rush or read Brietbart. Do you?
I lean toward believing that Hillary will win fairly easily against Trump. But I simply cannot count Trump out, and I don't think Hillary is relishing the battle at all. He's pretty fearless, which I find to be the only refreshing thing about Trump. I think he's absolutely as mean as Hillary. She may have her hands full and be tested in a way that she has never experienced. That would be fun to watch.
Other than that, I weep for our nation if these are our nominees.
@bob Ellison:Two million on AOL? I still have a free AOL account. I don't use it. It's there, though, and it's in their total.
2.2 million paying subscribers, not free accounts that no one uses.
Seriously, you're telling me you never heard of a show that millions of people watched for 12 years, it's still on TV now--it's like "nobody I know voted for Nixon".
I know you've moved on from print media and broadcast TV. So have I. Millions and millions of people who will never comment on a law professor's blog--who don't even know what a blog is--have not moved on from old media. And they know perfectly well who Donald Trump is and what he is like.
Amanda, please give me a couple of examples of "regurgitated talking points." I am genuinely curious.
Darcy is absolutely right that Clinton is as mean as Trump, but she's much smarter. Trump's intelligence is highly overrated IMO. I too will watch the debates with great interest. Who will be the most unscrupulous?
Hopefully the nation survives either one.
I didn't think so.
Tim, I don't waste my time with folks like you. I responded to your insult with insult and to engage you further is not something that interests me.
Everybody knows you can't do it.
@Amanda,
This is the second Hillary Clinton presidential campaign.
Can you think of any instance in either campaign where the adjectives "nimble" & "thinks on their feet" applies? I can't.
I see them as lumbering, script-bound oafs, unable to roll with the punches from the Obama campaign in the past, the Sanders campaign now, or the Trump campaign in the future. This is the woman who lost to an unknown first-term Senator from Chicago, & is now getting a run for her money from an unknown seventy-four year old Jewish socialist who isn't even a Democrat from Vermont. There's little that "lovable" there, like in a Joe Biden or a Cuomo & her negatives are sky-high, too. Her only advantage is generalized fear & loathing of Trump, which may find its match in the fear & loathing felt for her.
@Amanda: I responded to your insult with insult and to engage you further is not something that interests me.
In the time it took you to write that, you could have hit Ctrl-F and quoted tim in vermont's own words against him. So the above-the-fray thing isn't really that plausible.
Weak, Amanda, Weak! Tim wins!!!
I love seeing idiots proved wrong. I'm not *certain* Hillary loses the general, but she's not gonna waltz in on waves of 'positive energy'. She's going to look like exactly what she is.
Please don't comment so often, Amanda. Not that your stuff is *awful*, but do us a favor: only say it if you think it's *really* exceptional, okay?
Pro abortion group slams pro abortion candidate for anti woman (?) statements.
Why are so few noting the turnout for these primaries?
Dem turnout is DOWN from 2008. They are drawing flies for their primaries. Republicans are DWARFING their turnout in most places. And it's not like their primary is MORE competitive than the Dem one.
Young Hegelian,
I used to think that Hillary couldn't think on her feet until she testified in that 11 hour long Benghazi!/ email hearing. She made her interrogators look like little boys.
Only if you promise to do the same Jonathan... 'kay?
@Amanda,
I agree, she was impressive there, somehow, unexpectedly in her element. But, nevertheless, on the campaign trail, she just never seems to be firing on all cylinders. Even she admits it: "Bill just makes it all seem so easy!" ("it" being the meet & greet of a campaign).
Young Hegelian,
I suspect that when it comes to going up against Trump, she will be back in her element. She seems to do well under extreme pressure and against bullies.
The primary turnouts are an apples and oranges comparison--the GOP has a closer race than the Dems do (despite the Bern's embarrassingly strong numbers)
But it's really not. Trump is basically doubling the opponents.
Darcy is absolutely right that Clinton is as mean as Trump, but she's much smarter.
Based on...what?
Listening to her explanations, she is barely competent enough to walk. She decided to use an insecure email server to store highly classified state secrets. She is demanding that everybody release their speech transcripts before she will do so. She is unable to explain her decision making and why it aligns, so closely, with donations to her "charity".
Don't confuse Dems having low standards for her having remotely feasible explanations.
the mistake conservatives make is overblowing the FBI I investigation, or any DOJ investigation.
No, we know there is zero chance Obama will allow anything to go forward. No biggie. They don't prosecute anything Democrats do these days.
Doesn't make what she did legal. Just because your party doesn't charge you doesn't exonerate you.
During the debates with Clinton, he will be exposed as the misogynist ignoramus he is.
