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:
1 – 200 of 313 Newer› Newest»I know she wants to win, but imagine winning like that, knowing you are not wanted.
It turns her on.
Come on, Democrat Media Industrial Complex, you can do it.
Hillary is the monster. Real Americans see that.
He hasn't lost much because his supporters are deplorables.
Trump is like a monster, tromping through the built-up structures of American politics. How can he be stopped?
And why should you want to stop him? He's calling attention to things that needed attention called to them. How do you not see that?
Nothing seems to work. He keeps going. Yes, but in the end, he'll go down.
Probably true.
Afterwards, you'll remember and think oddly fondly of him, and the characters who defeated him won't have your heart.
I can't see why you'd give your heart to people who want to raid your retirement account.
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.
Can you get any sillier? My prediction is that what comes after Trump's defeat will make you long for Trump in a way that Trump makes you long for Romney and the Tea Party.
@Darrell, I agree with you.
I know she wants to win, but imagine winning like that, knowing you are not wanted.
She doesn't give a shit if she is 'wanted' or liked. She just wants to win in whatever way possible.
"Hillary is the monster. Real Americans see that."
Samantha Power famously said:
"She is a monster, too – that is off the record – she is stooping to anything... You just look at her and think, 'Ergh,' ... But if you are poor and she is telling you some story about how Obama is going to take your job away, maybe it will be more effective. The amount of deceit she has put forward is really unattractive."
It’s not just that she is “truly loathed,” (BTW, she is also truly loved), it is also that Americans have never elected a woman president before, unlike a lot of the world’s countries, and American men and women have very strong feelings about that. Perhaps one day you can do a blog entry on it. (?)
One other thing - many of your commenters don't believe the polls in any case, so I expect those who have said they don't, won't be giving the basis of this entry any legitimacy.
Ann:
These are all unproven allegations - not under oath - and not subject to cross examination. We know nothing about the bias, motive and possible incentive of these women to make such allegations. We do know that waited years to come out publically and then they magically appeared at the same time after AC's setup question.
It is all a last minute dirty trick by the Dems to dupe feminists such as you and moral values voters in order to put the alleged rapist Bill Clinton back into the WH so his so-called wife can continue to grift millions from Wall Street and foreign countries.
Althouse is now making a lot of sense.
I'm easy that way.
The amazing number is "45% believe she has strong moral character."
That is just amazing and evidence of wishful thinking of epic proportions.
When you post tongue in cheek items like this you lull voters into forgetting that if Trump does not win we are stuck with the Affordable Care act, over regulation, war on coal, etc. I for one before I do would like my children to have the chance to see what a difference a president can make to the economy, like we had Reagan revolution.
45% say Clinton has “strong moral character,”
I am speechless.
"'Trump is like a monster, tromping through the built-up structures of American politics. How can he be stopped' And why should you want to stop him? He's calling attention to things that needed attention called to them. How do you not see that?"
The question "How can he be stopped?" Is a reading of the mind of those who are looking on Trump as a monster. I am a distanced observer here.
To answer your questions within the context of my scenario, it depends on whether you see value in the built-up structures of American politics. If you want lots of destruction and think it's all corrupt AND hope that whatever replaces it will be an immense improvement, then you should be cheering for Godzilla. You should be dancing on the rooftops of Jersey City and Godzilla stomps down the buildings of Manhattan.
The NBC News/ Wall Street Journal poll today has Clinton up by 11! That's a BIG difference.
He hasn't lost much support when these allegations came out because people factored his personality (stuff like this) into their decision to support him before deciding. These allegations are known unknowns. They haven't come up with an unknown unknowns yet that would truly shock people.
It's easy to make a charge against someone, especially if you know the allegations aren't going to be vetted as they normally are. The MSM isn't going to do it. The "Octopus" Lady works part time at the Clinton Foundation and there are several pics of her and Hillary at non-campaign events. There are problems with two others. And those problems were found by everyday Americans, not news organizations with the resources to investigate. Hillary could get millions of women to come forward and swear. They think they are stopping a monster or saving the country.
I know she wants to win, but imagine winning like that, knowing you are not wanted.
She'll continue to make herself and her cronies wealthy, at taxpayer expense, further corrupting the federal agencies in order to insure a one-party rule, and you think she'll care if we loathe her for it? She'll be loved and appreciated by all the right people - the ones with (our) money.
Godzilla is actually the good guy, the bad guy(s) being the toxic, polluted environment whence he arose and the other monsters ("Smog Monster", "Mothra") also thereby spawned.
@Original Mike and @Michael K, we can make it three for three among us Mikes.
If anyone can come up with something lower than lying to the faces of grieving parents following Benghazi, I'm pretty sure I don't want to know what it is.
I know she wants to win, but imagine winning like that, knowing you are not wanted.
Hillary can dry her tears with the Clinton Foundation checks made payable to "Cash".
I like that Trump has drawn attention to NAFTA and immigration (BTW, according to CSPAN, Bush I drew up NAFTA, Clinton pushed it through, a majority of Reps approved it and a majority of Dems opposed it). As I have said countless times in here before, I don't like his racist and sexist appeals to voters, very reminiscent of how Wallace got into gubernatorial politics. But most curious of all to me is how people can't look at the way he staffs the manual labor at his properties and not see what a total hypocrite he is.
Forbidden Planet redux. The Monster is our Freudian ID. But my first thought was that is a how Trump's beautiful women see him.
But Trump has won over many black men from his authentic history of hitting on the models and the starlets. What else would a rich guy from NYC scene hunt with his money.
The interesting development is that the Evangelicals are still on Trump's side. They see him as Cyrus sent to set them free them and help them rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem and the all important WALL. ( That would be a man Sent by God, for those not into the scriptures)
What Darrell wrote. I think it's past time for Peggy Noonan and Annie Althouse to recognize that women do lie about being sexually assaulted, if there's something in it for them.
" We do know that waited years to come out publically and then they magically appeared at the same time after AC's setup question. "
Democrats are very good at this. Obama is president because Jack Ryan's divorce and child custody case, the records of the latter were sealed, included allegations by his ex-wife, that he wanted her to have sex in public. None of these allegations were ever supported by evidence or, as far as I know, by witnesses.
David Axelrod got the court to unseal the records and here we are ten years later. For reasons that are a mystery to me, the ex-wife, Jeri Ryan, is still considered some sort of Republican figure. She is, of course, an actress.
She speaks for the tens of millions of American women who fear most that they will be called, "irritating." Even when they do irritating things.
And finally these women have determined that, the sole obstacle to having their Icon of Irritability in the White House - Donald Trump, has done things that they can claim to find even more irritating: Conducting unwanted advances.
So this is the grudge-match that was called for. Which carbuncle, pustule or hair dye mishap is worse.
Irritation vs. Irritation.
On the theory that they are both monsters: here.
57 percent of registered voters say it was insincere
Women. Women watch romcoms to see the man apologize at the end, according to Klavan, who's written movie screenplays and probably knows.
Trump should apologize to his wive and embrace and fade to black, to get women to agree.
Roll credits.
Trump's treatment of women is shown by how he employs them, if you want to be serious.
Radio Free NJ and hence Derbyshire think Trump plays around; I don't. But it doesn't matter anyway, except that the idiot women's vote goes with the perception.
Godzilla in Japanese monster movies is usually taken as the atomic bomb, metaphorically.
They're gunshy over there.
I know she wants to win, but imagine winning like that, knowing you are not wanted.
Unless she really is dying, and doesn't much care about what people think as long as she can become President of the United States before she goes.
Maybe Althouse saw Jonah Goldberg's G-File on Friday:
I honestly can’t get my head around the fact that Hillary Clinton’s closing “argument” in this election is sexual harassment. Bill Clinton’s lifelong enabler has managed to turn this topic into a deadly weapon against a Republican nominee. This is like Godzilla turning public safety into a winning issue in the Tokyo mayoral race.
Linked on Instapundit by Ed Driscoll, who also noted:
ANALYSIS: TRUE: In Her Criticism of Trump, Hillary Forgets Her Own Past as a Slut-Shamer.
