According to WaPo's Chris Cillizza as of 3 p.m. yesterday:
1. Endorse Paul Ryan...
Trump did that later in the day.
2. Stop talking so much...
I'd say what he should do is vary the setting for the talking. We see rallies or one-on-one TV interviews. We never see him relating to ordinary people in a relaxed setting. (We do see him bring an individual onto the rally stage.)
3. Find a message. And stick to it....
He's had a consistent message for over a year! It's "make America great again." I guess Cillizza thinks there are too many specifics under that heading.
4. Stop picking dumb fights...
Yeah, obviously, don't do that Khan thing again. Leave private citizens alone. Fight the powerful.
पोस्ट्स
९९ टिप्पण्या:
"Leave private citizens alone. Fight the powerful."
That's it in a nutshell.
Get information about So You Think You Can Dance contestants here Gyaanpedia
We never see him relating to ordinary people in a relaxed setting.
I doubt that he is capable of relating to ordinary people in a relaxed setting. He has based his entire campaign on the fiction that he cares about, and understands the problems of, ordinary people. There is nothing in his history that shows that he has the least bit of concern about anyone but his inner circle. The only interest he has in ordinary people (or even extraordinary people) is what they can do for him or what he can take or con from them.
Leave private citizens alone. Fight the powerful.
You mean fight himself? Look at the economic advisors he picked, mostly people who have made a living by scamming others.
But let's see what Frank Luntz thinks, just to make sure these steps will cause us to turn the dial!
Freder Frederson said...
I doubt that he is capable of relating to ordinary people in a relaxed setting.
Of course you do. Without evidence of course, other than your distaste for the man.
He didn't fight Kahn. He said he sounded like a nice man and wished him well.
If there's a stink in the media about something, it's because some politician or charity wants that stink in the media. Hearne's Law.
Of course you do. Without evidence of course, other than your distaste for the man.
Provide me some evidence then. I bet you can't.
The remark about Kahn's wife was a shrewd move to bring the feminists and the islamists together, Derb notes.
You're seeing the covering noise for islam vs feminists, something rattling the henhouse.
Trump's wife had all sorts of things to say. Trump's women likewise.
Quite a contrast.
Yeah, if only Trump could be more like John McCain, Paul Ryan, or Mitt Romney, he might win the election.
That's right, Trump--take advice from one of the Hive's leading publications. They'd never steer you wrong.
The real message is that Trump needs to stop talking to the MSM, which just wants him to say something, anything, that can used to attack him.
Hillary didn't have a press conference for 200 days and everyone was OK with that.
Just get a well written speech and give that - and wait till the Debates.
As for endorsing Ryan, that advice was BS. He didn't get one vote by doing that.
Meanwhile, Jeb, Kasich, and Cruz, who all promised to support the Repub nominee are sitting on their hands, hoping Hillary wins.
Traitors and fools.
The reason all this bad press really hurt djt is because it was really good entertainment. Before, Trump doing his thing upending things was the best story going. Now, there's something even more interesting: Trump flailing. We are fickle, we need new material.
Leave private citizens alone.
When you give a speech at a national political convention, and attack the opposing candidate, you are no longer a private citizen, and you are fair game.
This: "Yeah, if only Trump could be more like John McCain, Paul Ryan, or Mitt Romney, he might win the election."
I would only tell Trump that he doesn't have to fire back at people immediately. Have your team do a little digging. Find the ties between the people and the clinton cash. Tweet that out. Listen to the crickets...
Leave private citizens alone. Fight the powerful.
You mean fight himself? Look at the economic advisors he picked, mostly people who have made a living by scamming others.
No..fight Hillary who is even more powerful, and who herself makes a living scamming others.
He's had a consistent message for over a year! It's "make America great again." I guess Cilliza thinks there are too many specifics under that heading.
There are. Duh. Every tweet he compulsively sends is another distraction. (Tweets are messages).
Stop trying to be Amorosa.
Lol.
i got so upset and angry about the past two weeks that wrote Trump and told him how to win this thing. Here's the essence of what I said:
Situation Today
1. Over the last couple of weeks you have made some ill-advised (albeit generally accurate) statements that have not only resulted in negative press, but have embarrassed your supporters and further alienated some of the Republican stalwarts that it would be better to at least have neutral.
2. You have lost momentum because you have spent time on unimportant issues.
3. You have allowed yourself to be manipulated by Hillary’s campaign - you may not like them, but they are smart and professionals.
