On election night, when Trump finally hits the fan, the shock and horror in the comment sections of all the wingnut websites are going to be epic. I wouldn't miss it for anything.
I certainly do. This has been the most bizarre and entertaining public implosion of a party ever. The best part of it all is that us progressives/Democrats/liberals didn't have to do a thing but sit back and let the total loons on the right destroy themselves. Ahhh Karma - it's a beautiful thing.
This must mean democrats and progressives are going to coalesce around Bernie to give him the nomination? A dog fight in liberal paradise maybe?
Infidel753, the polls have been predicting a massive loss if Trump is the T-GOP nominee, and yet they ignore all evidence and continue to support him. Remember how clueless Rove & Co. were on election night 2012, not believing Romney lost Ohio? This is the same illness that the T-GOP has not recovered from, they actually believe the majority of Americans support Trump and his unAmerican ideas.BlueBull, The T-GOP is reaping the whirlwind they sowed for the past 30 years.bigger isn't always better,I don't know how the Democratic contest will end. But I do know either one will beat Trump, and that's all that matters at this point.
The Trumpolines are impervious to polling data and common sense even when other Republicans try to explain it to them. They think everything will turn around once Trump goes after the Democrats with the attack-dog tactics that have worked so well against his Republican rivals. They're saying that Trump will just call Bill Clinton a rapist and accuse Hillary of protecting him, and all the women voters who are now turned off by Trump will flock back to him. I guess it's like the way "normal" Republicans pin their hopes on Benghazi eventually panning out.The striking thing about these polls showing Trump losing to Hillary or Bernie is that the margin is growing over time. The closer we get to the election, the more people are turning against Trump. The actual margin of defeat might be even larger than 20 points, incredible as that sounds. And so Trump would be forever branded the yuuugest loser of them all. Couldn't happen to a more deserving guy.
"Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), said after the Brussels attacks he thinks the U.S. should “patrol and secure“ Muslim communities. “That does not mean targeting Muslims. It means targeting radical Islamic terrorism,” Cruz said last week." But Cruz doesn't say HOW he'd target radical Islamic terrorism. How would he "target" an abstract idea? "terrorism?" Both Cruz and Trump are barely disguised proto-fascists. The Republicans supporting both men are the same people who complained that Obama would fundamentally change America. The Republicans are supporting two men who have been quite clear about how they would break constitutional law by targeting a religion and its people in their own American neighborhoods. This is what fear does to normally sane people, especially when those once sane people can focus their fears on "the other." It's happened all through our American history, nothing's changed, just the religion and the color of "the other" skin.
Good morning Hank,Did you read Pm Carpenter today? He nails it:Blue-collar whites, mostly males, were angry at Obama, who demonstrated his lack of interest in them by reviving a shattered economy and expanding access to healthcare coverage. Yet the "anger" of "many" of these whites over Obama's demonstrable indifference to their socioeconomic troubles was non-ideological. Indeed, their anger had to be non-idealogical, since Republican presidents from Eisenhower to Bush II had deployed Keynesian remedies to weak economies, and Obama's healthcare program stemmed from none other than the Heritage Foundation.Whence, therefore, all the blue-collar white anger? If Obama was merely doing what any competent Republican president would have done, why the explosion of white resentment? One answer lies inarguably in racism, which the GOP's grand strategic wizards fed through dog whistles and foghorns at poohbah-financed Tea Party rallies; another answer lies in the poohbahs' right-wing complex of noisy hate machinery: Limbaugh, Levin, Hannity & Co. Whatever the black Democratic president proposed, the Republican Party would oppose with unprecedented vehemence, anger and solidarity.Donald Trump? He has only brought all of it to an apotheosis. Yet read the quotes from the party's "elites." Says, for instance, Ari Fleischer: "If Donald Trump wins, he will change what it means to be a Republican." Similarly, "Wyoming investor" Foster Friess says: "The Republican Party is being dramatically transformed."Both gentlemen are not wrong. But their timing and causation are off — way off. It is not Trump who is changing and dramatically transforming what it means to be a Republican. It was the Republican Party at large that did that. For years the GOP's virtuosities have been demagoguery, racism and scapegoating — all intrinsically related and adamantly denied — and it was that rhetorical assemblage that caused the base's "growing anguish." Now they are naked virtuosities in the wholesale eminence of Donald Trump.And true to historical form, that's who Republican elites, still in public denial, are now scapegoating.