The only hope is that there is a big silent group prepared to vote for Trump. That women fall for this BS from Clinton astounds me, but the Dems know they will and here we are. Many have commented that even the most righteous R candidate would become a racist, woman hater, rapist, closet druggie and more after the Dems were through with him. That's one of the reasons I was all for having Joni Ernst run. The Dems would have a hard time tearing her down.
I do love the drug test idea. I suspect Clinton would make Lance Armstrong look like Mr. Clean.
Trump will fight until November 8. I can't ask anything more.
Godzilla is on Clinton's side! So sayeth Scott.
Too much focus here on Trump. The fact is (and as Chuck Todd is reporting this very moment on MTP), Hillary Clinton's negatives are every bit as bad as Trump's historically bad negatives in polling. And it is baked into this election that Trump will not get 35% of the vote as some Trump naysayers may claim; Trump will get a competitive number of votes. Because there is such a broad base of revulsion toward Mrs. Clinton.
But there is just not, I expect, anywhere near enough of the massive Clinton revulsion for Trump to win. All the more proof, of what a winnable election this could have and should have been, for a polished Republican candidate without all of the Trump negatives.
“You will never believe what the Motherfucker Bill did now, he tried to rape some bitch!”
--Hillary Clinton, accordintg to former Clinton insider Larry Nichols
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?
As hard as some people try to pretend, elections are not conducted in a vacuum. There is the other candidate to consider. And at least half of the Democrat Party has already openly expressed in this election and in 2008 their utter disgust and antipathy toward Hillary and all of Clintondom.
Way back in January 2008, I wrote --
"Hate and bile and indignation and anger and resentment for perceived wrongs are the number one characteristics of the Clintons lo these many years. And they are corrosive -- they corrode not only the intended targets, but the users as well. More and more we read in places like The Nation and Daily Kos and other left organizations that Dems have always known the Clintons to be malicious liars and demonizers, but that they looked the other way when the targets were Republicans, and now they no longer want to associate themselves with such Clinton slime.
"Even if Hillary gets the nomination, no one will enthusiastically vote "for" her, and even if she wins, no one will authentically and sincerely cheer. Even Dems know that, if she is elected, they will feel nauseous at the prospect of four or more years of Clintonism."
What was said then still holds. Hillary has not improved with age. The Clintons are just as toxic as they have ever been. We've been treated to more of the same duplicity, more of the same disingenuousness, more of the same viciousness. And Dems have once again felt the obligation to support her and, if they have any conscience at all, it sickens them.
Elections are not held in a vacuum, where we consider only one person. Hillary and the return of Clintonism is not something people look forward to, that's why she is not far ahead. Besides, to the extent that we do look at the boorish, obnoxious Trump, he is merely a fruit of that Clintonism. The Clinton gang took us down into the gutter long ago.
BTW and most likely meaningless, but brought to mind by EDH's linked article. I have been driving through many semi-rural areas of MN over the last week. My informal Trump vs. Clinton sign count is 12 to 3. I would ascribe nothing to this other than it IS MN, a pretty liberal state. I don't remember a like proportion for Romney when I traveled the same areas 4 years ago. Wishful thinking I am sure.
Unless she really is dying, and doesn't much care about what people think as long as she can become President of the United States before she goes.
I would not rule this out. I think she may have advanced Parkinson's but she wants the election and does not really care what happens after that, I think Obama is all about the perks and the preening but she wants the title and probably does not much care what happens after. Think President Kaine !
If Hillary prevails, election night her voters might say, "Yay, we beat Trump."
But the next morning they are going to wake up, look in the mirror, and say, "Oh shit, what the fuck did we just do?"
For a reporting job, Michelle Fields will say that Trump slipped his hand up her skirt while Corey Lewandowski held her hands.
This is not Batman v. Superwoman, this is King Kong v. Godzilla. It will end with King King swimming back to his island home. What happens to Godzilla? We'll have to wait till the next movie.
Kaine already showed us that he is not Able.
"But the next morning they are going to wake up, look in the mirror, and say, "Oh shit, what the fuck did we just do?" "
Answer: what had to be done.
"You will never believe what the Motherfucker Bill did now, he tried to rape some bitch!”
Hillary is all about supporting other women.
"...former Clinton insider Larry Nichols."
"Insider" is one description. Another description would be the "former Arkansas public relations flack who kicked off the Troopergate scandal after being fired from an Arkansas government job (and filing suit, and later dismissing that suit) and who has, ever since, attempted to make a career out of attacking the Clintons with ever-more outlandish and lurid claims against them. Culminating in the claim made by Larry Nichols that he was a hit man (yes, a real assassin) for the Clintons before reversing himself and claiming that he was under the influence of painkillers when he made the charge.
So HT is a Globalist, open border, pro-amnesty king of commenter. Nice to exclude you.
"something that ought to be powerfully alarming to those who cannot abide even the risk that Trump could win the presidency." It's not powerfully alarming because they know the risk is minimal. Sure, they'll fake a little panic in the final weeks, for fund-raising and GOTV purposes. But they keep their focus on the Electoral College and reasonably anticipate Trump's huge loss.
@kh: "That women fall for this BS from Clinton astounds me, but the Dems know they will and here we are." Of course, some GOPers know it as well. The fact that at this late date it "astounds" anyone is itself astounding. Effective pandering to women is essential in modern presidential elections--the single women's vote is a lock for Big Daddy Dems, and minority women can't be budged, but the GOP should at least get a healthy majority of married white women. So from the outset it was obvious that of all the candidates Trump would be most vulnerable to the war-on-women spiel and could be most easily used to neutralize Bill's liabilities. Can't have a candidate whose aggressive rhetoric will be construed as "rape jokes" by sensitive female souls. Hence Dem consultants hardly dared hope for Trump, but they got their wish. Whether the GOP and the Trumpites will learn anything, so no one is "astounded" by reality next time, remains to be seen.
We could say the same thing about you, Chuck. If we ever cared to say anything about you at all.
Darrell said...
For a reporting job, Michelle Fields will say that Trump slipped his hand up her skirt while Corey Lewandowski held her hands.
You fuckwad. Corey Lewandowski would be saying "I never touched her and I don't know her." And Trump would be saying, "I don't think it ever happened."
And then a videotape would show what fucking shameless liars Lewandowski and Trump really are. Because we have actually seen all of that play out before our own eyes.
The movie comparison is useless because it can be used to explain just about everything. Couldn't we use it to model Hillary as the star, with this being her third act and trump being the insurmountable obstacle. (Senate was act 1; losing to Obama was act 2.) I find it to be at least as good a fit as the trump-as-movie narrative.
Not only is there revulsion for Hillary herself, but for the show-biz industrial complex which is in the bag for her.
Chuck, Would you like to rethink your comment? I suppose you would not. LOL.
Personally, I am so square I am cubic, but I have it on good authority that "any woman worth her salt knows how to turn off attentions from an unwanted male so that the shmuck doesn't even know it is being done to him."
That would presumably be for normal people in normal circumstances; in some areas of showbiz more direct methods might be necessary. F. ex., if a young woman goes to work at Hooters, she would expect some boorish louts in the crowd that would have to be neutralized somehow, and if she just had come into town with a turnip truck last night, I expect she would solicit a few pointers from her co-workers before starting work.
I just do not believe these tearful sob stories about these women having been so abused by Donald Trump when they were young and innocent. I suspect a bevy of Anita Hills coming forward with exaggerated and embellished stories to save the world from this terrible ogre that threatens the progressive vision, and possibly in some cases also hoping for some pecuniary gain.
She must be truly loathed. Yep - this.
Small anecdotes: many women have their panties in a twist over the most recent synchronized "revelations" - lots of FB posts about how they don't want "this man" to be a model for their millennial sons. They don't seem to realize that their golden boys (including my Golden Millennial Boy) watch Comedy Central that is non-stop raunch.
One of the Comedy Central writers is the son of a good friend. She's been prolific on FB about how we cannot allow "this man" to be President because of how he treats women. I don't think she reads her son's Twitter page - it's full of sexual terms (although mostly about dicks, not pussy). He has no problem calling Trump women the "c" word.
Progs - you tore down the culture, so weep your heart out.
Maybe it is not a monster movie, but a version of "My Dinner With Andre".
Which would you rather see:
"MY Dinner with Hillary"
or
"My Dinner with Donald"?
Keep in mind the movie is four years long.
I am Laslo.