4. You have failed to understand that the MSM’s love affair with you is over. They love Hillary more.
5. You have made no attempt to mend fences. Whether you like it or not the optics of intra-party cooperation are important.
6. Your campaign has given the impression that it disorganized and amateurish.
Strategy to Recovery
1. Irony, sarcasm, even humor can, and will, be misinterpreted. You have seen that many times over the last couple of weeks. The MSM is not going to permit you to be sarcastic and ironic. They are going to purposefully misinterpret that every time. The people who are going to support you, generally, do not do sarcasm. It’s time to stop with the New York lip, no matter how dull you think it is. Hillary is dull, but look at what’s happening in the polls.
2. Concentrate your speeches, interviews and press conferences on your seven positions ( I would leave out “ pay for the wall” and substitute “address Radical Islam” as the seventh position.) Give a major speech on each of these positions after you have found some knowledgeable people to write the speech and after you have performed 3 and 4.
3. Meet very publicly with McConnell and Ryan to discuss their thoughts; modify or expand on your positions to meet some of their concerns/ideas.
4. Meet very publicly with the House and Senate Committee chairs who focus on your positions: i.e. VA; Intelligence ; Armed Services; Health Care; Taxes. Since this will be time consuming use Pence and your kids to do some of the leg work.
5. Establish a “charm offensive”. Meet with politicians, columnists you’ve alienated. Be prepared to acknowledge their concerns, put them on the defensive by listening to them. If you could somehow mend fences with the Bushes that would be fabulous, but I doubt it can be done.
6. Stress support for the armed forces - and vets - by discussing meaningful changes to the defense budget, visiting VA facilities, using Sean Smith’s mother and others who are supportive.
7. Stress again and again the strength of your potential nominees for the Supreme Court. Contrast the with the faux pas that Ruth Bader Ginsberg recently committed.
8. Don’t let the lousy economy rest, but that seems to be an easy part of the stump speech.
9. There is always Obama’s wishy washy foreign policy, but if you do attack it you need to have at least a semblance of a plan to correct it. That includes publicly recognizing Russia for what it is - an expansionist dictatorship.
10. Attack Hillary The ad campaigns are easy to envision:
A. “Hillary’s Corrupt”
- The Uranium Deal
- Pay to play contributions to the Clinton Foundation
B. “Hillary Compromises American Security”
- Libya and ISIS
- Russian Reset - Crimea and Syria
- Hacked personal server (Comey)
C. “Hillary Lies”
- E- mail server (Comey and Comey/Gowdy)
- Benghazi
- There are more but they may be too arcane
D. “Hillary the enabler”
- Bill’s victims
Stop yammering on about the primary. We get it - you won.
Stop acting like you don't care if you lose.
Freder Frederson said...
We never see him relating to ordinary people in a relaxed setting.
"I doubt that he is capable of relating to ordinary people in a relaxed setting. He has based his entire campaign on the fiction that he cares about, and understands the problems of, ordinary people. There is nothing in his history that shows that he has the least bit of concern about anyone but his inner circle. The only interest he has in ordinary people (or even extraordinary people) is what they can do for him or what he can take or con from them."
**********
A string of unsupported assertions isn't an "argument".
And no, it's not up to us to refute your empty assertions. It's up to you to support them.
Stand and deliver!
Having been a pro-lifer and tried to get the message across in varying environments, I have a lot of sympathy with Trump in this utterly hostile media environment. And I remember watching the efforts of Sanders followers to get messages across at the DNC and seeing them completely blanketed and tagged losers. When the media hates you, you will never look right in the media. And all about you there will be people saying - if only you did/ did not do this or that when you know that the media creates the image of a prolifer, a Trumper, a Berniebro and it will never be a good image on mainstream media if the overlords don't want it to be a good image for some reason of their own.
You just have to stick to your own principles, carry on the struggle and wait for fortune's wheel to turn. How long did abolitionists have to fight? But it's hard when people are not used to media hatred and unfairness. There ought to be set of exercises people could do to harden up when they depart the liberal zone, like turn off digital media intermittently so you realize the bubble it creates. Write letters with a pen. Plant a garden. Learn to listen for the sound of yourself whimpering, 'it's not fair" and shut it. Visit the Lincoln memorial.