By a woman who attacked women her husband raped, groped, and harassed. That'll be lovely.
He flubbed on the Nuclear Triad thing during the Republican debate, during the debates between he and Clinton he will be so diminished by Clinton
He flubbed a question.
Her flubs led to ISIS, an absolute catastrophe in the ME, and massive Russian aggression in the Baltics.
But, yeah, I bet her policy decisions won't be brought up. No chance of that.
The "there," Amanda, even for people who think Clinton's emails didn't evr include discussions of secret material ( which they 100% did) is that the o ly reason for Clinton establishing her own email server was for personal gain. Not financial gain, but political. Her own (ridiculous) explanation was that she did it for "convenience." For her own convenience.
By her own admission Clinton took actions everyone agrees involved risk to the government (and by extension the action) purely for her own benefit. That is a "there," it is one hell of a there.
Smart opponents would push the angle "if she is willing to risk national security as SecState just for her own potential political future how can she possibly be trusted with the power of the office of the President? We strongly disagree with Obama and think he has abused the power of the executive, but even we don't say henas do e so for his own personal gain. Hillary has, and would again."
Can't say that about Bernie...
"My hunch is, I think far less soft Democrats or Sander's followers will go for Trump in the end."
That's certainly possible. The sentiment against Trump on the right (not to mention the Left) seems a lot firmer than the disillusion on the Left against Hillary. Dems have long been better about teaming up than the GOP has.
"By the time November is here Trump will have been raked over the coals, for real. Not half hearted attacks like we've been seeing. The Clinton machine will roll over him in a very smart sophisticated manner."
Well, it'll be harsh but I don't know how effective. Trump's primary opponents have had every incentive here, and if they didn't do it it's hard to imagine what Clinton has that would change things. People who like Trump are aware of all his defects.
"In addition to what the Clinton's and the Democratic Party will do to him, and the the worst of it is, what he may actually do to himself. His latest mistake of waffling on rejecting the endorcement of a known KKK Grand Dragon is just a hint of what he could do to himself."
I'm sure there'll be a lot more episodes like this, but again I don't know how that hurts him among his followers. It may get more of his opponents to the polls.
"During the debates with Clinton, he will be exposed as the misogynist ignoramus he is."
That's where the Dems are too confident--Hillary is slow to react and comes across way too rehearsed. My own issues with Hillary aside, she happens to be a poor politician and her baggage and inability to deflect attacks will make her look worse.
"He flubbed on the Nuclear Triad thing during the Republican debate."
I have to admit I didn't know what that was at the time either--I have to give him a pass on that one. The bigger issue for Trump (if it really is an issue--vagueness is his whole strategy) is generalized fluff like "I'll balance the budget by cutting waste" (why did no previous presidents think of that? All we have to do is stop paying for waste! Call the White House! We can balance the budget tomorrow!) or "go around the state lines" (a longtime GOP policy argument, but certainly not something that will make a big difference in health care costs).
The one caveat for Trump fans here is that the general electorate is going to be far different from a GOP primary electorate. How that all shakes out this fall will be anyone's guess, but my guess is it gives Clinton a lead similar to Obama's previous two victories. Not razor thin, but not total blowout either.
I suspect that when it comes to going up against Trump, she will be back in her element. She seems to do well under extreme pressure and against bullies.
When has she ever been under extreme pressure or been bullied?
She tends to be the bully.
Ask the women unlucky enough to have her husband want to fuck them.
@Amanda,
She seems to do well under extreme pressure and against bullies.
Oh, boy, we're gonna have to agree to disagree on that statement!
"Her flubs led to ISIS, an absolute catastrophe in the ME..."
George W Bush's "flub" led to ISIS. If you doubt me just ask Trump.
"But it's really not. Trump is basically doubling the opponents."
With several candidates in the race, and the conventional wisdom until last week being that it could be close, a lot more GOPers had reason to go to the polls. The Democratic race has--per DNC plan--been set up as a coronation, Bernie excitement notwithstanding. At this stage Bernie will probably pick off a few more states, but Clinton has the nomination in the bag. I suspect more Democratic-leaners who are eligible to vote in either party's primary will vote in the GOP one than vice versa.
Young Hegelian,
We'll see what happens when she is up against Trump one on one. My hunch is that she will come out on the winning end of that. She did very well against the bullies in that hearing.
George W Bush's "flub" led to ISIS. If you doubt me just ask Trump.
Who removed Khaddafy, leaving a power vacuum in Libya for ISIS to come in and flourish? Hint: It wasn't Bush.
Who promised action is Assad used chemical weapons and then didn't do it? Who decided to ignore the one Arab Spring situation that might have benefitted America (Iran) and supported all the other ones that were terrible?
