Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 21 Oct 2016, 2:42 pm

dag hammarsjkold wrote:It seems that more of Trumps "outlandish" claims are grounded in truth.

http://nypost.com/2016/10/21/huma-on-hillarys-12m-morocco-fiasco-she-created-this-mess-and-she-knows-it/

There is also video evidence of democrat activists infiltrating Trumps' rallies to incite violence.

There is also email evidence of the criminal being fed the town hall questions prior to the debate in St. Louis.

Not that any Clinton scandal is capable of changing any democrat leaning person's mind about her.

Conclusion.....Trump is an egomaniac and behaves like a selfish child, but even a broken clock is right twice a day.


The only good news: after she wins, the drip-drip-drip will limit her political capital.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4961
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 22 Oct 2016, 6:19 am

Doctor Fate wrote:
dag hammarsjkold wrote:It seems that more of Trumps "outlandish" claims are grounded in truth.

http://nypost.com/2016/10/21/huma-on-hillarys-12m-morocco-fiasco-she-created-this-mess-and-she-knows-it/

There is also video evidence of democrat activists infiltrating Trumps' rallies to incite violence.

There is also email evidence of the criminal being fed the town hall questions prior to the debate in St. Louis.

Not that any Clinton scandal is capable of changing any democrat leaning person's mind about her.

Conclusion.....Trump is an egomaniac and behaves like a selfish child, but even a broken clock is right twice a day.


The only good news: after she wins, the drip-drip-drip will limit her political capital.


The next question is whether it will force Hillary to work across the aisle, or cause her to hunker down in a bunker. I think the latter is more likely, but I'm always hopeful.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 22 Oct 2016, 8:17 am

Ray Jay wrote:
Doctor Fate wrote:
dag hammarsjkold wrote:It seems that more of Trumps "outlandish" claims are grounded in truth.

http://nypost.com/2016/10/21/huma-on-hillarys-12m-morocco-fiasco-she-created-this-mess-and-she-knows-it/

There is also video evidence of democrat activists infiltrating Trumps' rallies to incite violence.

There is also email evidence of the criminal being fed the town hall questions prior to the debate in St. Louis.

Not that any Clinton scandal is capable of changing any democrat leaning person's mind about her.

Conclusion.....Trump is an egomaniac and behaves like a selfish child, but even a broken clock is right twice a day.


The only good news: after she wins, the drip-drip-drip will limit her political capital.


The next question is whether it will force Hillary to work across the aisle, or cause her to hunker down in a bunker. I think the latter is more likely, but I'm always hopeful.


I have no doubt it will be the latter, especially when the "i-word" starts being bandied about. Can you imagine the only husband/wife to ever get elected both get impeached?
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 22 Oct 2016, 8:38 am

Ray
The next question is whether it will force Hillary to work across the aisle, or cause her to hunker down in a bunker. I think the latter is more likely, but I'm always hopeful.

Why not look for actual evidence in past behaviours. (People repeat behaviours).
As President, Bill Clinton had a reputation of working across the aisle.
As a Senator Hillary had a reputation of working across the aisle.
And in this election, Hillary has the support of hundreds of senior Republicans.
She is a pragmatist, a realist and a policy wonk with experience and respect for the instiutions and an understanding of the culture on the Hill.

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/25 ... -gop-agree
I found this list of republicans supporting her. I'm sure its incomplete.
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing ... ton-grows/

Fate
I have no doubt it will be the latter, especially when the "i-word" starts being bandied about

Oh I'm sure it already has . And it was by nut bars about Pbama every few weeks.
This is as unrealistic as it comes. And will be even more so if the Senate goes Democrat. Hell there's even a chance the House goes republicn despite the gerrymandering .
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/201 ... 6-forecast

Projection: A 6-point Clinton victory would put 50 Republican-held House seats in play
Skelley’s math is rooted in a simple fact: If the Democratic presidential nominee wins a House district, the Democratic congressional candidate also probably wins that House seat.

This is not an ironclad rule, but it’s a pretty good indicator — in 2012, only 6 percent of districts that voted for Barack Obama voted a Republican into the House.

http://www.vox.com/2016/10/8/13211858/house-math-trump

Your nation is not as conservative as you think. Without gerrymandering there wouldn't be a Republican House.
In 2012, for instance, Democratic House candidates won 1.7 million more votes than their Republican foes — and still ended up with 33 fewer members of the House.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 22 Oct 2016, 10:40 am

rickyp wrote:Your nation is not as conservative as you think. Without gerrymandering there wouldn't be a Republican House.
In 2012, for instance, Democratic House candidates won 1.7 million more votes than their Republican foes — and still ended up with 33 fewer members of the House.


Bull.

Whatever happens, it's Trump.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 22 Oct 2016, 2:52 pm

fate
Bull.

Whatever happens, it's Trump.

It wasn't Trump in 2012.
And this is a fact.

In 2012, for instance, Democratic House candidates won 1.7 million more votes than their Republican foes — and still ended up with 33 fewer members of the House.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 22 Oct 2016, 4:30 pm

rickyp wrote:fate
Bull.

Whatever happens, it's Trump.

It wasn't Trump in 2012.
And this is a fact.

In 2012, for instance, Democratic House candidates won 1.7 million more votes than their Republican foes — and still ended up with 33 fewer members of the House.


So what? Gerrymandering is a fact of life.

The only reason the Democrats are getting anything this year is that moron, Trump.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15994
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 23 Oct 2016, 7:01 am

Doctor Fate wrote:
rickyp wrote:fate
Bull.

Whatever happens, it's Trump.

It wasn't Trump in 2012.
And this is a fact.

In 2012, for instance, Democratic House candidates won 1.7 million more votes than their Republican foes — and still ended up with 33 fewer members of the House.


So what? Gerrymandering is a fact of life.

The only reason the Democrats are getting anything this year is that moron, Trump.
Be fair, all those Republicans who voted for him in the primaries, and endorsed him (even if some have walked it back or become ambivalent since) have helped.

Ryan is also giving the Bernie supporters a reason to vote Democrat down the tickets. You can't blame the Donald for that one.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 23 Oct 2016, 7:24 pm

danivon wrote:Be fair, all those Republicans who voted for him in the primaries, and endorsed him (even if some have walked it back or become ambivalent since) have helped.

Ryan is also giving the Bernie supporters a reason to vote Democrat down the tickets. You can't blame the Donald for that one.


I'm not worried about down-ballot. The nation isn't as liberal as the deluded rickyp thinks. The State legislatures, governors, and off-year elections speak to that. Furthermore, Clinton is not popular. Many people don't trust her. They will vote to make sure she doesn't have both houses.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15994
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 24 Oct 2016, 6:23 am

Doctor Fate wrote:
danivon wrote:Be fair, all those Republicans who voted for him in the primaries, and endorsed him (even if some have walked it back or become ambivalent since) have helped.

Ryan is also giving the Bernie supporters a reason to vote Democrat down the tickets. You can't blame the Donald for that one.


I'm not worried about down-ballot. The nation isn't as liberal as the deluded rickyp thinks. The State legislatures, governors, and off-year elections speak to that. Furthermore, Clinton is not popular. Many people don't trust her. They will vote to make sure she doesn't have both houses.

Have you been looking at the trackers for the Congressional races? It is looking pretty close for the Senate (RCP currently has 50-50 on their no toss-up prediction, which would give Kaine the casting vote). The Republicans are ahead on the House polling, but with a lower majority.

McCain promising to extend the block on any SCOTUS nomination into the next Presidency will also perhaps annoy voters who have had enough of obstruction. That may or may not be enough to counter those who would want to have a balance.

I am sure many true "conservative" Republican voters will vote on party lines down the ballot, even if they can't pull the lever for Trump. But, as you often lament, it is those pesky middling voters who switch parties and make up their minds on whims who decide elections.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: 14 Feb 2000, 8:40 am

Post 24 Oct 2016, 11:40 am

in my Congressional election the Democrat (Louise Slaughter) has actually used commercials that tell us to vote for her for no other reason than her competitor (Mark Assini) is a Trump supporter!? No kidding, the entire commercial (she supports this message) is his backing Trump.

I can't stand Trump but I am now supposed to vote for this old fart because of this one reason!? What a joke
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 25 Oct 2016, 6:54 am

tom
in my Congressional election the Democrat (Louise Slaughter) has actually used commercials that tell us to vote for her for no other reason than her competitor (Mark Assini) is a Trump supporter!? No kidding, the entire commercial (she supports this message) is his backing Trump.

I can't stand Trump but I am now supposed to vote for this old fart because of this one reason!? What a joke


They only have 30 seconds Tom. In that time they can only convey one simple message. And apparently they feel a significant portion of the electorate will be swayed by this simple message.
And I'll bet they are right for 5 to 10% of the electorate. Whch might be all they need in many districts.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 25 Oct 2016, 8:45 am

rickyp wrote:tom
in my Congressional election the Democrat (Louise Slaughter) has actually used commercials that tell us to vote for her for no other reason than her competitor (Mark Assini) is a Trump supporter!? No kidding, the entire commercial (she supports this message) is his backing Trump.

I can't stand Trump but I am now supposed to vote for this old fart because of this one reason!? What a joke


They only have 30 seconds Tom. In that time they can only convey one simple message. And apparently they feel a significant portion of the electorate will be swayed by this simple message.
And I'll bet they are right for 5 to 10% of the electorate. Whch might be all they need in many districts.


Sure. Let's bet on Pelosi becoming Speaker.

How much?
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: 14 Feb 2000, 8:40 am

Post 26 Oct 2016, 5:45 am

I don't give a rats ass how much time they are limited to in their commercial. Running a campaign on "vote for me because he supports Trump" is ridiculous, negative ads bother me but certainly can be effective, this same candidate has had plenty of other negative ads (most of them have been proven to be lies by the way) but this one takes the cake for insipid! Look, I know you spin everything a liberal will do Ricky but this one simply can't be spun, it's a really foolish ad no matter how much you attempt to spin it!

Wait...
Ricky wants us to believe this is acceptable if it can turn 5% to 10% of peoples minds?
Then using his own "logic" tells us Trump should continue the birther nonsense?
User avatar
Dignitary
 
Posts: 3486
Joined: 02 Oct 2000, 9:01 am

Post 26 Oct 2016, 6:44 am

GMTom wrote:Running a campaign on "vote for me because he supports Trump" is ridiculous,


I disagree. I think the decision a politician needs to make regarding their support of Trump says a lot about what's important to a person.