I would only tell Trump that he doesn't have to fire back at people immediately. Have your team do a little digging. Find the ties between the people and the clinton cash. Tweet that out. Listen to the crickets...
Exactly, Kevin. He had a lot of ammunition he could have used against the Hispanic judge and Khan if he'd waited a few days for some background checks.
If I were Trump, I might try for even bigger rallies, and by-pass the media media for the most part- they will have to cover him anyway, they really can't help themselves, and I think most political ads are wasted anyway. From what I have witnessed, his crowds are larger than the venues he rents out a lot of the time. I would also treat the media with utter contempt, and do it openly at every opportunity.
He really does need to stop with Twitter- the tweets neither help or hurt, they are just irrelevant- the only people paying attention to them are people who can't be persuaded in the first place. I think he should continue to give interviews, however, just be more combative with the interviewer, and record everything himself- also, do it on ones own turf. Keep it simple and focused. Maybe he really isn't capable of doing that, but it would help. James Carville's old advice is pertinent here.
"Yeah, if only Trump could be more like John McCain, Paul Ryan, or Mitt Romney, he might win the election."
Against Hillary, yes he could. They all could beat her. There are few people in the country disliked as much as her, but we found one. What incredible luck.
Cilliza is a Clinton tool.
If Trump could reign in his mouth, he'd have a realistic chance. Not sure he can.
If he was better at #3, #4 wouldn't be an issue.
But if he had to go there, I still contend that he could have flipped the script better by suggesting that to honor Capt. Kahn, we all need to keep Hil from the power to pull another Benghazi.
1. He was forced to endorse Ryan.
2. He will never shut up. He has no charisma so one-on-one is no good.
3. Consistent message, but too easy to make fun of and twist to conform to the oppositions message.
4. What the heck, muzzle him and let him talk only when its from a script on a teleprompter. His "shoot from the hip" attitude is wearing thin and is now resembling someone who is a taco short of a combo plate.... A little nutso
Stop rising to the bait. You numbscull.
Keep it up, Donald, in November you can go back to NBC and do some more of you gag-worthy Apprentice shows.
Douche
Vicki from Pasadena
The underlying goal of all I suggested was to force the media to cover substantive comments and actions and let TV do Hillary destruction. I know so little about the impact of social media that I wouldn't dare advise on that other than to suggest that Ivanka be put in charge and Donald's tweeter be taken away from him.
"Stop rising to the bait."
That's probably te best way to put it to him. He clearly thinks it's "weak" to not respond. That's not always the case. I think of his stupid statement about not liking POWs...standing there like that came from strength.
".......as to the Kahn thing......." So much for the feminist movement, right Ann.
Flailing?
I guess it's some sort of Jedi mind trick. Start off with mind-numbing looseness to get your readers to lower their expectations for what comes next.
Me? I just click away.
2. Stop talking so much...
It's worked so well for Clinton.
On the other hand, Trump had a supposedly horrible week and after dipping slightly seems to be back even with Hilary.
I pointed this out before but it bears repeating:
Crooked Hilary so far (mid July) has spent $290,000,000 and just barely managed to beat one nobody from Vermont who is not even a member of the party.
Trump has spent $76,000,000, beat the crap out of 16 other well funded, well supported and experienced politicians to get the nomination.
Crooked Hilary has been running only slightly ahead of Trump since forever. Why isn't she beating this guy, with all the problems the press is happy to point out about him, by a lot?
Crooked Hilary has about $84mm on hand and can raise more. The question is how much more.
Trump is worth about $10 billion. He can tap into that for as much as he wants to without any problems with campaign finance laws. If he wants to spend $1bn to win, he could.
(Yes, some claim he is "only" worth $3-4bn. Even if true he could still spend $1bn of his own money)
Crooked Hilary is still telling us that winning is all about money ("I'll repeal Citizens United!!") So given how much she has spent and how little Trump has spent, how come she is not doing better?
John Henry
Except the race is just about tied again after the improbably yuuuge Clinton bounce.
To paraphrase Sally Fields: "They don't like you, Hillary, they really don't like you!"
Hahahahaha, good luck. Trump will be Trump.
1. Ignore Cillizza and other acolytes of the Pro-Choice Church.
2. Repeat 1.
As for Khan, next time he wants to attack an American citizen for partisan causes, he should avoid conflating crimes of Obama and people who did not destroy the significance of his son's death, let alone support the self-defense action to contain and judge a rogue dictator.
