That's Politico, putting in rather bland terms something that ought to be powerfully alarming to those who cannot abide even the risk that Trump could win the presidency. Why isn't he losing by a lot more? What explains his pesky resiliency?
Nearly 70 percent say they believe that Trump has “made unwanted sexual advances toward women,” a stunning number that comes after the publication of lewd comments the now-Republican nominee made on a hot mic in 2005, and amid allegations by several women who say he touched them inappropriately. (Trump has said his comments were just "locker room talk" and denies the groping accusations.)And yet, she's only got 4 points on him. She must be truly loathed. I know she wants to win, but imagine winning like that, knowing you are not wanted.
And a majority of registered voters -- 55 percent -- say that Trump's treatment of women is a legitimate issue, version 42 percent who say it wasn't. Similarly, most voters aren't buying Trump's apology for the 2005 video -- 57 percent of registered voters say it was insincere, and only 40 percent agree it sounded like "typical locker room talk by men."
Just 30 percent of registered voters say Trump has a “strong moral character,” versus 45 percent for Clinton. Only 34 percent view Trump as honest and trustworthy, down from 42 percent in last month’s survey. And just 34 percent say Trump has the right temperament to be president, while 59 percent say Clinton does.
As for Trump, the battering he's taking is epic, but he still survives.
Oh, sorry. That's just something I channel-surfed into on TV yesterday. It flashed back on me somehow.
Godzilla is a monster, causing endless destruction, but when he goes down losing, you get this crazy empathy for him. Am I saying Trump is a monster? Trump is like a monster, tromping through the built-up structures of American politics. How can he be stopped? Nothing seems to work. He keeps going. Yes, but in the end, he'll go down. Afterwards, you'll remember and think oddly fondly of him, and the characters who defeated him won't have your heart. Unlike a dead movie monster, Trump will still be a live human being, doing... whatever. The movie monster, even though killed in the movie, manages — if we've loved him — to get brought back to life for the sequels and remakes. But Trump will be around, and we'll want to see him again. His relentless, unstoppable rampage was so perversely rousing and even, for some, endearing.
Writing this makes me remember that Scott Adams has been talking about Trump's campaign as a movie. Adams saw Trump as the protagonist in a non-monster movie:
He explains that in the first act of a movie, "something unexpected [happens] that changes somebody's life trajectory" -- like deciding to run for president. In the second act, "you would see your protagonist overcoming a number of smaller hurdles," ending with the discovery of a seemingly unsolvable problem. In the third act, the protagonist grows or changes in order to solve the unsolvable problem.With that template, Adams predicts Trump will win the election. The protagonist solves his problem in the movie, and that could happen in real live because
He... wrote [last October]: "Once we recognize the movie form, we root for the hero, automatically. We have been trained by Hollywood to do that. You can’t turn it off in your mind. You can’t ignore it. If a candidate can wrap his or her personal story into a three-act form, that is the highest level of persuasion."So this is the idea that movies have trained our minds to identify the hero and root for him, especially as his problems become insurmountable. Within that template, everything bad that happens to Trump is good, because it sets up the profoundly satisfying emotional reward. The audience/voters could make him win, because deeply, psychically we want the hero to win. But it's one thing to watch and feel satisfaction when the hero overcomes all the obstacles. It's another to get up off the couch and translate your deep desires into the real-world action of voting.
"The idea of the third-act problem usually involves a character flaw of your hero," he explained [in mid-August]. "It is a problem that they specifically can't solve because of a character defect. They're afraid of something, they can't forgive, they've been a liar all their life until now... That's what makes it a good movie, we like to see people change in some positive way. That's what makes us feel good. Because in the real world we don't see it happen, hardly ever."
And what's missing from Adams's movie analysis is the monster hero. We want his rampaged stopped, we expect the closure that comes with killing him, and our deep psychic connection to the monster comes not as he wins but as he dies. Look how profound and exalted it is when Godzilla dies:
Posts
313 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 313 of 313"Polling shows Hillary winning women, I find that surprising."
What surprises me is that Hill has any male support at all. My boyfriend describes her voice as "ball shriveling." You'd think any man would look at her and think of the MIL or ex-wife or 3rd grade teacher from Hades.
@exiled -- just goes to show that we have too many Pajama Boys in this country masquerading as men.
Another point re the Al Jazeera interview -
Would the US media be improved if AJ were really active in the US?
I think so.
Whatever their biases, they are different from the unified, organized bias of the US MSM.
Not to mention they are much more sober and professional.
The media, DNC and the anti Trump people are missing the entire point and the phenomenon of Trump. They don't understand why the S.O.P. of character assassination, floating unsubstantiated rumors and all the other dirty tricks aren't working. The Dems and the media think that they are fighting Trump. They are sadly mistaken.
It isn't about Trump, the man. It is ALL about the ideas and the feelings that Trump embodies. The Trump supporters are fed up with the GOPe, the DNC, the elitist who want to control every freaking little aspect of our lives. Fed up with the government picking favorites and creating victim classes that get special treatment. Fed up with the Corporate cronyism.
FED up to the teeth with being called names, dismissed as low life, redneck, racists doing the dance of the sloping foreheads. Fed up with the real and pressing concerns of the American people being laughed at, ignored and being told to shut up. Shut up and pay the freight.
We asked nicely with the Tea Party. Trump is a stronger version and is the mouthpiece for the disenfranchised who are smoldering. They are ready to burn it all to the ground. Trump or no Trump.
It isn't Trump the man...so those smears don't mean much because it is ALL about the ideas, feelings and a movement.
If/when the DNC and the media literally steal this election, be aware that the movement and the feelings are not going to go away. The next embodiment of a Trump may be something that you really really don't want to see.
Buwaya, I have believed for some time that Al Jazeera was superior to any of our domestic news services, even though I abhor Islamism.
"I still thought Trump as president was a horrible joke and it wasn't until I heard from my brother Joe, who is battling fourth stage cancer, that I started opening my mind to the possibility that Trump was somehow meant to be.