"That is just amazing and evidence of wishful thinking of epic proportions."
Yes, but no more than the magnitude of wishful thinking of those who support Trump. Both candidates are loathsome; neither is worthy to be Prsident.
I think you've got the monster's identity flipped. Hillary is Godzilla, rampaging around and destroying what's left of the constitutional republic. What will be left when she's done -- even if she doesn't win the election -- is anybody's guess.
"What explains his pesky resiliency?"
Oh, I don't know. Maybe it has something to do with being played as a patsy for decades by the Uniparty.
If this election has to be looked at through the prism of monster movies, isn't the most apt one King Kong vs. Godzilla? In casting that re-make, isn't Trump clearly King Kong, and God-zilla the female lead?
"and as Chuck Todd is reporting this very moment on MTP"
I am through with MTP. Last Sunday was 59 minutes on Trump and 1 minute right near the end on what was coming out from Wilileaks (yeah I know, I didn't correct for commercials). It was outrageous.
Just gained an hour of free time on Sunday from here on out.
Two small points:
1. These wikileaks would have done actual damage to Hillary in the primary season. Whoever is doing it (the Russians?) missed the window of opportunity. C'est la vie.
2. Any marginal Republican, or marginal Conservative or even sensible middle-of-the-roader needs to take a swig of whiskey, envision what another 4 years of Democratic rule will bring to our country, check out how much their health care premiums have skyrocketed under Obamacare, hunker down during the political shitstorm, and vote for Trump.
Trump will throw the proverbial monkey wrench in the Globalist's plans. Hillary will execute those plans. Trump, FTW!
Trump has already destroyed the 30 year fictional Narrative that Wall Street money flow Taipans have used to cover up that they have not one scintilla of concern for Americans one second after their wholly owned Media Arm has fooled voters again into chasing an old "Russians are coming" myth on election day.
Trump finished them off the day he selected Mike Pence. The pair of them have been master communicators of the weapon of truth.
So the earth has been Scorched for the Money flow Taipans who wanted so badly to establish their own World Government, quickly of course, to stop wild sea level rise and extreme warmer weather, that are original Grade C fictions in the Big Lie Narrative.
Read the comments on the Politico story: "Trump supporters are disgusting white trash slobs! How come Hillary doesn't get more support?!"
The left seems to answer its own questions sometimes.
Trad guy - all of that means nothing if you don't win.
Trump will win. Keep that from Hillary. She has too much money to spend for BS.
"These wikileaks would have done actual damage to Hillary in the primary season. Whoever is doing it (the Russians?) missed the window of opportunity." No. They are exposing the weakness of the next president. They are setting her (i.e., us) up. We got the goods on you, lady. We know who you are. You ain't nothin' to us, and you can't do nothin' to us. Reset that.
You should be dancing on the rooftops of Jersey City and Godzilla stomps down the buildings of Manhattan.
What? And destroy Trump Tower?
Darrell said...
So HT is a Globalist, open border, pro-amnesty king of commenter. Nice to exclude you.
10/16/16, 10:40 AM
______
You have obviously never read my previous comments on immigration. You do not know what you are talking about.
Its not about individuals. These are questions of systems and societies. The individuals are incidental.
Its not really about Godzilla. Godzilla is really Anygodzilla, any would be just as resilient under the circumstances.
A more accurate though similarly monstrous film analogy for the Democrat side would be a zombie flick - who are those people?
Blogger sunsong said...
The NBC News/ Wall Street Journal poll today has Clinton up by 11! That's a BIG difference.
10/16/16, 10:09 AM
-----------------------------------------
THE nbc/wsj poll breakdown
33% - Democrats
25% - Republicans
33% - Independents
So I would take that with a grain of salt.
You have obviously never read my previous comments on immigration. You do not know what you are talking about.
Then you need your head examined for opposing Trump.
I keep hearing that Trump supporters are, in addition to being deplorable, 'uneducated'. I know plenty of educated professionals who are voting Trump. Maybe it's because most are physicians who are suffering under the policies of the current administration.
More to the point about systems, the real problem is your inability to restrain the system.
One Clinton here or there doesnt matter.
Such people are powerless, they are figureheads, facades, tools.
Ann said, "You should be dancing on the rooftops of Jersey City and Godzilla stomps down the buildings of Manhattan."
I like the sly reference.
Hillary leads by 4...
Q: Generally speaking, do you usually think of yourself as a...
Hide Results
Detailed View
Democrat 33%
Republican 25
Independent 33
Other 5
No opinion 4
Democrats are shitting their pantsuits.
"These wikileaks would have done actual damage to Hillary in the primary season. Whoever is doing it (the Russians?) missed the window of opportunity." No. The primaries were rigged from the beginning. Wikileaks may have damaged her, but the outcome of the primaries was pre-ordained.
Robert Cook: Yes, but no more than the magnitude of wishful thinking of those who support Trump. Both candidates are loathsome; neither is worthy to be President.
This is absolutely true. The only advantage Trump has in this regard is that the mass media won't mendaciously hide his flaws.
"You do not know what you are talking about."
Just a Hillary troll with a blank profile. They pop up like mushrooms after a rain.
"That's one of the reasons I was all for having Joni Ernst run. The Dems would have a hard time tearing her down."
Oh, come now. The Dems would play the "God bothering hick" card with Ernst. The SNL skits would write themselves.
After she was elected a few media sophisticates had a good time snarking about how Ernst spoke of wearing bread bags over her shoes as a child to preserve the only good shoes she owned. Noonan and Megan McArdle wrote good columns attacking the snobbery of her critics, who proved once again that it's perfectly fine to make fun of poor people as long as they are poor white people. So much for Tom Joad.
Robert Benchley once told Dorothy Parker that if they're not careful people become what they hate the most. As someone else wrote in the thread below, the Democrats, once the party of the ordinary Joe, have become the party of people who think they're better than you.
Clinton and Trump are equally deplorable and despicable.
Trump in his personal private life, Clinton as a government official. Tiny edge to Trump
Clinton will never be seriously challenged no matter what she does. Trump will be watched,scrutinized and challenged on everything he even talks about doing let alone things he actually does. Clear edge to Trump.
On the issues Clinton has a bad record as Secretary of State. We know her foreign policy ideas don't work. Trump has no record. Tie or slight edge to Trump
On economic issues Clinton wants bigger more socialist government. Clear edge Trump
Clinton will never be impeached no matter what; Trump will have to watch his ass from the first moment since most Republicans, all Democrats and 99 and 44/100 percent of the media would support his impeachment, Huge plus Trump
"Maybe Althouse saw Jonah Goldberg's G-File on Friday:"
No, I didn't. Godzilla isn't an obscure reference, but I was thinking about him because I happened upon the end of the movie on tv.
Michael K said...
"You do not know what you are talking about."
Just a Hillary troll with a blank profile. They pop up like mushrooms after a rain.
10/16/16, 11:18 AM
____
Another who does not know what he is talking about. I've been here since 2009. I don't give a shit about profiles, yours or mine. I'd much rather us talk to each other here, in this little box and deal with what we say to each other.
Blogger Chuck said...
"You fuckwad. Corey Lewandowski would be saying "I never touched her and I don't know her." And Trump would be saying, "I don't think it ever happened."
And then a videotape would show what fucking shameless liars Lewandowski and Trump really are. Because we have actually seen all of that play out before our own eyes."
Chuck is a liar and douchebag.
The only advantage Trump has in this regard is that the mass media won't mendaciously hide his flaws.
10/16/16, 11:17 AM
That's it. I expect a President Trump would frequently disappoint me, but he wouldn't be able to get away with anything. That's why all the screeching about his "authoritarianism" from people who have no issues with Hill's authoritarianism is absurd. She'll get plenty of cover until things become so wretchedly awful even the media misdirection won't work.
Blogger Ann Althouse said...
"Maybe Althouse saw Jonah Goldberg's G-File on Friday:"
"No, I didn't. Godzilla isn't an obscure reference, but I was thinking about him because I happened upon the end of the movie on tv."
If trump turned into Godzilla for a few days and destroyed DC he would be the best president ever.
$Trillions in graft at stake for the Clinton Crime Family. More than enough to buy a few complaints, but is there a blue dress. Any women describing his Peyronie? Lol.