And the handout to Ryan... Well, there is no need to alienate people with marginal correlation to your principles.
Crooked Hilary has about $84mm on hand and can raise more. The question is how much more.
Do you know how many big money favors a POTUS can do for rich donors? Don't you fret about Hillary raising money.
How much of the media treatment of Trump is because they are in the tank for Crooked Hilary and how much because she is a customer and Trump isn't?
What would happen if he went to the NY Times et al and said "OK, we are ready to start advertising. We will buy $2mm/week until November but we hope the coverage will be a bit less onesided. We'll be looking each week as we decide where to spend our money."
Think the coverage might improve?
John Henry
Jonah Goldberg: “The Pivot is the dearly held hope of a diverse group of politicians and pundits that Donald Trump can stop being Donald Trump. Trump can’t change. He can’t change any more than a one-armed southpaw can suddenly pitch right-handed.”
Aesop: A scorpion and a frog meet on the bank of a stream and the scorpion asks the frog to carry him across on its back. The frog asks, "How do I know you won't sting me?" The scorpion says, "Because if I do, I will die too." The frog is satisfied, and they set out, but in midstream, the scorpion stings the frog. The frog feels the onset of paralysis and starts to sink, knowing they both will drown, but has just enough time to gasp "Why?" Replies the scorpion: "It’s my nature . . . ”
Tim,
OK, say she can raise another $200mm. Do you think that she would be able to raise much more than that?
Maybe double it and say she can raise another $400mm ($130mm/month).
Trump can basically just write a check for $1bn if he decides to. Or $2bn if it comes to that.
My point is that there is some limit to how much money Crooked Hilary can raise. Trump is limited only by his desire to be prez.
John Henry
Can Trump trump these polls?
Clinton opened up a 15-point margin in the McClatchy-Marist survey, 48% to 33%, which was conducted as Trump feuded publicly first with the Muslim parents of a slain American war hero and then House Speaker Paul Ryan, one of the GOP's most popular and powerful figures.
In an NBC News-Wall Street Journal poll, Clinton's edge is 9 points (47% to 38%), cushioning what was a 5-point advantage in early July. A CNN/ORC poll this week showed Clinton with a similar 9-point edge over Trump nationally.
Clinton nearly tied Trump among men in the NBC-WSJ poll and enjoys a 22-point swing -- she now leads by 8 points -- in the McClatchy-Marist survey. With women, she continues to enjoy an overwhelming advantage -- 50% to 30% according to McClatchy-Marist and 51% to 35% in the NBC-WSJ results
In New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Michigan -- states that have trended Democratic in recent elections, but whose economics and demographics seem to pose an opening for the GOP nominee -- Clinton has made strides in improving her favorable ratings, while Trump remains challenged by high unfavorable ratings and resistance from a significant portion of Republicans.
CNN
One way Trump can relate more to the little people is have sit downs with bloggers, instead of with the mainstream media.
For example, I'd much prefer to see Trump be interviewed by Ann Althouse over one of her video deals, than have him sit down with Jake Tapper or call in to Sean Hannity.
This is more like a door to door type of situation. And he could do it from almost anywhere, as long as he has a solid internet connection. I'd do one every single day. Find bloggers all over America who aren't biased against me and do video conferencing with them and answer their questions about me.
And I'd do it to snub the media.
Blogger Unknown said...
Can Trump trump these polls?
Yes He Can!
Clinton's lead over Trump narrows to less than three points: Reuters/Ipsos poll
Reuters - 8 hours ago
Meanwhile, back in Wisconsin...
Paul Nehlen, House Speaker Paul Ryan’s Republican primary challenger, was ejected by Wisconsin GOP staffers from a Donald Trump rally in Green Bay, Wisconsin Friday night.
Nehlen was able to enter the premises of the rally before being urged to leave by individuals affiliated with the state party organization, according to his campaign. A Nehlen spokesman told The Daily Caller the Trump campaign had reached out and invited the congressional candidate to attend the rally earlier Friday.
Oooops someone got their invite pulled. What a mess.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/06/wisconsin-gop-kicks-out-paul-ryans-challenger-from-trump-rally/#ixzz4GaLL6Y5C
Trump hasn't demonstrated he can "stiffle himself"...
Will You Stifle Yourself - YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZOTszoKbE4
...for a sufficiently long period of time to make people with short memories forget that he has the earmarks of both ADHD and narcissistic personality disorder.