Joe is a former Marine being treated at a Veteran's Hospital in the state of Washington. He spoke passionately to me about how Trump was talking about every thing that needed to be said: Obamacare, the VA scandal, IRS corruption, criminal illegals, a corrupt DOJ and FBI covering up for Obama and Hillary. The Democrats and our president were afraid to use the word Islamic jihadists when naming terrorists; and he liked the fact that Donald Trump said that global warming is a hoax while Obama was claiming this was a bigger threat than terrorism. Mexico has a wall yet only Trump insists that we have one too, Joe continued. I had to beg him to slow down and take a deep breath because it was affecting his chemo and heart rate."
http://www.silive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/10/colon.html#incart_river_index
@traditionalguy said...
Trump has already destroyed the 30 year fictional Narrative . . .
TG - I hate to interrupt your unbridled id stream of consciousness spew - but what in Hell'S Name are you talking about? Australasian snakes and I want to know.
mockturtle said...
"Jupiter complains: And it is surprising, to a shrinking violet like me, how often they score. You want it, you gotta ask for it.
It probably has a lot to do with the guy, Jupiter, not just his line."
I'm not complaining, mt. I am just pointing out that the difference between an unwanted pass an a wanted pass is that the woman wants the wanted pass. But she is usually careful to hide that fact.
@Buwaya Puti at 1211 That is one of the reasons I would like to see Trump in the presidency. He will be very much an individual and that will mean that he will be dependent on the House and Senate more than any recent president. It's time the House and Senate worked at their Constitutional responsibilities.
Thinking about putting the Clinton crime syndicate in office is enough to make your stomach turn. The Obama Chicago clique was bad , but they will look like little angels compared to Clinton's people who have been practicing for 30 odd years.
Chuck wrote: "But I will feel a lot less disgraced, for having made the correct call all along that Trump was a shitty nominee, and a nominee like Trump is a mistake that we cannot, as Republicans, ever make again."
You are not the only prophet. Early on I commented here that Trump was a shill for Hillary and/or that the media would destroy him in the general. As for the future of Republicans, I beg to differ ....
First, the Republican brand has been trashed for presidential voters. Something is seriously wrong when Mitt Romney loses to a putz like Obama and Donald Trump gets the next nomination.
Second, the remnant of the Republican Party is too arrogant to identify the mistake let alone rectify it. Here's a hint: Jeb Bush, $150 million and an unacceptable platform.
gadfly, do you have anything to offer here but witless snark? You're almost as bad as Unknown.
Another pajama boy for Hillary, I suppose.
SO..NC Repub headquarters firebombed. I guess Trump really is inciting violence.
@bagoh Agree this has not gained Trump any support. But wonder how many are fence sitters who will ultimately come home to their usual party regardless of scandals. Like a friend who since pre-primary declared she can not vote for Trump. Now with the election weeks away she says she will probably reluctantly pull the lever for Trump because Hillary is worse.
Also we are not hearing how much support wikileaks is costing Hillary. Big media is mostly ignoring, but the young Bernie Bro contingent get their news from the internet.
I think this will boil down to who shows up to vote.Trump supporters that are willing to stand in line for hours to attend a rally seem like a sure bet.Reluctant Trumpers like my 55 year old friend will still trot out to the polls because they have done so their entire life and feel it is a civic duty. Bernie bros who have just found out that all the worst things they thought about the DNC are true and have never or rarely voted - less likely to show.
@dbq: "It isn't about Trump, the man. It is ALL about the ideas and the feelings that Trump embodies. The Trump supporters are fed up with the GOPe, the DNC, the elitist who want to control every freaking little aspect of our lives." Only one small problem: there are not enough of them.
"...that Trump was a shitty nominee, and a nominee like Trump is a mistake that we cannot, as Republicans, ever make again. Not for president, not for Senate, and not even for congress..."
And that is how we will see Democrats take every election at every level in perpetuity, for everyone will be intimidated into timidity and "civility" until no one (R) says anything of substance and all political rhetoric (R) will lack passion or the ability to persuade. The mere mention of (D) impropriety will be condemned as "Trumpian Hate Speech."
Sounds like a great thing for America!
@DBQ You are right. It is impossible for those currently sucking at the government teat to have any idea how pissed off a lot of people are. They are convinced that 'the people" are stupid. They are wrong. "The people" are slow to anger. Maybe their anger can be held in check this time, but at some point women are going to start suffering the hazards that post-industrial man has suffered and that will be the end of the D's run. Since the 60's women have been on the winning side in education, jobs and social acceptance. That can't last forever. The benefits of "diversity" will suddenly be going to someone else.
If/when the DNC and the media literally steal this election, be aware that the movement and the feelings are not going to go away. The next embodiment of a Trump may be something that you really really don't want to see.
10/16/16, 3:16 PM
Exactly. The tremendous anger felt by many will only increase - and not just among the "rednecks." My BIL's nephew was one of the tech workers forced to train his Indian replacement or lose his severance. Do those who think that's just fine understand how humiliating that is? He voted for Obama in 2008. He's voting for Trump this year.
"I commented here that Trump was a shill for Hillary and/or that the media would destroy him in the general."
That and/or is a pretty big hedge.
I guess if you go full conspiracy/reverse psychology mode Trump could still be just setup.
But I have difficulty believing that could be the case given what both candidates are enduring. It could easily have been "setup" at a far lower level.
@ Brian McKim The only answer I can see for getting the "correct" Republican nominee is to rig the nominating system as the Dems did this time. Do we really want Reince Priebus announcing to us who the big money guys have decided should carry the banner? Isn't the entire Trump phenomenon about getting the elitists out of our lives?
DBQ wrote: "The media, DNC and the anti Trump people are missing the entire point and the phenomenon of Trump."
You are correct about GOPe, anti-Trump Republicans. They are political ignoramuses.
It is likely that the media and the DNC understand the point well enough. It just doesn't make any difference. Their behavior would not change. Their goals are to win the election at any cost, to preserve the corrupt D.C. Way, a virtual one party system and imposition of their "progressive" ideology to control the masses.
To them understanding the Trump phenomenon is just the booby prize.