Sanders versus Trump.Clinton versus Trump.Sanders with a +6.3% greater margin over Trump than Clinton. Given Clinton's questionable honesty and integrity the democratic party operatives and big wigs ought to be throwing their full weight behind Sanders.It's going to be real, and it's going to be fun. But is it going to be REAL FUN?
Shaw... Trump seems to be DOA... Since GOP delegates are not firm, folks like Cruz are already undermining his count.For instance, in So Carolina, which Trump won, he may end up with few delegates as Cruz has laid the groundwork to get those votes at the convention.These are the rules of the GOP, which Trump agreed to when he decided to run. But... He never thought they'd come into play.Indeed, this will be interesting to watch..
What has this country come to when a commie atheist pinko like Bernie Sanders can beat a God-fearin' Murica-lovin' capitalist like Donald Trump? That's it, I'm moving to Somalia.
"The sad fact is that most Americans are not embarrassed, they are proud. What is going on in the presidential primaries is exactly what a significant portion of the population believes defines and represents them as “real Americans;” bigoted, greedy, fanatically religious, and generally epitomize anti-social malcontents. For the record, a malcontent is a person who is always unhappy and angry and acts on their inherent personality dysfunction."
bigger isn't always better,At this point, the Democrats could run a ham sandwich as a candidate, and it would beat Trump as well. That his supporters don't understand how disliked Trump is with a majority of Americans shows how out of touch with reality they are and always have been.Dave, I don't think Trump or his supporters are going to give up without a bloody fight. You've seen how Trump went after a female FAUX NOOZ pundit, Megyn Kelly, when she asked him questions he didn't like. He's been trashing her ever since that first debate -- he's obsessed with her. He won't cooperate with the Republican establishment; and if we think we've seen his idiotic ranting against Kelly, wait till the establishment kicks his prodigious arse to the curb and denies him the nomination.Kevin, it is heartening, isn't it, to see a majority of Americans reject The Trumper and all the divisiveness and hatred he stands for. Mything in America, it's been my experience with T-GOPers that they do not allow any facts that are in opposition with their fiercely held beliefs into their bubbles. They're still holding onto the "Obama is a Commie; Obama is a Muslim; Obama Hates America memes, even though sane Americans rejected that trainload of crap. I don't know what it will take for them to see their folly -- perhaps an apocalyptic defeat of epic proportions of their loud-mouthed baboon with little hands.
Shaw... true on Trump... he does not like questions that cause him difficulty. Witness his interview with the WAPO... when asked about ISIS, rather than answer, he noted how good looking everyone was.What a great answer. What I want to know, in the midst of all the chortling from the reporters, is why the WAPO people interviewing him let him off the hook? Why did they not press him more for answers?It seems many in the press have learned little from the donnybrook of Iraq aquiescence...
That his supporters don't understand how disliked Trump is with a majority of Americans shows how out of touch with reality they are and always have been.The great American dissatisfaction with the perceived lack of concern their government has for the middle class, as well as their fear of the significant demographic and cultural changes they see are a yuuuge driver of their angst.I know many folks that simply feel they have been marginalized and ignored for so long they are fed up and willing to say to the government . Ignoring millions of people with these feeling (and they aren't all stupid Shaw) ain't gonna be pretty.It is what it is.
Dave,I read that WaPo interview, and the longest answer he gave was the one on why he brought up the size of his hands at that famous GOP debate. He was quite detailed on that, but on using tactical nuclear weapons on ISIS? Not so much, because he knows next to nothing about foreign issues. His supporters are quite comfortable in giving the nuclear codes to someone who knows as much about foreign policy as my 4-year-old nephew?
More on The Trumper from Jim Wright:"Yesterday, in an interview with New York Times reporter David Sanger, Donald Trump was asked if he would rule out war with China.“I would use trade to negotiate. Would I go to war? Look, let me just tell you. There’s a question I wouldn’t want to answer. Because I don’t want to say I won’t or I will or — do you understand that, David?That’s the problem with our country. A politician would say, ‘Oh I would never go to war,’ or they’d say, ‘Oh I would go to war.’ I don’t want to say what I’d do because, again, we need unpredictability.”Unpredictability. Because apparently in Donald Trump’s mind you just keep ’em guessing, sure, maybe we’ll just bomb you, maybe we won’t. You never know. As if threats of war were the acceptable foreign policy statements of a civilized nation and not the megalomania of tyrants.History is replete with murderous dictators who believed in threats of military force as foreign policy and you don’t have to go very far to find examples."North Korea's Kim Jong Un comes to mind.
bigger isn't always better,I agree. I also understand not all Trump supporters are stupid -- but I have to say I don't understand supporting someone like him. This dissatisfaction with the government didn't happen overnight. Where were these disaffected Republicans and Democrats in the middle class when George W. Bush put two wars on America's credit card? When he pushed through Medicare Part D that gave Big Pharma a boondoggle? When the banksters on Wall Street tanked the economy? Why didn't they pay a price for what they did? This discontent didn't happen only during Obama's administration. This has been a long, slow slide since VooDoo economics gave us the big lie that cutting taxes on the rich and cutting services on the poor would bring America greatness.Instead it brought us Donald J. Trump.