Mayo Clinic:
"Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for admiration and a lack of empathy for others. But behind this mask of ultraconfidence lies a fragile self-esteem that's vulnerable to the slightest criticism...."
As far back as 1995, studies indicate that:
Deficient Inhibitory Control in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
"...These results replicate an earlier study that found deficient inhibitory control in pervasive ADHD and demonstrate that the deficit in ADHD involves a second aspect of executive control."
http://www.psy.vanderbilt.edu/faculty/logan/1995SchacharTannockJACP.pdf
These problems may or may not be baked into the Trump family. His 79-year-old chain smoking sister (a senior judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit) seems to have had no problems inhibiting herself. Perhaps with the help of the nicotine.
It is possible the threatened new release of Wikileaks material will sufficiently damage the Hildabeast to give the Trumpster a bump in the polls after it is released. But it probably be only a temporary bump as long as Trump remains Trump.
The election will probably come down to the unenviable choice between a compulsive liar and a blowhard with mental problems.
The election will probably come down to the unenviable choice between a compulsive liar with mental problems and a blowhard.
Fixed it for you.
Trumptalk is so different from what we are used to, which is well-honed political rhetoric, that we don't trust it. It has no bearing on my expectations.
5. Don't look so desperate.
bagoh20: Against Hillary, yes he could. They all could beat her. There are few people in the country disliked as much as her, but we found one. What incredible luck.
Under one set of assumptions about the voting behavior of various blocs, they would all beat Hillary. Under another set of equally plausible assumptions, they wouldn't.
Making smug assertions regarding counter-factuals that won't ever be tested against reality is a harmless enough diversion.
Whoosh, Trump threw Palin and Paul Nehlen under the bus! A twofer!
Washington (CNN)Sarah Palin reiterated her support for Paul Ryan's primary challenger Friday night immediately after her political ally, Donald Trump, endorsed the House speaker.
Trump on Friday evening said in Wisconsin that he would back Ryan in his Republican primary against Paul Nehlen, a little-known challenger. That announcement was a reversal from earlier in the week, when the presidential nominee declined to endorse the speaker.
Minutes after Trump announced his support during a rally in Ryan's home state, Palin wrote on Facebook that she was "proud to be standing with Paul Nehlen since May 9th.
Mountain Maven: If Trump could reign in his mouth...
Not trying to be a spelling/usage nazi; the typo here just cracked me up. Immediately provoked some bizarre images.
I've never seen the media - Right and Left - attack a candidate non-stop 24/7 like they have with Trump. Meanwhile, Hillary gets a total pass. Her lies, her corruption, her failure to make speeches/interviews/hostile questions, or her crazy left-wing views, who cares?
This election is really about where you think the country is going. If you like the changing demographics, zero interest rates, the trillion dollar deficits, the sky-rocketing trade deficits, Obamacare, open borders, globalization, etc. etc.
Then vote for Hillary.
Theoretically, he can. In reality, he can't. Told-you-so is small comfort for those of us who really do despise Hill.
Next time maybe the GOP, if there is a GOP, will try to get to 50 + 1 or 270 electoral college votes. Of course, the Trumpkins may take their ball and go home. Wouldn't put it past them.
Of course, the anti-Trumpers here are right: any decent GOP candidate had a chance against Hill, simply because the driving forces in the election and her personal unpopularity gave the party a good shot. Far from making "smug assertions," Case, Abramowitz, et al., make predictions on the basis of well-tested models. Looks like Trump will more disastrously underperform than anyone in recent history.
I fully expect Hillary to be elected because 51% of the American people are morons.
Like all stupid people, they can only learn one way - through experience. They believed Hoovers lies about the economy, FDR's 1940 about "keeping us out of foreign wars", LBJ's lies about "not sending American boys to do the job that Asian boys should do", Nixon's lies about "Peace with Honor", and everybody's lies that somehow we can have our cake and eat it too when it comes to spending and taxes.
Its only when the bill comes due that they wake up. Till then, its party till there's no tomorrow and gosh darn it Hillary will support the 2nd Amendment and look out for the middle class.
Anyone who talks about "Trumpkins" is a Hilary supporter. National Review and all the other "Never Trumpers" have shown their true colors. They are Hillary supporters who'd rather have a Hillary dominated SCOTUS, expanded Obamacare, trillion deficits, etc. rather than reign in illegal immigration or stop making bad trade deals. They are phony conservatives, part of uni-DC party.