She's Obama's third term and she was helping make most of these idiotic decisions.
She did very well against the bullies in that hearing.
She is a spectacular liar, true.
You're aware she lied in that hearing A LOT, right?
Do names like Jim and Susan McDougal, Web Hubble, Vince Foster, Mike Espy, Ron Brown, etc., and so forth, mean anything to anybody?
Mrs. Clinton, whose inclination is detailed policy talk and 12-point plans....
Clearly this person doesn't know what detailed policy is. Her inclination is slightly less obvious bombastic nonsense.
Damikesc,
You do realize Trump lies daily, do you not? You don't wonder why he is so short on details in his grand plans? Lies by omission are just as bad as lies by commission.
Hey, Amanda, where are Hillary's plan details? And how many agents or informants did Trump out? I bet it's less than Hill did....
@Amanda:You do realize Trump lies daily, do you not?
Your tu quoque here proves that you are aware that Hillary lied at the hearing and that it does not bother you a bit.
As for me, I know that Trump and Hillary are both liars, though Trump's are more toward bullshit (indifference to the truth value of his statements), and Hillary's are for personal and political advantage.
Hence the home brew server--she wanted to ensure that every FOIA request would come up blank. Don't think Nixon, or Bush, or any R would get a pass from you for that behavior.
Damikesc,
Go to Clinton's website for starters. Have you even bothered watching any Democratic debates this election season? I know they aren't as entertaining as Republican debates but they are chock full of policy details readily offered both Sanders and Clinton. They are the grown up's debates, might be boring after being dazzled with Trump's intelligence and charisma.
Trumps site has details. She has never spelled out how she will pay for any of it or a u details.
But she does hate a SCOTUS decision that said a group is allowed to criticize her.
I would like to apologize to Amanda. I shouldn't have insulted you like that.
BTW: (Don't look Amanda, this really did come via some right wing site or other even if it is a news photo...)
I found a picture of Hillary looking radiant.
Gabriel,
I would vote for Kasich if Trump wouldn't be the Republican nominee. I don't like Clinton, I don't trust Clinton and I do not like Clinton's lies any more than you don't like Trump's lies. Ooops, you failed to mention that Trumps's lies bother you. So, I'll assume they don't. Bottom line is that I will hold my nose and vote for Clinton over Trump, because Trump will be an unmitigated disaster for this country.
And the GOP town hall after SC was very informative. As opposed to the Dems "gimme" brigade.
Dem debates aren't boring because of policy. They are because Bernie is working so hard to not win.
I don't think Obama believes a word Hillary! says, and a Hillary! presidency most certainly will not be his "third term." But then there is not anyone else on tap that would conceivably give him a "third term" either, so he has a problem figuring out which alternatives would be worse.
Hillary and team need to attack Trump hard; and no one attacks like a Clinton. Should be an entertaining election season.
@Amanda: Bottom line is that I will hold my nose and vote for Clinton over Trump, because Trump will be an unmitigated disaster for this country.
I feel the same way, except that you have to reverse the two people you mentioned. Everyone is trying to figure out who the lesser of the evils is, and reasonable people can disagree on that.
Both Trump and Clinton will empower the establishment, for different reasons. But Trump will have hostile media scrutiny unprecedented in my lifetime, and Hillary won't.
"...radiates positive energy..."
That's gravity. With something having an ass that big it's inevitable.
That's gravity. With something having an ass that big it's inevitable
Hawking radiation, of course!
Hillary and team need to attack Trump hard; and no one attacks like a Clinton. Should be an entertaining election season.
Except they're used to attacking people who will fight politely.
Trump doesn't.
Who else has REALLY gone after Bill? Rand Paul is the only other guy I can think of. He took her biggest asset and neutered him.
Amanda:
I have watched a few Dem debates (but stopped as I lost some IQ points each time).
They are mostly them trying to outdo each other in what will be "free." Neither is intelligent enough to know that nothing is "free" but it doesn't matter, because they won't do any of it anyway.
Cubanbob -- FWIW if it's T&H in the general, I won't need to vote. Some Dem will cast for Trump for me.
And the reason smart opponents WON'T push "if she is willing to risk national security as SecState just for her own potential political future how can she possibly be trusted with the power of the office of the President" is because it's bound to lead to the childish "I know you are but what about me."
Well, it'll be harsh but I don't know how effective. Trump's primary opponents have had every incentive here, and if they didn't do it it's hard to imagine what Clinton has that would change things. People who like Trump are aware of all his defects.