And that is how we will see Democrats take every election at every level in perpetuity, for everyone will be intimidated into timidity and "civility" until no one (R) says anything of substance and all political rhetoric (R) will lack passion or the ability to persuade. The mere mention of (D) impropriety will be condemned as "Trumpian Hate Speech."
Sounds like a great thing for America!"
Exactly. And no matter how timid and careful the next GOP candidate will be, no matter how many times every word he or she says will be vetted by focus groups and campaign managers, he or she will be be portrayed as bigoted, racist, sexist, stupid, uncaring, a hick, etc.
Of course, that candidate might not care. Bush was thoroughly trashed by Dems (and he was too "high-minded" to respond) and now his daughter dances the night away in Paris, accompanied by Huma and Poppy is Obama's best friend. Trump's the one they hate, because he hurt poor Jebbie's feelings.
"That and/or is a pretty big hedge." (3:34)
It's not a hedge at all in terms of outcome. Either way he loses the general.
Sukie Tawdry @ 1:14pm:
"I ask because even though all those things, and more, have happened to me (and most women I'll wager), I've never considered myself the victim of sexual assault. It's been my experience that such episodes are easily dealt with and, if confronted, the men involved appropriately contrite. Now if uninvited and unwelcome advances continue even after you've issued a stop order, that's a different story. But, I'm telling you, the propensity of modern females to categorize men as predators and every incompleted pass an assault makes me want to throw a hardcover version of The Female Eunuch at them. Or at least point fingers and laugh."
I couldn't agree more and couldn't have written a better post. By today's definition of assault, I've been assaulted more times than I can count. And yet...I manage to go through life as a sane, well-adjusted - hell, exceptionally well adjusted, pragmatic, down to earth example of our species. AND in a relationship with a man for 20+ years. Imagine that.
@buwaya puti said...
Another point re the Al Jazeera interview - Would the US media be improved if AJ were really active in the US? I think so.
Richard Fernandez is not wrong about Islamists and as for al Jazeera, the "news orgnization" is a propaganda arm of the Islamic terrorists and always has been. The fact that the network's Qatari-based owners provided monetary support to Hamas should be be enough to believe other stories about active support supplied to al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.
Al Jazeera's cable slot, purchased from AlGore, is rumored to soon become a Herring . . . Network, that is.
Sure..shorter less hedgy would be "he'll lose".
Of course Trump has not lost support. We the people HATE the media, and the Establishment politicos. Any attack by them makes Trump stronger. Especially when they ignore EVERYTHING about the Crooked Old Lady. If Trump wasn't wiping the floor with her they would not be attacking Trump 24/7 and firebombing GOP Campaign headquarters. Landslide Trump. It is not close. Trump will get 400 electoral votes.
50 People at Kaine's Miami rally yesterday (so how could the Crooked Old Lady possibly be winning).
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/10/wow-50-people-show-see-hillarys-vp-tim-kaine-miami/
Miami Herald characterized it as a "get out the vote" rally today. HAHAHAHAHAHA. Same day they proclaimed in Bold Headline "We're with her". The media will never recover after this.
@hombre "the Republican Party is too arrogant to identify the mistake let alone rectify it"
They plan to do the exact opposite. If Trump loses they will blame it on the "wall". This excuse will be used to immediately push through amnesty. After amnesty my own and many other "swing" House districts will be solid Dem. That Republicans will then present a more conservative candidate to win over the millions of new third world voters is pure fantasy.
He is wrong about Philippine Muslims and their political threat.
Fact is the Philippine Muslims are getting demographically swamped, provinces they used to dominate have been turning Christian due to masses of Visayan immigrants. There has been a huge change in just the last thirty years.
The Muslims, or the radical ones, can kill and conduct all the terrorism they like, beyond a certain point that is just going to prompt an equal and opposite reaction. That could get very ugly.
Much of the point of the Philippine military intervention and political accomodations has been to prevent communal warfare - i.e., retaliation against Muslims by their Christian neighbors, who so greatly outnumber them.
Those people are Visayans, and are well able to take care of themselves if pushed.
"Exactly. The tremendous anger felt by many will only increase - and not just among the "rednecks." My BIL's nephew was one of the tech workers forced to train his Indian replacement or lose his severance. Do those who think that's just fine understand how humiliating that is? He voted for Obama in 2008. He's voting for Trump this year. "
Yes, I understand how humiliating that is (and I am a Democratic voter). I also understand it is stupid and smug and people who do that are too self-satisfied. Yes, yes and yes. More and more people are understanding this. And in fact, a few years ago, PBS did a great documentary on how companies are just bypassing Americans in favor of importing a middle class from India. Yes, PBS.
The Quataris paid off Al Gore for his environmentalist efforts on their behalf, for the purpose of suppressing US petroleum production.
I didnt say they didnt have a bias, all I mean is that they have a different bias, which in this media climate is likely to be an improvement.
bagoh20:
Can you really imagine Pres. Reagan having a conversation like the following between Trump and Chris Matthews at a town hall meeting last March? I can't.
MATTHEWS: Your most controversial suggestion was don't take nuclear weapons -- I mean, you may have been hooked into this by (inaudible).
TRUMP: Don't take what?
MATTHEWS: Nuclear weapons off the table. I have been trying to think of how we could conceivably use a nuclear weapon in the Middle East or in Europe in fighting ISIS. Where can you -- and why put it on the table or leave it on the table if you can't imagine where to use it?
TRUMP: Well, I didn't say, "Don't take it." I said I would be very, very slow and hesitant to pull that trigger.
MATTHEWS: Well, why would you -- why wouldn't you just say, "I don't want to talk about it. I don't want to talk about nuclear weapons. Presidents don't talk about use of nuclear weapons"?
TRUMP: The question was asked -- we were talking about NATO -- which, by the way, I say is obsolete and we pay a dispropor...
MATTHEWS: But you got hooked into something you shouldn't've talked about.
TRUMP: I don't think I -- well, someday, maybe.
MATTHEWS: When? Maybe?
TRUMP: Of course. If somebody...
MATTHEWS: Where would we drop -- where would we drop a nuclear weapon in the Middle East?
TRUMP: Let me explain. Let me explain. Somebody hits us within ISIS, you wouldn't fight back with a nuke?
MATTHEWS: No. To drop a nuclear weapon on a community of people that are...
TRUMP: No, no, but you can't say -- first of all, you don't want to say, "Take everything off the table..."
MATTHEWS: No, just nuclear.
TRUMP: ... because you'd be a bad negotiator if you do that.
MATTHEWS: Just nuclear.
TRUMP: Look, nuclear should be off the table. But would there be a time when it could be used, possibly, possibly?
MATTHEWS: OK. The trouble is, when you said that, the whole world heard it. David Cameron in Britain heard it. The Japanese, where we bombed them in '45, heard it. They're hearing a guy running for president of the United States talking of maybe using nuclear weapons. Nobody wants to hear that about an American president.
TRUMP: Then why are we making them? Why do we make them? We had (inaudible).
MATTHEWS: Because of the old mutual assured destruction, which Reagan hated and tried to get rid of.
TRUMP: (inaudible) I was against Iraq. I'd be the last one to use the nuclear weapon.
MATTHEWS: So can you take it off the table now?
TRUMP: Because that's sort of like the end of the ball game.
MATTHEWS: Can you tell the Middle East we're not using a nuclear weapon on anybody?
TRUMP: I would never say that. I would never take any of my cards off the table.
MATTHEWS: How about Europe? We won't use it in Europe?
TRUMP: I -- I'm not going to take it off the table.
MATTHEWS: You might use it in Europe?
TRUMP: No, I don't think so. But I'm not taking...
MATTHEWS: Well, just say it. "I will never use a nuclear weapon in Europe."
TRUMP: I am not -- I am not taking cards off the table.
Yeah. Trump prefers nukes to troops
That's the same thing LBJ said about Goldwater, after which, LBJ dragged us deeper and deeper into Viet Nam.
Speaking of Al Gore, thats one character you all should have tarred and feathered. He was openly acting as a foreign agent against US interests.
Because Mathews was trying to get Trump to commit to a hypothetical. There was no way to answer that question. What if the new Red Army is marching across Europe with thousands of tanks? Trump handled that just fine. Mathews is a puke and knew it would have been irresponsible for Trump to answer his question, which is why he forced it and forced it.
MSNBC is a massive in kind contribution to the Hillary campaign, as Wikileaks has made all too clear.
Did Trump cheat you in business, gadfly?
Did you like Hillary's "Bomb Iran" riff in her Goldman Sachs speech?
"Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran!" - HRC OK, I paraphrase.
gadfly can't wait to be crushed under the boot of the Clinton machine.
Cruz supporters just continue to demonstrate why it was good judgement to defeat that lout.
But Trump has not demanded war (Hillary has), vote for war (Hillary has), nor has he fallen asleep while his people were murdered (Hillary has.) And most important, Trump has not set up a secret email server that the enemies of the US can hack (Hillary most defiantly has) and then LIED to the American pubic, as well as Congress and the FBI ( another Hillary has done so!)
So vote for a person who 'maybe' is a bad pick or one who's track record most certainly IS A BAD PICK.
Your call.
HT, he was one of the young people who flocked to IT in the early 90's because it was the field of the future. He started out as a liberal arts major but figured a career in IT would mean financial success and security.
Many conservatives who read about the continuing degradation of the liberal arts tradition in favor of Victimology Studies have advised their young to ditch English or Art or Queer Studies in favor of a "practical" major. He did. The joke's on him.
That's one thing which might wake up the smug middle class Democrats, who believe so strongly in degrees and credentials. If that $100,000 degree doesn't help your kid find or keep a job - well, hello, Europe. There are plenty of highly educated young Europeans who are spending their days sitting on their asses at cafes, although in their cases, it's not because they've been booted out of jobs in favor of foreigners. The jobs aren't there to begin with.
I was aware from your earlier comments that you are a woman. I am too and share your bafflement. I see little evidence of "the sisterhood" in my day-to-day vote, but it sure seems to come into play when there there is a Democrat female on the ticket. Many of the women I know take it for granted that of course all women will vote for Hillary because it be such a historic first. It will be - we'll have the most amoral grifter ever elected to what is still (but perhaps not for long) the most important office on earth.
African-Americans found themselves so emotionally needy and manipulable that they could be talked into voting an accomplishment-free, moving on up political George and Weezie Jefferson into the White House as their singularly first presidential image bearer. Now for identical reasons women are falling all over themselves to repeat the same kakistic representation.
The hope to cling to would have to be that, after an indefinite interim marked by an across the board "Well, you know, we had an African-American President, and we had a female president, and, well...", surely things can only improve for both cohorts.
Donald Trump Told Howard Stern He Supported the Iraq War
mockturtle said... [hush][hide comment]
...... In old movies, when a man kissed a woman against her will, she would slap him. Of course, nowadays, he might sue her for assault. Things have gotten crazy.
In a lot of those old movies, after the slap, the man(always the good guy) grabs her and kisses her again and she melts into his arms. A real "no means yes" lesson to boys and men back then. Almost like it was expected behavior.
Also writing fictional tales of conquest in your diary.
Ha! That reminds me of the essay that Bernie Sanders wrote about a woman who fantasizes being raped by three men simultaneously?
exiledonmainstreet said...
HT, he was one of the young people who flocked to IT in the early 90's because it was the field of the future. He started out as a liberal arts major but figured a career in IT would mean financial success and security.
Many conservatives who read about the continuing degradation of the liberal arts tradition in favor of Victimology Studies have advised their young to ditch English or Art or Queer Studies in favor of a "practical" major. He did. The joke's on him.
That's one thing which might wake up the smug middle class Democrats, who believe so strongly in degrees and credentials. If that $100,000 degree doesn't help your kid find or keep a job - well, hello, Europe. There are plenty of highly educated young Europeans who are spending their days sitting on their asses at cafes, although in their cases, it's not because they've been booted out of jobs in favor of foreigners. The jobs aren't there to begin with.
______
WELL, that is sad, and I hope your relative and all of us do not give up. As a Democrat, I struggle with this issue among friends, how to bring it up and so forth. At the same time, I know that way back when, more Dems than Reps opposed NAFTA.
It is not the Democrats exclusively who believe and advocate uncontrolled immigration. Afterall most unions were against NAFTA, and many unionists were Democrats. Plenty of Republican businessmen supported NAFTA. Plenty of Republican voters did as well. Cheap products and all that.
Who are these women who fantasize about rape? I can't imagine it. Perhaps you men can enlighten us women.
exiledonmainstreet said...
"The Trumpists will be excommunicated."
Once again, who do you think will make up for the "Trumpists" once you have booted them? Most are not waiting - we're leaving the GOP in droves (and I'm hardly a "Trumpist.") I will never again give another penny to the RNC and I see no point in continuing the charade of voting for people who are fundamentally no different than the DNC.
Where are you going to get all those lost voters you dismiss in a fashion that puts me in mind of John Podesta? The blacks? The Hispanics? Will you promise them more goodies? If so, what on earth is the point of you?
Then what are you going to do, after Hillary is inaugurated? When your only hope to block her is Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell, and when the House is ready to pass articles of impeachment against her, but it will require 60 Republican senate votes to convict her? Your only hope to block her will rest with Republicans.
And if you are determined to sit all of out, and pout and grouse about how both parties are the same and you won't support either one... just hold your breath until you get the attention you deserve. And see who cares.
"Perhaps you men can enlighten us women."
I think I posted others back in the mattress girls days...but
there are studies...
"Sure..shorter less hedgy would be "he'll lose". (3:59)
Less precise too.
It is not the Democrats exclusively who believe and advocate uncontrolled immigration. Afterall most unions were against NAFTA, and many unionists were Democrats. Plenty of Republican businessmen supported NAFTA. Plenty of Republican voters did as well. Cheap products and all that.
10/16/16, 4:38 PM
That's why it's the UniParty.
The average hard hat is a Trump voter and yet Trumka has his lips firmly planted on Hill's backside. The union fat cats care no more about the guys paying the dues than the DNC or RNC does.
But are we talking about Rape or take me now Mr Man! One is violent, the other is .... fine/great/whatever.
Mick said...
Of course Trump has not lost support. We the people HATE the media, and the Establishment politicos. Any attack by them makes Trump stronger. Especially when they ignore EVERYTHING about the Crooked Old Lady. If Trump wasn't wiping the floor with her they would not be attacking Trump 24/7 and firebombing GOP Campaign headquarters. Landslide Trump. It is not close. Trump will get 400 electoral votes.
Trashtalk. Worthless, street-level trashtalk. You keep spouting this crap, and you won't back it up. You won't put your money where your mouth is. I want to bet you, on bullshit claims like "400 electoral votes for Trump." You are full of baloney, but you're also to chickenshit to bet on what you are claiming.
What a silly, unserious shit head you are.
"When your only hope to block her is Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell, and when the House is ready to pass articles of impeachment against her, but it will require 60 Republican senate votes to convict her?"
You actually think that will happen? You think they're a real opposition party?
They haven't stopped Obama and you think they're going to impeach Hillary?
Oh, that's rich.
Of course, Chuck, that's what they say they'll do. They'll send lots of "URGENT!!! STOP HILLARY!" emails out asking for money. The National Review and Weekly Standard will publish a 100 indignant essays.
And it will all come to naught - just like all of Trey Gowdy's hearings resulted in nothing.
But they will get more of your money - which is the point.
HT,
I believe the phrase you're reaching for is "rape rape".
I too was raised on the sugar n spice bit.
Per Full Moon: In a lot of those old movies, after the slap, the man(always the good guy) grabs her and kisses her again and she melts into his arms. A real "no means yes" lesson to boys and men back then. Almost like it was expected behavior.
Yes, I guess that did happen a lot in the movies. After the slap, the guy would say something like, "I like a girl with spirit." Realistically, though, a woman can usually let a guy know, without ambiguity, she is not interested.
Have I missed Obama's call for civility in wake of NC firebombing?
What's happening in IT is that as communications technology improves, it becomes easier and easier to outsource routine programming work. If you work in this field, your only real defense is to constantly upgrade your skills and work in areas where your job can't easily be outsourced. Limiting immigration is not going to make any difference.
I work in this field, and I'm constantly amazed at how many of my fellow programmers haven't learned any new languages or programming paradigms since their first job. As the old saying goes, you really want to have 20 years of experience, not one year of experience repeated 20 times.
"Donald Trump Told Howard Stern He Supported the Iraq War"
Did he vote for it in the Senate? 'Cause talking to Howard Stern and voting for war on the floor of the Senate imply exactly the same level of responsibility.
God, Democrats are trivial clowns.
Why isn't he losing by a lot more? What explains his pesky resiliency?
D’ya think it might be that much of the public sees through all the media bias crap, is more concerned about the need for job creation, economic revitalization, an effective foreign policy particularly with respect to Russia and China, views Clinton as hopeless and that maybe, just maybe the only alternative Trump might be someone who might deliver?
Frankly I think that we are screwed........
From the Noble Prize winner........
Slow Train Coming
Trump isn't losing because the alternative is Hillary Clinton.
Clinton isn't losing because the alternative is Donald Trump.
The American people are losing because the alternatives are Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.
HT wrote:
It is not the Democrats exclusively who believe and advocate uncontrolled immigration. Afterall most unions were against NAFTA, and many unionists were Democrats. Plenty of Republican businessmen supported NAFTA. Plenty of Republican voters did as well. Cheap products and all that.
Economics ain't rocket science. There are known ways you can increase economic growth. Having products and services provided by people who will produce them for less money is one way to increase economic efficiency. This is what is accomplished by immigration, and outsourcing jobs to foreign countries.
Another way to increase economic growth is to exploit natural resources.
Yet while it is obvious that not every river should be damned for hydropower, and not every acre of arable land should be used to grow corn, it escapes some people that driving down the wages of citizens is perhaps not the best path to prosperity.
If economic efficiency is the ultimate goal, we would herd people into death chambers when their economic usefulness ends. Instead we send them checks.
lemondog,
"Gotta serve somebody" works also ;)
The Iraq War (i.e. ceasefire) ended with Bush. It resumed with a vengeance and metastasized with Obama, Clinton's progressive wars (i.e. social justice adventurism), anti-native policies, and immigration reform.
It's informative to compare and contrast the end of Hussein and Gaddafi's regimes. The former was an unreformed, belligerent dictator who invaded a sovereign nation and was brought to justice with a trial before the people. The latter was a reformed dictator who opposed social justice adventurism, and prospects of a Libya-ISIS Affair, and was brought to justice through sodomy and abortion.
Blogger Lydia said...
And you know one of these candidates will have troops in Syria within the year. Hillary has voted for every war and started the rest for 25 years.
"Yeah. Trump prefers nukes to troops."
This is a stupid retort. But it is illustrative of the complete unseriousness of Hillary and her supporters.
A vote for Hillary is a vote for war. Endless, stupid, War.
Blogger Chuck said...
"Trashtalk. Worthless, street-level trashtalk. You keep spouting this crap, and you won't back it up. You won't put your money where your mouth is. I want to bet you, on bullshit claims like "400 electoral votes for Trump." You are full of baloney, but you're also to chickenshit to bet on what you are claiming.
What a silly, unserious shit head you are."
Poor Chuck. People are speaking the truth about Hillary of whom he is clearly voting for. Only when pressed does he tangentially criticize her. Every specific criticism is targeted at trump and trump supporters. It is clear you want trump to lose and the Republican Party to split.
You are a shill. A dishonest dishonorable shill. We expect nothing less from the Hillary campaign.
Chuck has not figured out that "Support us, you ignorant rednecks! You have no choice! We are the only ones standing between you and the abyss, you stupid knuckleheads!" is not an winning political strategy.
As Wikileaks show, the Dems have plenty of contempt for their own voters as well. But at least the Dems don't proudly bray their derision and scorn from the mountaintops like the GOP is doing. The D's might privately think that BernieBros are all basement-dwelling losers, but Pelosi publicly praised the Occupy movement, while McCain took a dump on the Tea Party.
Stupid Party is stupid.
HT wrote - "As a Democrat, I struggle with this issue among friends, how to bring it up and so forth."
You've struggled. Oh, how you've struggled. How to bring it up? What to do? What to do? Better to think about bringing it up some other time. Yeah, that will do. Well, at least I thought about bringing it up. Yeah, that was good, wasn't it? Yeah it was. Well, I' m glad that's over. I feel better about myself now.
Put it this way Chuck, what do you think that Hillary Clinton is going to be impeached for? Displeasing Republicans? The answer will be that it was already tried by the people, in the 2016 election, and (if you get your wish) Hillary Clinton was voted innocent. Nothing that you say will happen.
In this campaign Hillary and her Council, like any clever lawyer whose defendant is guilty, are attempting to secure an acquittal by blaming the victim. They have turned Trump into Jodie Foster in The Accused.
And if Hillary is still alive in 2020 then she will be reelected if she wins now. It's as if you don't recognize the power of incumbency, especially as used by the Democratic machine. None of these 2020 jockeys will have a chance.
exiledonmainstreet said:
"They haven't stopped Obama and you think they're going to impeach Hillary?"
Agreed. The GOPe would be fine with a corrupt Hillary, as long as they got their share of the pie.*
The only thing that would run Hillary out of office is if Bernie's "basement dwellers" -- to use Hillary's term-- joined forces with the former Trump supporters -- Althouse's hypothetical from a few weeks ago. The GOP would only act against Hillary if they're forced to by an angry electorate that's at the pitchforch-and-torch stage. They'd do it trepidatiously, because it would mean that they were in danger as well.
*(Yes, I am that cynical.)
@ Chuck
"When your only hope to block her is Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell, and when the House is ready to pass articles of impeachment against her,"
Impeach her! Come on - they are going to be far to busy passing her agenda. Ryan/Hillary agree on:
-Open borders
-Amnesty
-TPP
-More refugees
-Increasing the number of H-1B visas
-Increase taxes on middle class to allow for more tax breaks for Wall St, Hollywood, Green energy
-More federal oversight of schools
-more & bigger "anti-poverty" programs, aka welfare for all
Chuck,
This is the way it works-
If chiefs have no indians,
And indians have no chiefs,
Chiefs cant get new indians,
But indians can get new chiefs.
"Note that there is never a thought -- let alone a thoughtful post -- about Hillary's gender gap with men."
Which is what -- 6% or so? How is that interesting?
The interesting gap for Clinton is with middle class and working class voters -- a demographic the Clintons and all Democrats seem to have simply given up on. Republicans too. Trump's genius was in his ability to see that gap and speak to those Americans' sense of desperation and express for them their frustrations and feelings of betrayal by government they've been suffering ever since H Bush promised "read my lips".
"The only thing that would run Hillary out of office is if Bernie's "basement dwellers" -- to use Hillary's term-- joined forces with the former Trump supporters -- Althouse's hypothetical from a few weeks ago."
Well, I have found myself agreeing with both R & B and garage mahal in these threads, so the End Times must be upon us. Several years ago, that would have been as unlikely as the prospect of the Cubs winning the WS. (If they do win, it will be The End of the World, which is a good thing as it will spare us Election Day.)
Seriously, I had a long talk with other day with my Bernie loving nephew. He is leaning toward voting for Stein, but I believe I got him to consider voting for Trump. (He said, "If I do, I'm not telling anybody.") He has been keeping up with Wikileaks and Hillary absolutely appalls him. Obviously, we do not agree with how to "fix" the problem, if it is at all fixable, but if there is one small ray of hope in this mess it is that the more thoughtful disaffected of both parties realize they are being manipulated by DC and the media.
One thing I tried to make my nephew understand without success is that it is the growth of government that has led to this mess. Hillary in office is so dangerous because the federal government is so huge and unaccountable. He keeps thinking that Big Government is fine if you just have the right people - idealistic public servants, rather than sleazebags - in office. I told him that people go to DC as idealistic public servants and become sleazebags very quickly, because that is what Big Government rewards.
I don't know duterte's particular angle, but seeing as they have thrown most allies under the bus, hest to go with the strong horse, in the region,
Sadly enough, anyone who thinks a president Trump will shrink government is fooling himself.
well he's sold off non performing assets in the past, like the plaza and his yacht, if needs must,
Well..seems to have been deleted, but the poster here who predicted false flag accusation re NC bombing was correct. New Republic tweeting "the timing is curious".
you need a program for all the players over there,
In a televised plenary debate in the Senate, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile publicly accused Trillanes of working for Chinese interest, in reference to the territorial dispute between the Philippines and China.[30] Posing as an informal emissary of the government of Benigno Aquino III, Trillanes allegedly wanted to rein in then Foreign Affairs Secretary
Albert del Rosario and prevent the United States from being involved in the regional
dispute. Enrile then proceeded to read what he said were notes of Philippine Ambassador to China Sonia Brady about a meeting with Trillanes in Beijing, in which Trillanes allegedly told the Chinese that the Philippines cannot enforce its coastal protection, and that the Philippines does not have any interest in the Scarborough Shoal.[31] Senator Trillanes confirmed that he had been acting as "backchannel negotiator" with China for months, keeping then Foreign Affairs Secretary Albert del Rosario out of the loop. [32] He was then charged of treason and espionage in May 2016 for his series of sixteen secret meetings with officials in Beijing and providing information which resulted in the immediate occupation of Scarborough Shoal and the Spratly Islands by China in 2012.[33]
Per exiled: I told him that people go to DC as idealistic public servants and become sleazebags very quickly, because that is what Big Government rewards.
A lot of people don't realize this but well-meaning folks elected to Congress soon find that, if they don't play the game, they are shut out of the process altogether. Remember the news story about new Congressmen being expected to spend a minimum of 30 hours a week fundraising? [Aired on 60 Minutes. The experience is so disillusioning that they either decide not to run again or join in the corruption, rationalizing, I suppose, that the power gained will enable them to do the good they intended to do. It's been like this forever and doesn't seem likely to change unless we get term limits.
Remember the news story about new Congressmen being expected to spend a minimum of 30 hours a week fundraising?
Credit should be given to McCain Feingold for that one.
Nobody remembers that Eugene McCarthy's quixotic run against Lyndon Johnson in 1968 was funded by ONE supporter.
Sadly enough, anyone who thinks a president Trump will shrink government is fooling himself.
I am always interested in people who know Trump well enough to read his mind. How long have you known him?
Where did you first meet ?
How did you happen to get so well acquainted ?
Meade said...
Sadly enough, anyone who thinks a president Trump will shrink government is fooling himself.
10/16/16, 8:00 PM
I don't think that. I don't think Jeb would shrink it either. As I mentioned earlier, I would probably be disappointed with him much of the time. Hillary will vastly expand the power of the government.
It's a choice between not so great and absolutely horrific.
"anyone who thinks a president Trump will shrink government is fooling himself."
I think Trump is appalled at all the waste, red tape and incompetence of government. NYer's still admire him for the Wolman ice rink in Central Park. The city had spent millions over six years, it was projected it would take another two years and millions more to complete. Trump took over and it was up and running in about four months. I believe Trump would like to shrink government and get the budget under control. How successful he would be against two parties united against him is the question. The advantage a President Trump would have is he is beholden to neither party nor special interest donors, he is a fast learner and adept at using social media. He could prove very successful at uniting the public behind him to put pressure on congress to pass legislation they don't want.
Shrinking the government is desirable, of course. Reorganizing it is essential. Expanding it is a horror to be avoided at all costs [irony intended].
If government growth is a given..which entitlements alone will likely assure, better at least create an environment more favorable to domestic industry and job creation.
If the stimulus money had gone to consumers, there would have been real stimulus.
New Republic tweeting "the timing is curious".
10/16/16, 8:06 PM
Yes. Heaven knows, there has been no violence against Trump supporters. Nobody's been beaten or spat upon or had their cars keyed or lawn signs stolen.
And yet, she's only got 4 points on him. She must be truly loathed. I know she wants to win, but imagine winning like that, knowing you are not wanted.
Ann,
I don't think she cares about being liked -- she wants to be feared, and power is a means to that end. And with the Presidency in her hands, she will have a LOT of power -- enough power to make our lives miserable for having the temerity to loathe her and to refuse to cooperate with the evil that flows from her brokenness.
Hale Adams
Pikesville, People's still-mostly-Democratic Republic of Maryland
I said...Note that there is never a thought -- let alone a thoughtful post -- about Hillary's gender gap with men.
Meade responded: Which is what -- 6% or so? How is that interesting?
Where do you get that data, Meade? An older Rasmussen poll suggests that her gender gap is worse than Trump's: link
Anecdotally, it seems true as well.
Meade wrote How is that interesting?
What would be interesting is if Hillary were hiding a worse gender gap.
What would be interesting is if Hillary were hiding a worse gender gap.
Because to even bring it up might exacerbate it. Her only reason for it would be that men are stupid and sexist.
The Republicans include a lot of small businessmen and these all support Hispanic immigration. I used to ask early Trump supporters about this but they never even saw the issue. The GOP will pass amnesty if Hilary is elected. BUT once the Hispanics are citizens then the Dem hold on them will weaken because otherwise they oppose her at the gut level and as small businessmen which most of them are; and in religion the ones not Catholics are fundamentalists. What I'm saying is that in this case as in the case of the collapse of the pension plans which will hurt the black middle class the consequences of the election of Hillary will not be the continuation of the past - whatever happens, she will be inadequate.
I sort of see the US becoming known as "the sick woman of the West" as the Ottoman Empire was known as "The sick man of Europe." The Ottomans were sick because they were weak and weak because they were corrupt. Then they had their "Godzilla", Kemal Ataturk. Nothing in America will go like that.
But it won't go on the pattern of the past either. We've been sold and Trump has made that plain. Those who deny the selling of America to globalists may win this election. But they won't get their pensions without reform and they won't get reform from Hillary and the Democrats.