Anglelyne Mountain Maven: If Trump could reign in his mouth...
Not trying to be a spelling/usage nazi; the typo here just cracked me up. Immediately provoked some bizarre images.
I guess he could reign with his mouth.
When every one is finished venting. Trump will be accepted twice as much by the scared folks again.
We just had the mandatory attack for no reason to test Donald and see if he gets angry or handles it in stride. He passed the test.
rcocean: Anyone who talks about "Trumpkins" is a Hilary supporter.
That isn't fair, rc. It's silly, but it's not necessarily pro-Hilly.
The testing hasn't yet begun....
Blogger Anglelyne said...
bagoh20: Against Hillary, yes he could. They all could beat her. There are few people in the country disliked as much as her, but we found one. What incredible luck.
Under one set of assumptions about the voting behavior of various blocs, they would all beat Hillary. Under another set of equally plausible assumptions, they wouldn't.
Making smug assertions regarding counter-factuals that won't ever be tested against reality is a harmless enough diversion.
Everyone can easily beat Obama, it just so happens we picked McCain and Romney, the two guys who couldn't.
Or even better. No one could beat Obama, therefore it doesn't matter that we picked McCain and Romney.
Everyone can play along!
If Trump can make it a referendum on Hillary and the status quo, Trump will win.
If it's a referendum on Trump, Hillary will win.
rcocean: I fully expect Hillary to be elected because 51% of the American people are morons.
Like all stupid people, they can only learn one way - through experience.
We all think that people who don't vote our way our morons.
We're all mostly right about that.
Sure, what Trump needs to do is all the stuff the other 16 guys did. That's a winning strategy for sure!
Bay Area Guy said...If Trump can make it a referendum on Hillary and the status quo, Trump will win.
If it's a referendum on Trump, Hillary will win.
+1
eric said...Everyone can easily beat Obama, it just so happens we picked McCain and Romney, the two guys who couldn't.
I don't know if it would have been easy to beat Obama in 2012, but I do know he was vulnerable and the Republicans managed to nominate the only person in the entire party who could not run against his biggest weakness.
No counterfactuals needed for that.
It's impossible for a Republican to make an election about the Democrat, even if you have the star power of Donald Trump.
So, if Bay and Tim are right, Trump loses. Which I think at this point is the odds.
The two things I'm seeing that give me hope, but only slightly.
1) Wikileaks.
2) Clinton is only getting around 40% to 45%, there are still a lot of undecideds.
It's all going to depend on the #NeverTrump crowd.
By that I mean, if, as we get into September and October, they start to come around and realize, "Oh shit, this really is an election between Clinton and Trump, my guy can't get snuck in at the last minute!" and start to, even reluctantly, endorse Trump, he has a chance.
If, on the other hand, they continue to tear him down and profess zero responsibility for their tearing him down, he's going to lose.
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-tracking-poll-20160805-snap-story.html
Separately, the poll also asks voters which candidate they think will win. That question has often shown greater ability to predict election outcomes than asking people who they will vote for, particularly when the election remains months away.
Clinton leads that voter expectations question by a large margin, 53%-42%. After the Republican convention last month, Trump had briefly narrowed the gap on that question, but Clinton has rebounded sharply over the past week and a half.
Here's what I think will happen if Trump does get elected: He will implement a few of his pet objectives then step down in favor of Pence. Trump is awfully hard to LIKE, but the fact that SCOTUS justices are at stake makes voting for him an imperative.
Blogger Anglelyne said...
rcocean: I fully expect Hillary to be elected because 51% of the American people are morons.
Like all stupid people, they can only learn one way - through experience.
We all think that people who don't vote our way our morons.
We're all mostly right about that.
Look at Hillary supporters and tell me that demographic doesn't favor the left side of the bell curve.
"Make America great again" is nonsense that assumes the world's greatest economy is no longer. And suggesting that Trump change anything is a YUGE waste of the writer's time. Flailing, of course, is and has been, for a long period of time, Trump's only talent. When the mind goes . . .
It is the penchant of conservatives and moderates to move to the back of the bus when demanded by Democrats and establishment-types that is rallying Americans to Trump's candidacy.
Khan was out of order. Trump should stand his ground and respond to stupid fights initiated by and slanderous comments made by Democrats and establishment-types alike.