Along the same lines, it is still close enough for the Democrats to steal it. It does look like Trump supporters are emulating Democrats now. They don't care what he's done. They just want to keep the Clinton's out.
Other than Hillary's myriad faults and dishonesty, who wants a rapist for First Lady.
The Trump stories are almost as true as Michelle Field's story. At the very most, they are mountains made out of goosebumps. Except for the ones that are absolutely made up.
Yes, but no more than the magnitude of wishful thinking of those who support Trump.
The wishful thinking being that during a Trump Presidency:
(1)the Mainstream Media will rediscover its adversarial -- vs. its heretofore Praetorian -- role vis-a-vis the Presidency
(2)the permanent bureaucracy will re-discover its conscience (e.g., Nixon's vs. Obama's IRS).
(3)K-Street and Congress will exercise balance-of-powers mischief since Trump apparently threatens their phoney-baloney jobs and gravy trains.
Since we'll be stuck with corruption regardless of who wins, I'll take corruption-in-opposition over corruption-in-collusion any day.
Perhaps the Monster is the Media.
A Monster Virus, seeking to corrupt everyone it touches, to suit its Host.
The Internet is the Vaccine, but it only works on a small part of the population: the Vaccine has been effectively contaminated by trolls, memes and cute-cat videos.
The People who are infected never realize their infection, the Beauty of the Virus. They scratch and scratch, but deny there is a rash.
Those who are clean of the Virus are shunned, a unique reversal of the contagious norm that contributes to the Virus' efficiency.
Something like that.
I am Laslo.
Clinton is more destructive to the built up structure of US politics. Clinton destroys from within with the cancer of corruption. In the long run government corruption is fatal.
@Bay Area Guy Point #2. Absolutely. How many times do you have to tell the (choose your own word!) that this election presents a binary choice. Forget the other guys. Clinton is a louse and her "policies" will continue the hell of the Obama years. Trump is a horny bastard who should know better, but his policies will give the unemployed and underemployed a chance and if we are going to war in Iraq again we will know it - unlike the VN-like buildup being conducted on the sly today.
DON'T VOTE FOR THE CROOK! IT'S IMPORTANT!
Hillary is up by 11 in the NBC WSJ poll. That's worth considering. Yet now Trump in all his cry baby naïveté is blaming SNL for his woeful showing in the polls. Good grief. Maybe some of his supporters will be so convinced by his nonsense election rigged conspiracy theories that they won't vote. Trump is making the election ugly.
Laslo suggests: Perhaps the Monster is the Media.
Hydra, to be specific.
Achilles, after 2012 and all that "unskewed" business, I'm leery about dismissing the polls, but it does seem like we are being gaslighted.
Nigel Farage thinks that we will see a huge turnout of people who have been nonvoters up until this point. I hope that is correct. Are those people reflected in the polls at all?
"DON'T VOTE FOR THE CROOK! IT'S IMPORTANT!"
"I'd rather have a lech than a leech."
Darrell said...
The Trump stories are almost as true as Michelle Field's story. At the very most, they are mountains made out of goosebumps. Except for the ones that are absolutely made up.
No, Darrell; I am in no mood to play games with you. Corey Lewandowski said he never touched Michelle Fields and had never met her. In fact, he grabbed her by the arm and jerked her. Donald Trump said that he believed Corey on that story, and that he suspected that nothing ever happened. The videotape and the police say otherwise.
You stepped in a giant Trump-turd on this one. I'd ask you to admit it, but you won't admit anything. You are going to remain dug in, like some Japanese soldier on a forgotten island in the Philippines long after the 1945 surrender. Trump will be defeated, and you will no longer have a candidate or a party of your own. The world will move on to the very serious debate between Congressional Republicans and a new Clinton administration. You'll be on your island, awaiting orders from the Emperor and the Imperial Army.
Trump's lech days are behind him--if it was ever true. Hillay's corruption and treachery know no bounds==probably even death. Corporations/foundations exist in perpetuity.
Why are so many people who really don't like Trump considering voting for him, even after all the crap thrown up? Take "Laws are for the peasants to obey", the 'Justice' Department and FBI affirming 'Special Rules for the Rich and Connected'. Add in crap like the Navy now being more concerned with PC language than with crappy ships
http://nypost.com/2016/10/15/us-navy-gets-pc-makeover-while-its-ships-fall-apart/
Now toss in the contempt shown toward the average citizen by so much of the Democrat establishment*.
http://bayourenaissanceman.blogspot.com/2016/10/trump-clinton-and-proof-that.html
Top with a garnish of someone who ran the Bimbo Eruption Squad and trashed any woman who came into her sights in the name of power.
Put it all together, and there's far too many people for comfort willing to push Trump just to say "Screw you all!" to the elites.
*I know, the Stupid Party establishment is as contemptible as the Evil Party brass; fact is that their stupidity in trying to shove Jeb Bush down our throats was a big part of getting Trump where he is.
I watched a lot of Godzilla movies as a kid and teen and adult, from the Raymond Burr heavily-edited "original" where Godzilla gets dissolved in an acidified Tokyo Bay right down to his bones, to the many "Japan is really strong, and even stronger when Godzilla helps! movies with kids, romantic interests and tiny boxed goddesses, right through the schlock crap of the giant iguana killed by Matthew Broderick and Jean Reno on a New York bridge (Worst. Commute. Ever.) to the 2014 epic where Godzilla, champion of progressive eco-memes that he is, saves the world from other, worse, nuke-eating monsters that have way, way too many offspring.
Trump ain't Godzilla. And Hillary ain't no Mecha-zilla. Trump is a protest against the current failure of one side of the political divide to live up to its promises, and Hillary is the result of the other side conceding to corruption beyond belief in order to retain power. And that is the whole of that.
"Trump is making the election ugly."
Hillary, of course, is making it pretty. Good grief !
"The only advantage Trump has in this regard is that the mass media won't mendaciously hide his flaws."
True, but in the unlikely event of a Trump presidency the corporate media will be impotent. After their rabid partisanship in this campaign, neither Trump nor those of us who favor him will give two shits about anything they write.
The most historic, and delicious, thing about a Trump win would be watching these goose-stepping creeps consigned to irrelevance. Hopefully a new, more serious, media would rise from the ashes of the clowns.
I do think of the two candidates Clinton has the more authoritarian tendencies, as does her party. Even worse, the totalitarians are firmly entrenched in our government. I know many of you will find this offensive because the speaker describes FDR as our last dictatorial president, but I found this to be a powerful argument against Hillary as president.. It's rather long, but interesting and well-presented.
Oh shut up, idiot. The tape shows the contact was incidental, especially when you view the different angles. Lewandowski sheepdogged her to change her direction by bumping her shoulder. I've done it myself. Note I said shoulder. The wrist/arm bruises are inexplicable without perfidy.You can see the WaPo idiot in the plaid shirt suspiciously following in those tapes. He was the one that was writing a story about violence following the Trump campaign. There was something larger at play that fizzled. His photographer missed the shot or her going to the ground was the shot and it never happened. The photog afterward claimed he wasn't there even though he Tweeted other pics from that site.
Matt, the situation is ugly.
It is silly to turn your face from it, and unbecoming to sneer.
It is natural to avoid the disaster your polity is turning into, but that is just ostritch behavior.
This all is just a manifestation of a much worse underlying reality.
Btw,care you capable of serious discussion?
Because like Diogenes, I am always in search of an honest discussion.
Hillary goons vandalized citizens cars when they attended the last Trump rally with spray paint. Trump is making things ugly.
"Clinton is a louse and her 'policies' will continue the hell of the Obama years."
Which were a continuation of the hell of the Bush years.
"Trump is a horny bastard who should know better, but his policies will give the unemployed and underemployed a chance...."
What policies? Trump has said true things about the collapse of employment and the economy, but he hasn't spelled out exactly how he's going to remedy these ills. He speaks in headlines, which attract attention and arouse interest, but they are purely suggestive, leaving his listeners to fill in the meaning. He's a walking 30-second commercial, all sizzle but only an imaginary steak.
They're both unfit to be president.
exiled said: Nigel Farage thinks that we will see a huge turnout of people who have been nonvoters up until this point. I hope that is correct. Are those people reflected in the polls at all?
Since most poll results are prefaced with the disclaimer, 'of likely voters', it would tend to support Farage's theory. Honestly, I know quite a few young Sanders supporters who have never voted before and are voting for Trump. They don't like him but they really, really hate Hillary.
Yet the actual intimidating violence comes primarily from anti-Trumpers. Beatings..now vandalism. So if I have to attend a Trump rally for work, I now get to wonder if my car will be trashed.
Hard to weave that shit into the Godzilla thing.
"Grandpa, tell me again about the night Hillary defeated Trumpzilla!"
"Well, it was Election Night, 2016. Trumpzilla had raged across the land, destroying everything in his path. They tried to stop him with guns, rockets, bombs, planes and tanks. Nothing worked until Hillary discovered his weakness: Light. She arrayed an army armed with video projectors, and beamed accounts of women claiming they had been victimized by him onto his ample belly. It made him shrink and shrink, until he collapsed to the ground on the Washington Mall, never to rise again. He was stopped before he could rampage across the White House and Capitol Hill.
"Hillary stood outside in the moonlight as her media and lobbyists and other minions swore eternal fealty to her. And then she smiled, the moonlight glittering off her fangs. Oh, no, we'd never really noticed them before. What we did notice was that she looked... Hungry. She probably hadn't fed in at least three days..."
Infuriating. In 1993 Bill Clinton promised us a "co-Presidency" with Hillary. When Hillary ran in 2008 her claim was she was bringing Bill back to the WH. Now we are supposed to pretend Bill's return to the WH does not matter. Dems are trying to return an impeached sexual abuser and alleged rapist to the WH for part two of the co-Presidency. Yet we are supposed to be appalled that questionable allegations of Trump grabbing and kissing women inappropriately has not lost him more votes.
The real truth of Trump's "I could shot someone on Fifth Ave" is that it applies just as much to Obama and the Clintons. Obamacare, Obama's signature achievement is raising rates YUGE yet he has an over 50% approval rating. Does anyone think that if Obama just randomly nuked a country tomorrow his rating would drop below 50%?
They're both unfit to be president.
For a huge change (or it "yuuuge change"?) our resident Maoist is right. But one of them is less unfit than the other. I'm voting for Trump.
Nobody is fit to be president.
The office is very far from the one man affair that it once was. Its much less a case of a president making decisions than of decisions being made collectively, much of which involves the collective persuading the officeholder to go along. Everything, every policy, every speech, every word is from a collective and represents its consensus.
This is inevitable, the result of the sheer mass and complication of the institution that is, supposedly, being directed. It is at this point effectively ungovernable.
It takes a very powerful personality to insist on a non-consensus view, and that will only be applied in exceptional cases. The most significant personal aspect of it, that still persists, is the PR value of the personality, the character and charisma of the player, regardless of who is writing the lines. But thats it, it is a shadow of the ancient idea.
You arent electing a person, you are electing a clique and a system, to preside over something that has an overpowering life of its own anyway.
"Authoritarian" is not synonymous with "dictatorial" or "totalitarian."
Obama's approval ratings are just as trustworthy as the Trump/Clintons polls. I doubt if they were ever over the 30% of the true believers plus some independents.
Why?
#1 - A lot of Americans are disgusted government and feel cast aside by the current political system (although I don't like Trump, they're not wrong about this)
#2 - Hillary Clinton is a thoroughly corrupt and cynical politician.
Given Trump's weaknesses, I might have been able to vote for a moderate democrat this cycle. Do they make those anymore? Haven't seen one in years.
"He's a walking 30-second commercial, all sizzle but only an imaginary steak."
I understand your reaction but you understand nothing about economics and what make economies work so maybe we should reserve judgement.
You arent electing a person, you are electing a clique and a system, to preside over something that has an overpowering life of its own anyway.
Trump will bring in a lot of new people--probably from the business world--because of the lousy was he has been treated by the Republican Party. That has to be a good thing--fresh blood.
Yes..I remember the phrase "Two for 1" back then. Since then she has waxed and waned regarding Bill's role. Kind of finger in the wind..depending on the context. This time she briefly said she would have Bill handle the economy...which would elevate the unelected, unaccountable "1st lady" position to ridiculous Godzilla scale.
At the end of the day, those of us who are worried about the complete power Hillary would have as president are smart enough to realize that while Trump may be a jerk, he will have little power. The press, the Democrats and Republicans as well as Justice, FBI, etc will keep him in check.
On the other hand, Hillary will be given free reign to pack the country with illegal voters as Obama has, in contrast to laws currently on the books; she will ram Obamacare "fixes" through, using non-legislative means, and cater to special interests of her backers on Wall Street and Foreign governments. She will have complete support from the federal government bureaucracy and media. Her judgement in most matters is flawed at best and completely a result of craven political calculation at worst.
My calculation is pretty simple:
1. Americans today despise the ruling class, unless they get some freebies. They still despise them, but we can be bought. Advantage D.
2. Hillary is hated and has been for decades. She is a known commodity--a creepy pathological liar. Advantage R.
3. Trump is also hated, but still a relatively new player. He is strongly suspected to be a creepy pathological liar, but hope reigns eternal. Advantage R.
4.Party mechanics are important, especially get out the vote, purchasing media collusion, etc. Advantage D.
+4 seems about right, but there is plenty of room for error on both sides.
My blue plate special--there are at least five more October surprises, all disgusting, and Trump wins, covered in guano.
Blogger Robert Cook said
"They're both unfit to be president."
But one of them will be president.
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.
The other candidate is kicking the neocons out of the Republican Party.
This should not be a hard choice for you.
Yes, she is truly loathed. But the billionaires who run the Democrats wanted to make sure they chose somebody they could count on being able to buy.
I might have been able to vote for a moderate democrat this cycle. Do they make those anymore? Haven't seen one in years.
Some of them like Susana Martinez, who did not feel welcome in the Democrat Party of today, though she basically remains a "Sagebrush Democrat," have turned Republican for the time being.
Also some of the sex allegations are down right laughable. When I first read that Leeds had said she would have been okay with Trump feeling her up, I thought it had to be a mistake. So I listened to the audio and that is what she said: "If he would have stuck with the upper part of the body I might not have gotten, I might not have gotten too upset. But when he started putting his hand up my skirt that was it." Sorry, but that is not sex abuse. In old style parlance, once you let a guy get to second base - he is gonna try for third. She said no and he stopped. What is crazy is that media is promoting this woman as a victim.
I 100% believe Trump was sexually aggressive with many women. How often it actually was abuse is what I question. As with the NYTimes story about Brewer, based on their own accounts it sounds like many of these women encouraged or at least were not upset by Trump's attention.
You arent electing a person, you are electing a clique and a system, to preside over something that has an overpowering life of its own anyway.
A couple words come to mind: kakistocracy and oligarchy. By the time the next presidency is over, kakistocracy will be standard in spell checkers.
buwaya puti said...
Its much less a case of a president making decisions than of decisions being made collectively, much of which involves the collective persuading the officeholder to go along.
--
Trump has alluded to this...albeit as defense. Instead of decrying Hil ordering up nameplates for her cronies, we might be better off asking both for MORE details on who would be advising on what. Along the lines of having Trump laying out a list of SCOTUS noms, show us your "team".
But..I guess in Trump's case it would just provide more targets for the media.
I might have been able to vote for a moderate democrat this cycle. Do they make those anymore? Haven't seen one in years.
I might have voted for Jim Webb but the Dems would never have supported his bid. It was Hillary all the way.
Hillary will be the best gosh darned President money can buy. Even if she is cis-gendered and white. She will certainly be vulnerable to attack on her left flank, because it's likely that her lefty posturing will go out the window once she's elected.
"Trump will still be a live human being, doing... whatever."
Althouse might think, and Trump clearly thought several months ago that he'll would able to go back to his nice life at Trump Tower managing his business while taking pot shots at Hillary if he loses.
But he won't. The evil hag has no compunction about destroying the lives of powerless people if it serves her purpose - Kathy Shelton, Juanita Broaddick, that filmmaker who rotted in jail for a year and is now homeless because Clinton used him as a scapegoat to cover her own failures. Do you think she'll let The Donald off the hook, especially after that jail line?
