|
Speaking of Khans: https://twitter.com/AP/status/760092756668735488 Trump won't let it go though.
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 13:51
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 23:56 |
|
|
MonkeyOnFire posted:Yup, he's still at it this morning. Didn't McCain endorse Trump though? Or am I mistaken?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 14:01
|
|
|
MonkeyOnFire posted:Yeah, last I remember McCain was all aboard the Trump train. Can't imagine what's going through his head at this very moment; if nothing else, he's a man of principle, and not the kind of person you'd ever expect to back down from a pledge, but between this and the whole "I like people who weren't captured" deal (plus the effects a failed Trump candidacy might have on McCain's re-election, slim though they may be) there's probably a great deal of buyer's remorse. I'm sure a lot of people are, but none of them refuse to retract their endorsements. As I said in the Trump thread, it feels the only member of the GOP who comes out ahead here is going to be Kasich. He didn't endorse and he's leaving a trail of evidence that he was against Trump from the get go. Barring a magical win from Trump, Kasich wins in the long run.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 14:10
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:Cruz, too. He's pretty clearly angling for a 2020 run. Possibly Kasich, too, his gimmick in the primary this election was being the Sane Dude, which depending on how this election and the response thereto goes might be much more appealing to the GOP base in four years. I hesitate to say Cruz because of his speech, but short term memory and whatnot. Trump, if he loses, is going to be /very/ bitter, and I can totally see him making a SuperPAC (well, provided Citizens United doesn't get reversed) to sink any Cruz chance from here on out. Kasich hasn't done anything that public to slap Donald in the face apart from rebuke his outlandish statements. Geostomp posted:They are getting more and more desperate to somehow salvage Trump's idiocy. I wonder how far they'll go for the next stupid thing he says. By November, the sky's the limit. Right wing radio from what I'm hearing (as in second hand) is pushing the Muslim Brotherhood angle now. It probably won't make it to mainstream, but who the gently caress knows in this election.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 15:10
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:If he was I'd give effectively zero shits. Most MB franchises, especially the ones in the US, are not exactly the boogeyman they're touted as, except insofar as they're not real big fans of Arab dictators. The problem is, while most people are going to see this as attempted smeer from a highly, highly questionable source, Trump's base is going to eat this up. They don't care. He's brown, he's Muslim, and he /may/ be tied to some Muslim org. That's enough for them.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 17:14
|
|
|
Can we get HUGE to filter to YUUUUGE (or some variant of it)? Thanks.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
Dear Rush,  Signed, This member of the LGBTQ community. WampaLord posted:There was an r/politics post with "Gary Johnson supports TPP" and the top comment with hundreds of upvotes was "gently caress, WHO DO I VOTE FOR?" The most common one I hear is something to do with IP rights. Given TPP is designed to dick over China and China has fucktons of knockoffs, it makes sense there would be a clause protecting IP.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
A Winner is Jew posted:Not only that, the only thing with any meat to them were brainstorming things that didn't go anywhere, or people calling each other bitch via emails. Remember when Assange said he'd release something that would FOR SURE GET HILLARY ARRESTED, THIS TIME FOR REAL! during her acceptance speech and he released nothing? Good times.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 19:00
|
|
|
Mahoning posted:Honestly, zero of my Facebook friends have said a positive thing about Trump (probably because anyone who would, I've already defriended or hidden them from my timeline). But I've seen a lot of Gary Johnson posts, and I simply point out some of his terrible economic policies and they have nothing to say other than "better than Trump or Hillary!" Seriously, they've only heard that he wants to end the war on drugs and is LGBT friendly and they're like "totally awesome! Vote Johnson!" Libertarians are republicans who want to smoke weed, really.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
A Winner is Jew posted:The best way I've found is to tell them that it's W Bush vs Gore 2.0, and voting for Nader was how we ended up with Bush. Has anyone responded to you with "NO IT'S NOT!" and if so, what was their reasoning?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
Isn't most voter fraud done by right wingers more often than not?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