I think I disagree with this just because Trump's opponents also had the incentive to put themselves in position to appeal to Trump's voters. Only recently have they attacked with anything near the vigor that was probably needed all along (but it probably wouldn't have worked anyway). Hillary will write his die-hard voters off immediately and scare people into turning out (the ones that will still need scaring). Sidenote: Around half of eligible Hispanics didn't vote in 2012. How many Hispanics will vote for the first time in 2016 and continue voting Democrat ever after?
The Dem. turnout has been weak. I think the signs are that it will remain so, especially after Sanders throws in the towel. There are many many disgruntled on the left who will stay home rather than vote for Hillary. There will be many on the right who will virtue signal by not voting for their oh-so-pure candidate but there will be fewer of them. Trump for the win as a result.
We can be sure that Trump's opponents have not held off on investigating him. They don't have anything on him that can stick or they would have used it and neither will the Democrats.
The worst so far has been that of 300 plus American applicants at the Palm Beach resort only 17 were hired, the rest of the spots taken by foreign workers on work visas. In six years. One U.S. candidate a week. This is very weak tea.
So expect a lot of sad sacks that temporarily lost jobs after Trump company Chapter 11s moaning about how Trump ruined their lives. He can easily counter with hundreds that were employed, remain employed. He can tit for tat easily enough on the business score. Can't be accused of being a philanderer for obvious reasons. It will be fun to watch Clinton try. She is just too laden with baggage
And then there is former President Fox. Lecturing an American candidate for President of the USA. OK, Sr. Fox, tell us again how many Mexican citizens were killed during your tenure as head of the country? How explosive was the growth of narco traffic during your tenure? You make the case for the wall.
Amielalune,
No doubt watching the Republican debates raises everyone's IQ points, lol. Or not, but hey they are entertaining!
@Diamondhead: How many Hispanics will vote for the first time in 2016 and continue voting Democrat ever after?
They will vote Democrat ever after, but large numbers of them'll vote Trump in 2016.
Trump is intemperate, but he is not immoderate. He is drawing a lot of non-Republican support. They may all get bored with it by November. I wouldn't try to forecast anything from what is happening now.
Gabriel,
Large numbers of Hispanics will be voting for Trump?!
Oky doky then, if you say so.
@Amanda:Oky doky then, if you say so.
Polls have said so. So have the results of the Nevada caucuses--i.e. people who actually voted, as opposed to "registered voters".
@ Gabriel: They will vote Democrat ever after, but large numbers of them'll vote Trump in 2016.
I have a hard time seeing that happen, but no, I wouldn't put money on anything at this point.
Gabriel, probably hard to tell since it's a caucus, but if you took Hispanics in total in Nevada, surely Trump came in third in the state.
@Diamondhead:Gabriel, probably hard to tell since it's a caucus, but if you took Hispanics in total in Nevada, surely Trump came in third in the state.
Didn't say he'd get a majority of them, or that he ever did. I'm saying large numbers will vote for him. Large numbers already have.
Since only about half of Americans pay any federal income tax, what a Democrat "debate" is is a bidding contest for votes paid for with money that they promise to take from the other side as soon as they win power. That's really elevating.
Political strategy calls for brutal attacks only when you believe you are behind.
The quote that forms the title of this post makes me chuckle every time I refresh the page. How did the writer even Bring herself to write a sentence that included "radiates positivity" and Hillary Clinton? It's like an oxymoron of a sentence, like saying a black hole radiates light.
"While Mrs. Clinton radiates positive energy on the trail, Democratic groups are beginning to coalesce around a strategy to deliver sustained and brutal attacks on Mr. Trump."
So, same thing they'd do to any possible Republican candidate?
I mean, not seeing how this is any different from any other election year, in this area.
" Trump will be campaigning with Juanita Broderick and Kathleen Wiley. "
I would not be surprised. They still have scores to settle with Hillary and they look better than Paul Jones in public. She is just as big a victim of Bill but not as impressive.
The deadly problem that Ds have is TURNOUT!
White turnout is down 30%. We'll see how it is in these primaries.
GOP turnout is way up.
Since Amanda is still telling us (11:34am) that Trump "flubbed on the Nuclear Triad thing during the Republican debate", I think we ought to remember that when she first brought that up, she had no idea what it was, either, as we see in this post from January 17th. As poker1one and Drago between them pointed out, her remark about a "narcissistic, thin skinned, blowhard, doofus, buffoon, misogynistic bigot like Trump who didn't even know what a nuclear triad was" was idiotic: in fact, he didn't know what the nuclear triad is, and neither did Amanda. She didn't know that there's only one, and that it still exists. Whether she has taken the trouble to find out what it is since then I neither know nor care. Chances are better than even that she is paid to post her nonsense here.
Post a Comment