Gentlemenly GOPe losers like Romney are permitted to go back to their old lives. I fully expect that Trump will be financially ruined in record time. Hill will unleash the IRS on him and the media will make sure that buying or staying at a Trump property will be as socially unacceptable as wiping your nose on your sleeve at a dinner party. Not only Trump will be ruined, but his kids will be targeted as well. I would not be surprised if department stores stop carrying Ivanka Trump's clothing line.
Hell, the media are gleefully engaged in ruining the life of Ken Bone because he dared ask Hillary a tough question about Obamacare. Now we are know that Bone (gasp!) frequents porn sites and had a vasectomy. The public needs to know.
The Democrats - and the Republicans- will make sure that no serious challengers to the status quo will ever dare arise again. And so in 2020, the GOP will revert to form and put up another gentlemanly eunuch that Chuck will love. And he or she will lose and failure theater will continue. Until it can't anymore.
The media (Althouse include) seem obsessed with Trump's gender gap with women. Note that there is never a thought -- let alone a thoughtful post -- about Hillary's gender gap with men.
Leeds is the one that works at the Clinton Foundation and is said to be a "friend" of Hillary. If Hillary has friends. That alone makes he story suspect. Saying that women don't mind the tits makes it unbelievable. This shit only works because the Media isn't do its true job. (No, House Organ for the Democratic Party is NOT their true job.)
When is an "unwanted sexual advance" not an assault?
Is coping a feel, which is what we called it back in the day when a guy would maneuver himself into getting a touch nevermind how fleeting of breast, an assault? Is a man spontaneously planting a kiss on the lips without warning or invitation an assault? Is a passing pat on the ass an assault? Is a man putting an arm around a woman and drawing her close to whisper something in her ear an assault? What if the something he whispers is lewd or crude? Is it an assault when a man leans in close, say if you're dancing, and you can feel his erection?
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.
Chuck said...
"All the more proof, of what a winnable election this could have and should have been, for a polished Republican candidate without all of the Trump negatives."
Chuck, could you explain how Trump came to be the nominee, when all those highly-polished globalist assholes were right there handy? Do you think he bought the nomination? Or maybe he just walked up and grabbed its pussy?
When is an "unwanted sexual advance" not an assault?
If you are Bob Packwood, putting your hands over their eyes from behind and saying "Guess Who?" qualifies. Also writing fictional tales of conquest in your diary.
I agree that if Trump loses the media/Democrat complex will set out to utterly destroy and bankrupt the entire Trump clan. A lesson must be sent to prevent any other non-politician rich righties from daring to enter future races.
"unwanted sexual advance" would include a verbal advance that would be welcome to another recipient. It's too vague and contextual.
@Jupiter, I think the media collaborated with the Clinton campaign to push Trump. He received a lot of free air time to push his nasty rhetoric against the other Republican candidates. He's still receiving free air time, but this time it's to push unsubstantiated claims of inappropriate conduct towards women.
Note to Papa Cruz--In case Baby Cruz ever makes a run again, you better drop Marina off your Christmas card list NOW. Btw, she was a KGB agent. I don't want you to get caught flat-footed like when you learned Castro was a Communist.
Sukie, I agree with your assessment. Calling these maneuvers 'sexual assault' dilutes the seriousness of actual, violent rape, which happened to me when in my early 20's. 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.
"If he would have stuck with the upper part of the body I might not have gotten, I might not have gotten too upset."
Oh..uh huh...
Althouse you picked the wrong movies to use as analogies. neither of these two is epic enough for The Monster comparison. A better movie (albeit somewhat dated) to use is Network.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9XeyBd_IuA
Hillary and the Democrats in a nutshell. Then there a clips that describe Trump.
Trump is, like Gelernter said in the WSJ the other day, an empty gin bottle the public, in its frustration and contempt, has thrown at the picture window of the system.
It is not that Trump has done this, he is much more an instrument of the collective will, a symbol, a weapon, a missile. An effect, not a cause.
The act, the form, the prosaic, lumpenprole nature of the gin bottle are all part of it.
Its the modern version of an angry crowd expressing its now-dangerous sentiments, as perhaps the authorities should have taken the Paris riots of April 27 1789, a clear signal to the system. It is the case however that the US system is even less amenable to direction towards substantial reform (the French were after all actually attempting substantial reform) than even the French were in 1789, and it may have been too late for them also. Ref. Hippolyte Taine
Cacimbo Cacimbo said...I agree that if Trump loses the media/Democrat complex will set out to utterly destroy and bankrupt the entire Trump clan. A lesson must be sent to prevent any other non-politician rich righties from daring to enter future races.
Hillary has clearly telegraphed a threat to quash Clinton opponents via both her promise to overturn Citizens United through legislation and through judicial appointment litmus tests. The latter came up in the last debate but was completely ignored. I'm not sure what she'd do via executive order.
Nigel Farage thinks that we will see a huge turnout of people who have been nonvoters up until this point. I hope that is correct. Are those people reflected in the polls at all?
Yeah but what's also unknown and incalculable is the degree and extent to which the Dems are prepared to steal the election. It's down in those trenches where all those dirty donated dollars get spent. And the Dems have a track record of being very effective at election theft.
Allegations, hearsay, and innuendo are not credible reasons to abort a viable candidate in the 11th hour.
People wonder why women are revolted by Trump while they give Billy Jeff a free pass for much worse behavior. Of course, some of it is the old Republican - Democrat double standard, and the indulgence shown to any male politician who champions *cough* "women's reproductive rights." But it also matters that Trump, who was rather good looking when he was young, is now a overweight old man with weird hair. Women imagine being groped and kissed by him as he is now and think "Yuck!"
Dem women had sex fantasies about both Clinton and Obama. I heard more than a few Dem women in DC declaring they'd give Bill a BJ in a New York minute if he asked them. Some twit actually published an embarrassing piece in the WaPo in 2008 about her sexy Obama dreams. It was like a R rated version of Tiger Beat magazine.
I think some male Trump backers vastly overestimated the appeal of Trump's alpha maleness. It appeals far more to men then women. (Actually, I'm wondering if this obsession with his sex life helps him a bit with black and Hispanic men. Those are two notably macho subcultures and I can't imagine the shrill white woman with the dumpy pantsuits thrills them very much.)
It's because
1) No one believes the Left's fake outrage. Because of them, we had to explain to our kids what a blowjob was and why the President stuck a cigar up inside his girlfriend. And they have zero credibility - slut shaming Bill's rape victims while attacking Trump for making lewd comments about women?
2) Hillary Clinton is above the law. For all his faults, Trump does not have the power to squash an FBI investigation the way she just did. She is not accountable to anyone
3) And the only relevant difference between the two - the MSM and the Establishment elites hate Trump. What this means is that if Trump gets out of line, the media will eviscerate him and the Establishment will Impeach him before his blood is dry. He won't be able to tie his shoelaces wrong without them jumping his case.
But if Hillary gets out of line, the media will censor the story and the Establishment will either cave or cover for her.
Hillary Clinton is above the law. She must not be allowed to gain the power of the Executive Branch.
Both candidates are loathsome; neither is worthy to be Prsident.
Only one of them would be held to account.
Progressive wars, trial by sodomy and abortion, immigration reform, belligerent behavior, class diversity, progressive debt, progressive corruption, female chauvinism, sacrificing women and girls, abortion rites, and the Pro-Choice Church are reasons to reject a candidate.
Big Mike said...
"@Jupiter, I think the media collaborated with the Clinton campaign to push Trump. He received a lot of free air time to push his nasty rhetoric against the other Republican candidates."
Trump is the Republican nominee because he was willing to address the issues that are most important to Republican voters; massive illegal immigration and weaponized PC. None of the other candidates were willing to even pretend to a concern about these issues.
The Democrats are at war with the majority of Americans. They intend to replace us with a population more to their liking. A lot of Americans haven't caught on yet. They're still playing by the old "all in this together" rules. Or they are so afraid of being called "racist" that they are willing to sell out their own children. But that is changing. It may not be changing fast enough to elect Trump. But if ISIS pulls an October surprise, Hillary is toast.
Nhu Quynh--Knock it off! You are getting as annoying as Chuck.
"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"
I worked as a cocktail waitress in college at a hotel bar catering to business travelers and it was almost a given that some of those lonely, horny middle aged salesmen and conventioneers would get grabby after a few drinks. Usually a sharp "Knock it off, mister!" and a glare was sufficient. They'd look sheepish and leave a big tip. Occasionally, if the dude didn't stop (usually because he was three sheets to the wind), I'd ask the bartenders, especially one guy who was big and brawny, to back me up. It never went further than that, and I certainly didn't lose sleep or obsess over such incidents. Sometimes guys are jerks, you deal with it, and you move on.
Do not click on the spam links unless you want a virus!
And the Dems have a track record of being very effective at election theft.
10/16/16, 12:59 PM
Yeah, they're really good at that. Actual governing - not so much.
Mockturtle, rape is a serious violent crime directly primarily at women. The rape victims I have known truly did fear for their lives. I'm very sorry for your experience. I know you only from these pages, but it appears you have not allowed what must have been a supremely traumatic event to color the rest of your life, so good on you.
I get particularly angry at women who cry rape following sex they regret having or because the guy post coitus doesn't call (or text or email). Every time a woman lodges a false or frivolous charge of rape, it makes it all the more difficult for women who truly have suffered this ultimate assault. I honestly and truly despise these women and would make such claims criminal acts.
Keep on keepin' on.
he lost little support because most people realize this is your standard media hatchet job where, at the last second they find damaging info on a candidate that they spring on us as an october surprise.
I didn't stop supporting them because of the people now makign the claim that suddenly sexuallly innapropriate behavior matters. The Clintons and the democrast who covered for him DO NOT HAVE ANY REAL LEGITIMACY suddenly getting offended.
As I have already said, Trump never said he assaulted anyone. THat characterization was of consensual behavior. At least as he characterized it. But,he characterized behavior towards a group of women (THEY) who we have no knowledge of. And therefore we can't disprove his claim that they let him do anything. From this though, the media is saying he forced himself on people based on his own statement. He wuld disagree with that characterization.
The did the same thing about his joke about walking into the ladies dressing room. They did the same thing abotu his comments about the Latino judge. THey did the same thing about his statement that NBC alluded was him saying there would be violence against Cinton when he said ""She doesn't want guns, take their — let's see what happens to her," Trump said. "Take their guns away, okay? It'll be very dangerous."
Over and over the media finds ways to mischaracterize his staments as being racist/sexist/homophbic. WHen if you look at the staement there are certainly alternate interpretations that can be given. But they never do.
That is fundamentally dishonest. and we can see right through it.
BUt, since the dems want to now bring up groping and innaporopriate behavior, lets talk about Joe Biden> back in 2015, when John Stewart was still a host of The Daily Show they did a story about Joe Biden groping women:
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/yfmksi/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-the-audacity-of-grope
Clearly if hte standard is sexual assault is unwanted touchign, then dems would have to say that Biden commited sexual assault. Right? Becuase nowhere on this tape does he ever ask a woman if its ok to touch them before he does so.
ANd he touches some girls who are like 12. In one instance he is fondling her hair. IN anotehr he lovingly carresss her cheek. In another he goes in for a kiss despite her squirming with embarrasment. And once he is standing there and tells a girl How are you I hope you have a bick fat fence around the house. and then he stands over another girl and is groping her from behind and says "can I have one with Jess alone.
Stewarts reaction where he puts the sanitizer in his eyes and says he can still see IS hilarious.
HOwever, what came of this account? Did anyone in the dmemocratic party view this as anything but comedy? Did Biden get excoriated by the media, despite the newscasters noting how long he had his hands on one womans shoulders? Did Obama not know that Joe Biden was like this? Because he certianly never did anything to publically punish him for groping.
The attitude is "Joe is just being joe" So, I'd like to know why the dems were accomodating of what is clearly a sexual assaulter. Every time we bring up Bill clinton we always hear "But Bill isn't running for the white house"
Joe Biden IS the VP though. Obama and his wife both went on national television to shame Trump over things he said he did (even though he said they let him do those things) but they apparently were completely ok with this dirty old man groping women and kids without so much as a reprimand.
And even The Daily Show dropped it. Now that we see this, shouldn't Trump silmply play this tape at the next event and then ask Michelle Obama what she thinks of the VP's activities?
Here's an analogy: Grant v Lee in the Civil War.
When I was in school, Lee was portrayed as sober, meticulous, Honorable, cerebral. Grant was portrayed as drunk, scatterbrained, lucky. (Historians didn't like his GOP presidency in the Robber Baron era and imputed it to his prior military capabilities.)
But, of course, the Civil War was not Grant v Lee. It was one army fighting to preserve slavery, and the other fighting to end slavery.
Lee may have been an honorable man, but he was leading a dishonorable cause.
I think it's similar to Hilllary v Trump. Hillary will never be caught on tape spouting crude vulgarities or writing libelous emails. She's too savvy, scripted and disciplined for that. But her cause is ignoble. It's more big Government nanny-state leftism. Trump, on the hand lacks her personal self-discipline, and her polish, but has a noble aim - to make our borders secure, fight ISIS, and stimulate our private sector economy. Despite his flaws, the better choice is Trump.
Well, enjoy this movie while it lasts. Mr. Market, to use Mr. Buffett's quaint term, is about to wake up with a case of delirium tremens after an 8 years drinking binge and we will now discover that he has spent our grandchildren's legacy and smashed their piggy banks. Worse yet, Reagan's bear is now back in the woods making noise and threatening us and our "rifles" have gotten rusty. And don't complain about the narcissism of these two candidates, because the culture we choose to buy is awash with it. They both reflect with perfection what has happened to our country. That said, one candidate has a rather bad image problem and the other candidate has committed real crimes.
"Your article a lot of good information and good." Thanks for the compliment, Nuke You. (I am somehow sure you were referring to my comment, although we English-speakers don't describe such as an "article.") Regards to your Nigerian brother, and remind him about his promised transfer of funds.
We have to elect Clinton. We can't put a sexual exploiter into the White House. Oh, wait. . . .
"Clinton is a louse and her 'policies' will continue the hell of the Obama years." Which were a continuation of the hell of the Bush years.
If you believe that to be true, and you vote for Hillary anyway, then you are voting for a continuation of the Bush years.
At least according to your logic.
Miss Quynh is, at least, better looking than Chuck.
Or tries to be.
But is probably a guy.
As many a sailor in East Asia has discovered to his surprise.
@Jupiter, my assertion and your response are both correct.
I hope that in fifty or seventy years there will be a Hippolyte Taine writing a history of these times, with a similarly diligent, detailed, substantial, empirical, conservative approach, and with such style. Things would have turned out reasonably well, or at least in some recoverable, favorable condition if so.
I wont be around to read it, but I desperately wish I had that book in hand.
to make our borders secure, fight ISIS, and stimulate our private sector economy. Despite his flaws, the better choice is Trump.
You deluded bastard. She is for open-border lawlessness like Obama practices. She created ISI and supplied arms (and Toyota trucks) to them. Her ideas for helping the economy is to impose another tax or place another burden on private businesses. She is the crap on a crap sandwich.
Here's the racist Godzilla at yesterday's Humanity United Against Terrorism event in New Jersey organized by the Republican Hindu Coalition. So there's that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZYpK2bGMpY
Hillary is an open face shit sandwich smothered in diarrhea gravy.
And they can make us eat it.
Blogger buwaya puti said...
"Miss Quynh is, at least, better looking than Chuck.
Or tries to be.
But is probably a guy.
As many a sailor in East Asia has discovered to his surprise."
That was a bot.
exiledonmainstreet said...
"Sometimes guys are jerks, you deal with it, and you move on."
What no one seems to want to point out here, is that sometimes guys are jerks, and other times, they go home with the waitress. When a woman is interested in a man, she seldom hands him a printed invitation (although it has happened). She makes herself available, smiles a lot, and awaits developments.
Most guys are sufficiently averse to rejection that they play this game very carefully. But some are not bothered by rejection, or are willing to accept a possible rejection to save time. And it is surprising, to a shrinking violet like me, how often they score. You want it, you gotta ask for it.
All the pearl clutching from the Dems and Michelle Obama (see recent speech) over Trump's womanizing is laughable given how Michelle has glorified people like Jay Z & Beyonce. Those two are disgusting - their lyrics and performances are pornographic and portray the relationship between men and women in the worst possible way. Michelle has taken her daughters to their concerts - I have no doubt these girls had a liberal diet of their music growing up.
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.
What no one seems to want to point out here, is that sometimes guys are jerks, and other times, they go home with the waitress."
True enough. I went out with one guy throughout my college years and was not interested in the advances of my customers, but they did sometimes score with the others. There was one waitress in particular (funny, but utterly nuts) whose openly stated goal was to sleep with guys from all 50 states. I think she was up to 30 or something when I left there. If only the guys knew that - imagine knowing that all you have to do is say you're from Rhode Island instead of Indiana and you're in like Flynn.
On a very tangentially related matter,
Look for todays excellent Al Jazeera interview with Rodrigo Duterte. I dont think any US media has tried or bothered.
I have heard him before, mostly in Visayan and Tagalog, but not really in English, saying anything complex. I was quite surprised by his facility and rhetorical skill. This is a very intelligent man.
Agree or disagree with the fellow, he is impressive. Marcos, in extemoraneous speech, was very much like this, though he didnt have quite Dutertes ability to project sincerity.
Scott Adams needs to stick to drawing Dilbert because reality doesn't venture into his mind.
Donald Trump needs to go back to his pretend life as a rich real estate mogul for the same reason.
Oh, how I yearn for November 9th when we will hear the last of Donald Trump's spew.
@exiled "I think some male Trump backers vastly overestimated the appeal of Trump's alpha maleness. It appeals far more to men then women"
Polling shows Hillary winning women, I find that surprising. Even in 2014 Gallup polls of women show 39% prefer a male boss, 25% prefer a female and 34% don't care. I am always surprised at how many women hating women are out there. "I only have men friends" or "you just can't trust other women" are statements I have heard expressed over the years. Never heard those type of anti-male statement from other men.
If only the guys knew that - imagine knowing that all you have to do is say you're from Rhode Island instead of Indiana and you're in like Flynn.
10/16/16, 2:03 PM
Come to think of it, it's probably the only time in Wisconsin history when saying "I'm from Illinois" might have increased a guy's chances of getting laid.
I am always surprised at how many women hating women are out there. "I only have men friends" or "you just can't trust other women" are statements I have heard expressed over the years. Never heard those type of anti-male statement from other men.
10/16/16, 2:13 PM
Believe me, our last few presidential elections have not increased my regard for my own gender. I'm continually amazed at how shallow most women - including very bright women who are good people in other respects - are when it comes to politics.
@Jupiter. True. A passable male who can sling BS like a champ will always score more often than the great looking guy with no rap.
buwaya puti said...
Trump is, like Gelernter said in the WSJ the other day, an empty gin bottle the public, in its frustration and contempt, has thrown at the picture window of the system...
Your citation of Gelernter, and your criticism of me, is hilarious. Because my rhetoric has been mostly indistinguishable from Gelernter. Both Gelernter and I are voting Trump. "Grimly," as Gelernter says.
Gelernter, in the process of explaining his vote for Trump, calls Trump "Mr. Nauseating... [with] all the class and cool of a misbegotten 12-year-old boy... an infantile vulgarian."
And Gelernter concludes this way:
"It’s too bad one has to vote for Mr. Trump. It will be an unhappy moment at best. Some people will feel dirty, or pained, or outright disgraced.
"But when all is said and done, it’s no big deal of a sacrifice for your country. I can think of bigger ones."
I could not have said it all better myself. I will feel dirty, and pained and even a bit disgraced, when I cast a vote that will include Trump. 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. Not for president, not for Senate, and not even for congress. All of my rhetoric calling out Trump as a political disaster will be my personal saving grace. My vote will just be one of millions, lost in the shuffle of a sad coronation of another Democrat. I'll be as sad as other Republicans, but I will have my reputation. And I will be part of the rebuilding team. The Trumpists will be excommunicated.
@ exiled fyi I realize my statement made it sound like I am male. I am a female and have many female friends who I have been friends with for decades. Just find that so many women are anti-women that I am surprised and puzzled the opposite would be true when it comes to voting.
In an odd coincidence I was watching the Half in the Bag episode reviewing the '98 and 2014 Godzilla movies as I browsed over to this post. Spooky.
Just find that so many women are anti-women that I am surprised and puzzled the opposite would be true when it comes to voting.
10/16/16, 2:28 PM
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.
tim in vermont said...
Hillary is an open face shit sandwich smothered in diarrhea gravy.
10/16/16, 1:45 PM
Morning open about her. And the bread! It's artisanal marble!
@buwaya puti said...
Rodrigo Duterte . . . is a very intelligent man.
The populist President of the Phillipines is breaking from historic ties to the United States to cozy up to the Chinese Communists, who have occupied rich South China Sea fishing waters near Scarborough Shoal which belongs to the Filipinos. If that is intelligence, so be it, but I think I would like to hear from Wretched over at Belmont Club about his reaction to this move.
Trump may not have lost much support, but he can't afford to lose any, and he certainly hasn't gained any, which means he'll lose if it doesn't turn it around quickly.
I believe that Trump has probably done some crude things with women, whether all these allegations are true or not, but as a very reluctant Trump voter, I see it like a common hiring situation.
Assume you were hiring a contractor to build your home and only two were available. Contractor A is a proven builder with a history of getting homes built, but he also is a known womanizer, and you have heard many stories of him being a real cad with women. Contractor B has a history of lying to clients, building shoddy homes, and going around serious building codes to the point of dangerous illegality (people may even have died), although he's never yet been prosecuted, because his brother is the local D.A., and he is very well connected. Who do you hire to build your home?
You also have to understand that one of them is gonna build it, and you must live in it and pay the bill, like it or not. How bad would Contractor A's personal behavior have to be in order for you to choose Contractor B to build your home.
To take it further, imagine the home is built and you are very unhappy with the result. Which one would be better to have a complaint against?
Chuck,
I havent criticised you, much, other than your style. Holding your nose while voting is normal.
But the outrage seems, well, emotionally incontinent, unrealistic, out of touch.
I am a foreigner, but both by inclination and circumstance, a keen observer of your people. Your angry outrage seems bizarre, when I contrast it to the very sober, useful, even irreplaceable gentlemen I know outside of the internet; lets just say there is no way the US could function, on a technical, operational level, if you purged its control rooms, for instance, of Trump backers.
You cant go to war with people like that, because you would be rejecting virtue, for one thing. A man is a man, a unit, after all, indivisible.
And then there is prudence. There are a huge number of them. This is not a phenomenon of a few wicked souls, but of a great mass. In democracies you need a great mass.
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.
"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?
"That women fall for this BS from Clinton astounds me.."
Really?
Most women don't think logically.
Ann believed Obama in 2008.
Ann believes that "space" refers to vagina.
She may also believe that if Trump refers to "void", "empty", "vessel", he's also referring to vagina. In fact anything that Trump can say that refers to an empty container or anything that can be filled is translated by womanspeak into vagina.
It's a woman thing, you wouldn't understand.
That's also why making crude remarks to women is rape, fondling is rape, a pat on the ass is rape, heavy petting is rape, not wanting to be a certain co-ed's boyfriend is rape, breaking up is rape. What is not rape is sexual assault by PIV penetration by Democrats who fight for your right to kill your baby. Righteous women will offer that person oral sex .. and more.
Gadfly,
I dont necessarily approve of Duterte, I am just pointing out a notable interview. Go watch it an tell us of your impressions.
I dont believe that Richard Fernandez has addressed the Philippine strategic situation quite as thoroughly as he should. He is not correct on the Muslim problem for sure.
I followed the Philippine presidential campaign, and my impression of even the down-market sources was that it was conducted on a level of sobriety, seriousness, realism, and lack of manipulation that makes this US political campaign and its media coverage such a horror.
Compared to the US, that third world country has an honest, responsible and diverse media.
"Yeah. Trump prefers nukes to troops."
Imagine if we had President who our enemies believed was like that. Reagan was that kind of President. Trump is clearly no Reagan, but having a President that scares your enemies is a good thing, and it has to be convincing.
Can you imagine 9/11 happening under Trump if the Islamists believed he'd melt Mecca in response just as a starter?
He's also right to call out the stupidity of Dems habit of revealing actual (not psy op) military strategies and limits.
Post a Comment