Mel Mudkiper posted:I am tempted to wander into one of the pro-Trump GBS threads just to lurk and see how they are spinning all of this Look for boosted_c5's posts in the trump thread in c-spam
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 01:42
|
|
|
sarmhan posted:Buffet releasing his tax returns as a giant gently caress YOU to Donald is going to be amazing. Add in Cuban and we'll have an even better time
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 02:58
|
|
|
Dexo posted:Wait does Ryan seriously have a shot at being primaried? Short version: no. Longer verison: HAHAHAHAHAHA no. Truthful version: Ryan's seat occupies the southern half of Waukesha County (occasionally called the Alabama of Wisconsin), the southern suburbs of Milwaukee County (lots of aging boomers), and extends all the way to Janesville where he's from. He's insanely popular here, and any democratic challenger is simply a token challenger (if they run one at all). Of course, this area mostly went for Cruz, but Trump did win in two of Ryan's counties. I don't think the primary will unseat Ryan by any means, given the guy is further right than Ryan. As I said last thread, Ryan is running ads like there's a serious threat to his seat. It's... dumb.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 05:58
|
|
|
Mountaineer posted:What's Romney's most recent statement on the election? I don't recall anything him saying much after his big speech during the primary. This seems like a situation where he could really twist the knife if he wanted to He's largely laying low. Sadly for everyone in this thread, he's taken shots at Clinton while not really promoting Trump. I think he largely falls into "Never Hillary" but will never endorse Trump, like Kasich.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 06:18
|
|
|
Odds on Trump trying to say something outrageous to steal the spotlight from the Olympics?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
waitwhatno posted:Eurogoon here, how the gently caress is Trump polling at ~40%? How is ~40% of your voting population ready to elect that clown? There's a certain % that always votes a certain way in the US, regardless of who is running (this is not unique to the Republicans). We don't know what the GOP floor is exactly, but it's probably somewhere between 30-40%.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:Besides what others have said, a not insignificant number of our populace is old, scared white people. They get all their news from sources as honest as Fox News while most networks are determined to equate both parties to avoid appearance of bias. As such, we get honest debates treating even well-established scientific findings like global warming as equivalent to an "expert" who claims that wind is a non-renewable resource, unlike oil. So many people don't really understand anything about politics or issues, instead just going by party loyalty or whichever seems to support their pet issues the loudest, simplest way. Some take this so far that they just assume that the parties need to trade off just to be "fair". I have a bunch of those old, scared white people as regulars at my work. One of them was going on about how Trump will win, including up to last Thursday before Hillary (and Khan) spoke. He refuses to move to Milwaukee, the city, instead of the suburbs because "it's a dump" and points out the bad parts of town as to why, completely ignoring suburban Milwaukee. I was really tempted to call him out and go, "Yeah, you don't want to move because you don't want to support those non-white folks, right?" but I didn't (this guy has said, "It's not racist if it's true!" without any sense of irony in the past).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:That was the funniest thing ever. And then they couldn't stop him by disavowing his racism because that's PC liberal thought control, they couldn't stop him by warning his rhetoric would be poison in the general because he's just saying what everyone's thinking and Republicans only lose when they disappoint America by not being racist enough. And they couldn't even use their media empire to expose how dangerously ignorant he is about government and foreign policy because you can't trust the media, whenever you don't like what you hear on the news it's because they're making up all their so-called facts, you gotta go with your feelings. That is probably the most accurate reasoning I've seen as to why the GOP rolled over and took it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 16:35
|
|
|
Rhesus Pieces posted:It's day three of the post-convention general election cycle and Trump has already attacked grieving gold-star parents, fire marshals and now a crying infant. Attacking Chris Kyle, American Badass (tm) 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
zoux posted:Here's a good article arguing that for Trump supporters, racism is clearly the motivating factor. And people are going to whine that it's Salon and not bother reading the article I bet when used as evidence as to why he's racist. Seriously, the biggest annoyance I've had out of the Trump supporters is "HE'S NOT RACIST WHAT HAS HE SAID THAT'S RACIST".