Afghanistan was a legitimate response to 911. Iraq had no legitimacy. GWB should have finished business and taken out bin Laden, then brought the troops home.As to the remaining list, there where many speaking out by the end of GWB's presidency. You are right the discontent has been festering for some time.. Unfortunately many republicans and conservatives either chose not to understand their part in creating the environment that allowed the problems to grow or just don't care.GWB was not a fiscal conservative, he was a fiscally irresponsible Keynesian that had no problem using the nation's credit card for his misguided expenditures that ballooned the debt.As for the financial meltdown. Well, suffice to say there was responsibility all around, it wasn't just limited to republicans and GWB.All presidents have less impact on financial markets and jobs than many realize.Interesting times.
Regardless if Trump would be a good President or not, his entry onto the field has shown the American people what the Republican Party has become - nihilistic, insane, irresponsible and certainly contemptuous of American values. The GOP support for Trump is based on self-hatred, and certainly hatred of America -- they believe this country is rotten to the core, but have no idea of the responsibility they have for this sad state of affairs: They've been voting for the same people who've promised them everything and delivered nothing. The time was ripe for a demagogue like Trump to lead them by their ignorant noses into another dead end. They think Trump is shaking up the establishment? What fools. What dependable fools they all are.
"Republican Party has become - nihilistic, insane, irresponsible and certainly contemptuous of American values."It's the American people who keep voting for these demagogues, so you are describing the American people.
"Regardless if Trump would be a good President or not, his entry onto the field has shown the American people what the Republican Party has become - nihilistic, insane, irresponsible and certainly contemptuous of American values."No, Anon @11:26 I've described the people who vote for people like Trump and Cruz: nihilists, insane, and irresponsible. I didn't say ALL Americans or The American People. Just the dimwits who support Trump, Palin, and their ilk.
And as it becomes more and more apparent that Trump will not be getting the GOP nomination, the question will become, what of his voters?No GOP candidate can hope to win the presidency without the trove of white voters the Trump campaign currently has in the fold. Simple demographics show that for and GOP candidate to win, they have to flip states Obama won in 2012, and they need a growing number of white voters each election to do that. When Trump does not get the nomination, and the party chooses someone like Ryan, Romney or Kasich, will his voters get in line and support the establishment, or stay home?Stay tuned...
I did not say all people either, just the ones you were mentioning.
Dave, the same thing can be said of the Bernie Sanders supporters. I've read that at least a third of them would not vote for Hillary if Bernie doesn't get the nomination. Will those voters stay home or vote for Trump? I have no idea.I do know that neither Sanders nor Clinton are as extreme as Trump or behave like a buffoon. The Trump supporters are so angry that they are willing to overlook his crude behavior and complete lack of knowledge about our laws and how the world works. If people are looking for a guy who can build big gaudy buildings or walls with his name on them, Trump's their man.
What I hear often is “I don’t like the candidates…at least Bernie Sanders is SINCERE and hasn’t changed his opinions.”Well! I believe Hitler was probably very sincere, too.
@shaw -- I've read that at least a third of them would not vote for Hillary if Bernie doesn't get the nomination. Will those voters stay home or vote for Trump? I have no idea.------------I've had this conversation with my middle niece who is a big Sanders supporter (even gave me a "Feel the Bern" hoodie for Xmas). I've stressed to her that I'm glad to see her taking an interest in the political process but she has to see this as a longer term process of developing a more progressive voice in the Democratic party.She insists he's going to win and I'm afraid a lot of young people are going to stay home rather than accept a second choice.
@Lady Pinkbottom -- Well! I believe Hitler was probably very sincere, too.--------That meme is very big at the mothership today.Along with believing Bernie shouldn't be pictured with the American flag.