Although Trump wasn't my choice in the primaries, I do want him to beat Hillary. Not only is she a horrid liar, but worse, she will be the next pied-piper for Leftist morons, whom I can't stand.
However, I had a sinking feeling that Trump's personal attacks in the primaries would come back to haunt him and it has. The #neverTrump crowd is alive and well - withholding their support and votes.
This makes Trump's task even tougher. I like that Trump endorsed Ryan - to win he has to do more of that.
If the Bernie voters can rally to support Hillary; the Jeb, McCain, Romney types should be able to do the same.
I seriously doubt that Jeb, McCain and Romney voters can support Trump, the differences are too stark and he has insulted them too deeply. Some words just can't be taken back. As for Bernie voters supporting Clinton, much easier, they're both liberals mostly on the same page politically. Plus Bernie has made a point of asking/ telling his supporters to vote for Clinton, to defeat Trump.
Sebastian: Next time maybe the GOP, if there is a GOP, will try to get to 50 + 1 or 270 electoral college votes. Of course, the Trumpkins may take their ball and go home. Wouldn't put it past them.
Of course, the anti-Trumpers here are right: any decent GOP candidate had a chance against Hill, simply because the driving forces in the election and her personal unpopularity gave the party a good shot.
Apparently, Trumpkins taking their ball and going home could be a factor in future elections, but is an irrelevant factor in weighing the chances of "any decent GOP candidate" against Hill in a counter-factual scenario.
Far from making "smug assertions," Case, Abramowitz, et al., make predictions on the basis of well-tested models. Looks like Trump will more disastrously underperform than anyone in recent history.
You can make predictions about events that haven't yet occurred. You don't make "predictions" about counter-factuals. So I hope you're invoking your experts' models to predict that Trump will suffer a disastrous loss, and not to prove something that can't be proved. No model can "predict" whether any other "decent" GOP candidate could have beaten Hillary. If you want to believe that, knock yourself out. But continuing to stamp your feet and insist on the truth of unprovable assertions just makes you, and everybody else engaged in the practice (and that includes some Trump supporters here) look like idiots.
Aside from being a pointless exercise. If I were you, and believed in the viability of the GOP, and believed what you believe about the how the Trumpkins fucked everything up and could fuck up future elections for you, I wouldn't be wasting my time getting all bitchy because they won't admit (sniff, sniff, stamp, stamp) that it was all their fault (flounce out). I'd be trying to get rid of the bastards, make sure they have no say ever again in GOP nominations.
@wholelottasplainin' obviously doesn't understand the character of the man running. Narcissism, possibly even solipsism, takes the Trump mind away from everything except himself.
I could understand that some folks don't recognize forms of self love because they don't know or care to know anyone with such traits - but we have all lived with Barry Soetoro in our TVs for the past eight years.
Stupid Trump interpreter says key to success is for person loved for authenticity not to be himself.
It's all going to depend on the #NeverTrump crowd.
____________
I think Jill Stein and Weld/Johnson are going to have a more significant impact.
Next time maybe the GOP, if there is a GOP, will try to get to 50 + 1 or 270 electoral college votes. Of course, the Trumpkins may take their ball and go home. Wouldn't put it past them.
1) Trump supporters have spent the last thirty years being told to shut up and be loyal, and they have..it is why they exist. It is pretty insulting to be accused of future disloyalty.
2) The ones threatening to take their ball and go home this election are the anti-Trump supporters. So it's OK to have standards and be disloyal for one group...but not for another? Sounds like a Democrat to me.........
Part of what I think that we have been seeing is the MSM (Dem operatives with bylines) doing what they seem to do every election, which is to hold their ammunition until after the conventions, then unload on the Republican nominee. All of f a sudden, they no love Niger put Trump in the evening news unless he screwed up that day. Instead, they are covering Crooked Hillary, with us seeing more of her after her convention than we saw for the last several months before it. Not that she is the more interesting of the two, but Trump can't win this way. All they need to do is keep him off the evening news, and her add advantage is going to win the election for her. Which network do you think is going to give him a fair shake at taking her down? The Clinton News Network (CNN)? PMSNBC? CBS? NBC? ABC? Al Jazirilla? What I seem to have been seeing this last week or so has been Trump maybe saying something that could be interpreted wrong NGOs, not the way he intended, and then a bunch of Dem and Crooked Hillary operatives coming on air to explain why it is so horrible. Then take his correction out of context to show how clueless he is. Which is really not that different from what the MSM did against Romney and McCain at this point. They have their candidate, and are going to pull her over the finish line no matter what it takes. And maybe compounding this, so many have become so beholden to the Clintons over the last 24 years (though few at the level of ABC's George Stephenopolis, who paid them $75k to get noticed by them).