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
Pakled posted:There's also this Not surprising. Farmers tend to be Republican and rail against handouts while getting money from the government anyway as part of farm bills (they apparently get pissy if you point this out to them), so they feel that "dem coloreds are taking /my/ money!" all while hiring migrant workers who are, more often than not, hispanic. Construction is odd at first, but given the amount of buildings Trump has his name on, it's easy to argue he helps create construction jobs (whether or not he's footing the bill is another matter). Manufacturing? Rail against China, you win their support. Trade? Now it's coming out he doesn't pay his contractors, but back then, that tied into the whole "building buildings" thing.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
edrith posted:This is from a few pages back but that's...really not how racism works. Racial scapegoating in times of economic stress is of course a thing, and rich slave owners might have exploited racism along those lines, but they didn't "create" a brutal system of racism, and they didn't create chattel slavery out of whole cloth. If you want to understand the history of racism in America, you have to understand the history of racism (and Islamophobia, and especially antisemitism, because a lot of antisemitic tropes were borrowed to define new-discovered Native Americans/used to justify their enslavement/etc) in pre-Age of Discovery Europe. Racism has never been solely about class or money and it has rhetorical roots that date back to ancient Greece. Please don't insult axolotls like that. Anyway, racism may not have roots in class warfare, but they're entangled now that they're pretty much one in the same, especially here since most of the poor, urban areas do tend to be overwhelmingly black, and the poor white areas tend to be overwhelmingly racist (and gods forbid if a black person gets any of /their/ welfare).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:My facebook feed this morning has been blowing up with two Jill Stein things She's floundering hard after polls showed "Oh hey, Bernie supporters /are/ in fact leaving en masse to support Clinton". I had no problem convincing someone who thought she was a good idea that she really wasn't with the whole vaccine thing.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:That's been their problem this whole time. Republican politicians had multiple chances to stop Trump by cooperating but that would mean putting aside their own egos and ambitions temporarily for the good of the party, the country, and their own long-term interests so nope they just mashed the "betray" button for 7 straight months, counting on someone else to fall on that grenade and leave them standing. Remember when it was down to four and they were still squabbling over who took votes from who?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 03:50
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:How has all of this happened in 24 loving hours A bit late, but don't forget Obama backed the GOP into a corner by telling them to disavow trump, making them having to choose between the cheeto and actually following Obama's instructions
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 04:38
|
|
|
Gyges posted:That's the beautiful trap they've stepped into. The top of the ticket is getting toxic enough to effect the down ballot, but if they actually write off the top of the ticket that effects the down ballot. See, when Cruz gave his speech, I thought it was by far the best speech of the RNC. It was hopeful. It was impassioned. It wasn't overly negative or overly reliant on bashing Hillary. It was a great speech to stump for his party's platform and a reminder "It's more than just the presidential race here!" But, he didn't bend the knee, and his message got lost.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 06:03
|
|
|
showbiz_liz posted:Dumpster Fire will have to be one of them, surely. MSNBC has you beat: Trumpster Fire.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 06:09
|
|
|
Relentlessboredomm posted:They still can. Garland's just twisting in the wind right now. At any point they can continue the vetting/nomination process. I wouldn't be surprised that at the end of summer recess, we see confirmation proceedings. It may not end in confirmation, but they'll likely start.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 06:43
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Morning_Joe/status/760790261370753025 Did this get linked? Or did I somehow miss it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 16:27
|
|
|
I'm going to laugh when the brand new 400m talking point gets shut down. They try to find new dirt on the Dems and either A. Trump goes and say something he shouldn't, or B. it's completely proven wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