What surprises me is that Hill has any male support at all. My boyfriend describes her voice as "ball shriveling."
Where boners go to die.
exiledonmainstreet said:
"I told him that people go to DC as idealistic public servants and become sleazebags very quickly, because that is what Big Government rewards. "
Indeed.
There is little room for idealism in a large, entrenched bureaucracy. There is layer upon layer of rules that have been put in place-- primarily to protect the leviathan itself. Those who enter thinking they will change it more than likely find themselves changed by it, or they leave defeated.
"BUT once the Hispanics are citizens then the Dem hold on them will weaken"
There are over 12 million illegal immigrants in this country. By me the largest communities of illegals are Chinese, Mexican, Albanian, Russian and assorted Arabic speakers. Most do not own their own business. They work low wage jobs in construction, cleaning, landscaping, food service, prostitution.... Because of low wages most receive food stamps, free medical care, free medicines for their children and some even qualify for rental assistance. Their children attend the Democrat indoctrination camps known as public schools. The Spanish speaking illegals listen to Univision and watch Telemundo, both which tell their audience all Republicans are evil white racists. Catholic churches have been pro-Democrat for years. The chance that these amnesty recipients would vote Republican seems like fantasy.
Can you imagine 9/11 happening under Trump if the Islamists believed he'd melt Mecca in response just as a starter?
Had they known that as a result of knocking over two towers, Bush would in turn knock over two Islamic countries, they would have attacked someone else. And that's what needs to be done - raise the price of terrorism higher than what they are willing to pay by an order of magnitude.
Had Carter the balls to level a square mile of Tehran per day, they would not have held the hostages for 444 days - released, not coincidentally, while Reagan was being sworn in. Had Carter survived another four years, those poor hostages would have been held the entire time.
Speak softly and carry a big stick is sage advice. Limp-dicked, lead from behind, hash-tag, beta-male, deceive the American public diplomacy, as we've seen repeatedly from the Obama adminstration, is quite obviously not the correct approach.
walter said:
"...at least create an environment more favorable to domestic industry and job creation. "
Yes.
If the focus of the govt leviathan in on the needs of the people it's charged with serving, then despite the corruption inherent to any powerful organization, it might still do some good. But the progressives running our govt today don't put the needs of America first, they prefer to think globally. Plus, the ruling class doesn't like traditional Americans or their values. They feel little to no sympathy for the Americans who are losing their jobs to cheaper foreign labor.
Trump, with all his faults and character flaws, seems to genuinely like Americans, and says he will focus the leviathan on the needs of American's first. No one can predict how successful he would be at changing the leviathan, but his pro-America attitude as the chief executive is a good start. There is nothing to lead one to believe that Queen Hillary will start to care about the needs of the "deplorables" once she gets coronated.
I don't understand why the relatively small drop in support is a mystery. Among the reasons people might be voting for Trump, the following would not be affected by all the sexual peccadilloes:
- Anyone with a goal of preventing Hillary from being president
- Anyone voting for Trump because of immigration
- Anyone voting for Trump to deliver a giant middle finger to official Washington
The only voters this would realistically affect who were in Trump's camp are those who don't have strong reasons for either voting for him in the first place or using him as a protest vote. Just from the nature of the two candidates, that's not likely to be a large pool.
This is kind of why nothing ever stuck to Trump in the primaries - voter anger is not an easy thing to dissipate without satisfaction once it's present, and I would say the angry voters have been going to Trump in both the primary and the general. It should greatly alarm the powers that be, but considering how absolutely tone deaf Washington and particularly the Democrats have been, they are more likely to think that if Hillary wins all is well.
Anyone else here think that Chuck would welsh on a bet without a second thought?
This election is an unprecedented, in my lifetime, extravaganza of psyops, spin doctoring, propaganda and dirty tricks. We are witnessing the mother of all alinskying.
Yet the latest Rasmussen poll has Trump ahead by 2. The LA Times Poll has Trump just ahead but trending up.
The electoral map looks bad for Trump yet when you check the states you find they included bogus polls like Monmouth.
It ain't over till it's over.
Darrell said...
Anyone else here think that Chuck would welsh on a bet without a second thought?
You miserable fucking troll. Let it be known, all who are reading this; "Darrell" falsely accused me of having welshed on a bet. He was wrong; it was a lie. And he's been called out on it. Not only by me, but also by the person with whom Darrell wrongly presumed I had welshed.
I have not welshed on any bet. Darrell is just still butt-hurt over having gotten it wrong, and having been called out on it by me.
You really are a peculiarly mendacious, rotten waste of human space. Darrell.
Darrell said...
Anyone else here think that Chuck would welsh on a bet without a second thought?
10/17/16, 4:27 AM
Oh, I believe that, Darrell, absolutely. He's got some kind of a fetish for betting. People like that are always defective. Yeah, that's probably his kink, he bets, he loses, he doesn't pay. Such a thoroughly dishonorable chap.
You two fuckwads; I propose to challenge the stupid trashtalk you post, with a bet, and you're too chicken to man up.
You rotten piece of shit, Bad Lieutenant; name a time when I've failed to pay a bet.
Don't troll me on this anymore. Leave me alone. The next time you write about my "welshing" on any bets, I will be emailing Professor Althouse to ban you.
Chuck, just to be clear, I think that you are a dishonorable son of a bitch. I have no information on you welshing, but I'm sure you would do anything you felt like doing and rationalize it later. When we've discussed bets seriously I've found that not only are you no action, you're no talk. You really seem more like a crazy person than anything. The easiest explanation is that you are a leftist political troll of some sort.
If that was too long and hard for you:
I don't trust you.
Why should I?
Bad Lieutenant, I don't care about you. Or what you think, about anything. I care less than nothing about what your opinions of me might be. So leave me out of your posts.
Good luck with Trump in November.
Dear Dishonorable Chuck:
You are not the boss of me. I shall say what I like, when so unfortunate as to be reminded of your existence.
Go lie and cheat somewhere else, poltroon.
Boys, boys!!! ;-)
Post a Comment