I do know that neither Sanders nor Clinton are as extreme as Trump or behave like a buffoon. The Trump supporters are so angry that they are willing to overlook his crude behavior and complete lack of knowledge about our laws and how the world works.Extreme is always in the eye of the beholder, and, that does make it somewhat subjective Shaw.Having said that, at least Sanders and Clinton have retained a reasonable degree of reasoned thought and objectivity. So have their respective supporters. The same absolutely CANNOT be said for Trump or his supporters. This election cycle is shaping up to favor the D party, whoever the top of the ticket may be.
Ducky, my nephew and his wife have vowed not to vote if Bernie doesn't get the nomination. That's classic cutting off one's nose to spite one's face. They're fierce Bernie supporters, but won't listen to reason, which is: not voting is voting for the Gooper nominee.I will vote for Bernie. I will vote for Hillary. I will NOT stay home. And I will NEVER vote for Trump!Lady Pinkbottom, Jesus Christ was very sincere as well. Why do you feel the need to use Bernie Sander's name and Hitler's in the comparison? Are you that bladdered?
Yes Ducky... when you say, speaking of Bernie and his sincerity, that "Hitler was very sincere too" you should expect people to see you equating Bernie and Hitler...Seems like pretty straight forward English...Despite your protestations to the contrary...
I voted for Bernie in the primary here in Florida. I would love to see Bernie get the nomination. Not that I dislike Hillary, at all - I just like his positions far better. Still, I'll happily vote for and work for Hillary should she be the nominee and I will NEVER vote for any of the Republiclowns running. Never.
Here's hoping the Libertarian candidate for POTUS draws more votes than in 2012, and that many rational republicans/conservatives vote Libertarian that usually vote republican.Some just can't vote Hillary because of theit conscience .
Doesn't Hillary's dishonesty concern anyone? Do you really want to listen to her screech for the next four years? Can you handle that phony laugh for four years?
Anonymous,It is interesting that you're concerned about Hillary's "dishonesty," but failed to mention that Trump has very little acquaintance with the truth. Fact-finding organization have found that he's a pathological liar. "Of the Trump claims that PolitiFact had checked as of late last week, a full 77 percent were deemed “mostly false,” “false,” or “pants on fire” — the corresponding percentage for Ted Cruz is 66, Hillary Clinton 28, and Bernie Sanders 29 (though Sanders is the only candidate without a pants-on-fire howler on record). And what’s striking about so many of Trump’s lies, as John Oliver recounted on a megaviral Last Week Tonight segment on Trump, is just how checkable they are. They’re the sort of falsehoods you shouldn’t expect to get away with." Your characterization of Hillary's voice is sexist and has nothing whatsoever to do with her intelligence or her ability to govern.
Now, now Ms.Shaw, my 11:48 questions pertained to Hillary Clinton not Donald Trump.So perhaps I'll ask again.Does Hillary's documented dishonesty concern you?And how does making mention of Ms.Clinton's voice pattern become sexist? A bit toucky, don't you think?
Anonymous: "And how does making mention of Ms.Clinton's voice pattern become sexist? Women's voices are naturally higher pitched and, therefore, sound more shrill to some people who need little reason to find fault with women in politics. Women's vocal chords are, for the majority, shorter and thinner than men's. That's not the only reason women's voices are higher pitched and men's voices are lower, hormones are involved as well. So criticizing Hillary for her voice pattern is like criticizing her for having breasts and a womb. So criticizing something she has no control over because she's a female as a reason to dislike her is sexist.As for your insistence that I answer your other question, I'm under no obligation to answer an anonymous troll's obvious condescending taunt. My blog; my rules.
Why is it that the low-IQ types who make up the radical right always - ALWAYS - play the juvenile, grade-school game of "But he did it too!"? It's the same game the annoying little 'anonymous' troll is trying to play. Deflect from how awful his candidates are by attempting to make Hillary as bad or worse than the knuckle-dragging Drumpf, the single-celled ultra-radical Cruz or the sane but absurdly anti-choice Kasich. It's such a lame game they play and, sadly, they think it works.
BlueBull, the troll came back and taunted me about Hillary's voice and other nonsense -- which of course changes the subject away from his candidate. Trump's negativity numbers are worse than Hillary's, but the troll didn't want to talk about that, just Hillary's shrill voice and dishonesty, because then he doesn't have to think about the repulsive Trump and Cruz.
I know Shaw, it's always the same with them. I read many right wing blogs each day and I see the same ole folks saying the same ole things over and over and it always boils down to how awful everyone on the left is and how mean the media always is to everyone on the right - no matter how many proverbial bodies they have buried out back. :)
Post a Comment