Jackson Taus posted:I mean there could be a private ultimatum. "Either fake a heart attack and drop out or we'll pull all our help/turn on you and you'll lose by 10-15 points". If Trump at any point is faced with a choice between getting smoked or having to save face, he's going to pick face-saving as a matter of ego-survival. The trick is convincing Trump that's what he's looking at (which I'm not sure is possible). He won't. He'll go "I'LL WIN THIS ANYWAY!" And continue to double down on the whole rigged angle.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:I think in general that the Clinton foundation are just sort of "average" in terms of bad poo poo that they do. I mean Hillary is not positioning herself as any sort of leader on the Left and a great deal of her current policies seem to have been sensible if somewhat lacklustre. Fixed, but agreed. And largely as of late, it seems she's laying low. She doesn't do these giant rallies that Trump does. She does smaller ones, designed to be more personal. Of course, Wikileaks is always around the corner, but Trump did a /fantastic/ job of poisoning that well to the point where any future leak against her will immediately be suspect.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:I think it's a good strategy. The fact is that you can play to your strengths in this sort of contest as your opponent is too busy committing suicide for anyone else to notice. And the whole wikileaks thing, it seems to be pretty much bunkum (look at all the emails! That have nothing on them at all really... poo poo), I wouldn't worry too much about them. The real problem seems to be a lack of easy counter-narrative. Assange has gone on record saying he has emails that'll get Hillary arrested (For real this time! THIS TIME IT'S FOR REAL!). And then Trump opened his mouth about Russia getting them.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 19:05
|
|
|
straight up brolic posted:The Manafort pivot to law and order in general was terrible from a strategy perspective and, even if Trump was moderately respectful, I think he still would fail with that as the central tenet of his candidacy. The law and order idea does a lot to rile the republican base, but the issue is that it raises his lack of credentials as an executor of that philsophy. He does nothing to project calm or the traditional strongman "im going to handle this". The reality is that, outside of the people that are begging to be ruled by the idea of white man politically as well as religiously (which is 30% of the country), people are scared of the lengths that Trump would go to to maintain law and order and he's not seen as a reliable caretaker of the country. You can't run someone with all-time candidacy unfavorables and an association with instability and fascism as a law and order candidate for the American people. It doesn't work for the branch of the Republican coalition they need (white, educated) to form a winning one. I'm going to disagree here, if only slightly. It was a logical pivot. Trump has been promoting "safety" (or what he believes is safety) by saying immigrants (namely Mexican) are the cause of all our country's crime and Muslims the cause of all terror and we should keep them out. Black Lives Matter gave him the justification (in his mind) to take shots at African-Americans and support cops. But I agree completely on the limited appeal of the message.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:I think even without the Russia thing it wouldn't have gone too much further. Though tbf I am not sure of anything these days. Possibly, if only because Wikileaks got exposed as seemingly the mouthpiece for Russian Intelligence, and the fact that they didn't care about any personal information in the DNC leak or the Turkey leak (that they ended up taking down).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/guypbenson/status/760899936955138048
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
The GOP has three major blocs right now: 1. The Rich, FYGM elite. Really don't seem to care much as long as they get taxed less, yet want more military spending because it usually flows back to their pockets (Romney). 2. The Tea Partiers, or "Freedom Caucus". Usually bigoted, and usually shitheels who have no clue how to actually run a government (Vaping dude). 3. Evangelicals. Drives the anti-LGBTQ and pro-Christianity, anti-Muslim portions of the party (Huckabee). Trump's support comes primarily from #2. This portion was courted with Nixon, and really became active when Obama got elected (you can guess why). Trump is likely to be the climax of this bloc, but that remains to be seen.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
Radish posted:Evangelicals like Trump too because they are mega racist as well. Yup. They went away with the fall of the KKK, and with LGBTQ coming up, they found a new boogie man to latch on to.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 23:56 |
|
|
Hillary ads seen: 1. Jill Stein ads seen: 1. Trump ads: 0 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 22:55
|
|