That last post of mine was pathetic, thanks to Apple's Spell Check. Sorry.
back on your heads people, cilizza is journalist, but like a capybara mostly harmless,
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll-idUSKCN10G2BQ
@Bruce Hayden That was one of the points of my long screed above. Trump needs to arrange his appearances so that they have to be covered locally/regionally ultimately forcing the networks to cover him. Local/regional stations will not be able to resist a local visit or speech and of course most voters are "local". As far as attacking Hillary he is going to have to pay to do that. I would if I had the money!
I am voting for Jill Stein because she is hot. That's the standard now. Look at the Canadian PM, Mr Zoolander.
Ninety comments and still nobody points out the obvious.
I refrained w/ my comment because it was too much the elephant in the room to be worth noting.
Hint: Put yourself in DJTs shoes. THIS IS ABOUT DJT. How many decades and odd statements do you folks need before you get it.
Althouse suggests that DJT should talk to normal people. From DJT's POV, sure, as long as the focus is how DJT is awesome, or DJT can illicit adulation, or DJT can claim to work miracles for the little people (e.g. end all crime and violence in America on the day he's elected). But, that would just be more of the same.
Anywho, every now and then I start thinking that folks genuinely don't get DJT. Ninety comments into this thread (and Althouse's original post) is such a time. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe y'all do get it and your just flossing w/ quips for fun, like me.
If Milton Friedman wasn't a Jew, the racist GOP (Kristol, Podhoretz, Chuck) would be all in for the candidate that will surely be forced to do the right thing by virtue of the political consequences of doing the wrong thing. Friedman's ideal for a democratic leader is exemplified by Trump. The anti-ideal of Trump is Hillary: literally absolutely unaccountable to any person or institution.
Because of the biased hatred of him amongst old media and young indoctrinated simpletons. Trump has earned dictionary status as "Friedman's Ideal Leader" and history will record as such.
As many have suggested, it is almost as if Trump wants to win his way, or not at all. He very grudgingly identifies with mainstream Republicans, such as his running mate, who may actually help him. It shows on his face--it is like going to the dentist. His opponents suggest this amounts to craziness--a refusal to defer to consultants in an age of credentials, just imagine! Why should we be expected to put up with this?
I have no idea why he has handled the last couple of weeks the way he has. If there is some truth to the idea that everything is personal with him, maybe seeing Chelsea in action, and being reminded of her friendship with Ivanka, somehow made him pull his punches a bit, and then look for something in the DNC that really pissed him off. Result? The Wrath of Khan.
He very grudgingly identifies with mainstream Republicans, such as his running mate, who may actually help him. It shows on his face--it is like going to the dentist. His opponents suggest this amounts to craziness--a refusal to defer to consultants in an age of credentials, just imagine! Why should we be expected to put up with this?
When these mainstream Republicans have been WRONG from the onset of Trump's campaign, why should he listen?
THIS IS ABOUT DJT. How many decades and odd statements do you folks need before you get it.
Yeah guys can't you see? Trump is all about Trump and screw everyone else, unlike Hillary....who.....no....wait.....
Hmm...looks like they're both self interested demagogues......So I guess this point is actually meaningless.
Never mind.
Gahire,
Just put yourself in DJT's shoes at a podium, or in an interview, or on Howard Stern's couch, or on David Letterman's couch. What's he doing there? More to the point, why is he there doing what he's doing there?
You can hate HRC, you can find all sorts of faults w/ her, but you don't serve your ends by suggesting that she, psychologically, needs to make a spectacle of herself, like DJT does.
You can hate HRC, you can find all sorts of faults w/ her, but you don't serve your ends by suggesting that she, psychologically, needs to make a spectacle of herself, like DJT does.
She can't. To o so would call attention to her obvious short-comings.
Of course, the Trumpkins may take their ball and go home. Wouldn't put it past them.
You realize, or do you, that "Fuck you, now vote for us!" only works on Democrats?
If the GOP is no better than the Ds, why bother?
Nevertrumpers is who must, and will, come home.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा