Poll: Will Trump campaign make it to Nov 8?

[Blackjack200]

The accusers and the NYT are "horrible, horrible people," and the claims are false. He claims his lawyers are "preparing" a lawsuit against the NYT.

Just curious... if a candidate for elected office could demonstrate that a news story was false and damaging in the run up to an election, he/she would seek an immediate injunction and seek to force the publisher to publish a correction, right? Not "prepare a lawsuit".

After Hurricane Matthew, Democratic party lawyers didn't grandstand about how they were going to sue Florida to extend voter registration. They just went and did it, and quickly got a judgment in their favor.

 

[Commodus]

I don't think Trump has much of a choice even if he desperately wants to quit. We're less than a month away from the election, and that's way too late to have a substitute candidate turn things around. Pence? He'd pick up the loyalists who worship anyone "blessed" by Trump, but he'd lose the personality (however terrible it is) and momentum. Undecideds would rightly see the GOP as weak and ineffective.

And I can't even imagine who would take over if not Pence. Cruz? He's almost as dishonest as Trump, doesn't have the charisma and is so cynical that he makes Clinton look like a doe-eyed optimist. And after that... well, a lot of the possible candidates just wouldn't have the star power or experience.

I picture Reince Priebus sobbing into his hands, knowing that the election is almost a foregone conclusion, and that it's so bad that Trump's negative aura could hurt House and Senate representatives just by association. I'm not counting on the Dems getting majorities in both Congress and the Senate, but if they did, it'd trigger a cataclysm in the GOP.

 

[Jhhnn]

I don't think Trump has much of a choice even if he desperately wants to quit. We're less than a month away from the election, and that's way too late to have a substitute candidate turn things around. Pence? He'd pick up the loyalists who worship anyone "blessed" by Trump, but he'd lose the personality (however terrible it is) and momentum. Undecideds would rightly see the GOP as weak and ineffective.

And I can't even imagine who would take over if not Pence. Cruz? He's almost as dishonest as Trump, doesn't have the charisma and is so cynical that he makes Clinton look like a doe-eyed optimist. And after that... well, a lot of the possible candidates just wouldn't have the star power or experience.

I picture Reince Priebus sobbing into his hands, knowing that the election is almost a foregone conclusion, and that it's so bad that Trump's negative aura could hurt House and Senate representatives just by association. I'm not counting on the Dems getting majorities in both Congress and the Senate, but if they did, it'd trigger a cataclysm in the GOP.

Everybody's locked in for the ride, like a roller coaster, & nobody's getting off until the ride's over. I'll bet Repub leaders wish they weren't sharing the seat with Chester the molester...

Donald had his hand right up their ol' skirt before the top of the first hill.

 

[Bitek]

Both names will be on the ballot on Nov. 8th regardless. I could see Trump declaring that the election is a sham and suspending his campaign. There's no longer much doubt that he's going to lose.

That's where I'm at. It's a slim chance he bails, but I cannot rule it out.

It really depends where his ego takes him.
Losing "fighter", or refuses to continue to play in a "rigged" system and runs off to start a scumbag media company? Would he rather quit or be fired...

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Just curious... if a candidate for elected office could demonstrate that a news story was false and damaging in the run up to an election, he/she would seek an immediate injunction and seek to force the publisher to publish a correction, right? Not "prepare a lawsuit".

After Hurricane Matthew, Democratic party lawyers didn't grandstand about how they were going to sue Florida to extend voter registration. They just went and did it, and quickly got a judgment in their favor.

The two things are not mutually exclusive. A motion for injunctive relief would require that he had filed suit. That being said, there is no way any court would order injunctive relief, unless (and this would never happen) the Times reporters admitted that they knew the information was false at the time they wrote their stories.

Obviously I don't expect a lawsuit to actually be brought, though with Trump one never knows. In practice such a suit would open Pandora's box to all of the evidence regarding Trump's other acts of harassment and/or evidence of his admitting to engaging in conduct of this nature (since truth is a defense to defamation, and the fact that he has engaged in other unwelcome contact and bragged about it is at least potentially probative on the question of whether the allegations the Times posted are true). This could even, potentially, lead to a successful subpoena of all of the raw footage from the Apprentice. Even if no discovery were conducted, I find it hard to understand how the Times could successfully be sued for defamation, since they apparently interviewed not only the accusers but other people the accusers had told about his conduct shortly after it happened (not to mention the fact that Trump is on record bragging about having engaged in precisely the kind of conduct these women claim occurred). If Trump were foolish enough to sue the Times (he is, after all, an exceptionally foolish man), the ensuing release of damaging information would make what we've seen so far look like what it probably is - the tip of the iceberg.

 

[fskimospy]

The two things are not mutually exclusive. A motion for injunctive relief would require that he had filed suit. That being said, there is no way any court would order injunctive relief, unless (and this would never happen) the Times reporters admitted that they knew the information was false at the time they wrote their stories.

Obviously I don't expect a lawsuit to actually be brought, though with Trump one never knows. In practice such a suit would open Pandora's box to all of the evidence regarding Trump's other acts of harassment and/or evidence of his admitting to engaging in conduct of this nature (since truth is a defense to defamation, and the fact that he has engaged in other unwelcome contact and bragged about it is at least potentially probative on the question of whether the allegations the Times posted are true). This could even, potentially, lead to a successful subpoena of all of the raw footage from the Apprentice. Even if no discovery were conducted, I find it hard to understand how the Times could successfully be sued for defamation, since they apparently interviewed not only the accusers but other people the accusers had told about his conduct shortly after it happened (not to mention the fact that Trump is on record bragging about having engaged in precisely the kind of conduct these women claim occurred).

That was my first thought about why he would never dare to actually follow through on a lawsuit against the Times. Presumably the Times has access to plenty of legal counsel and I would think their first move would be to go on a treasure hunt through his whole past with subpoena power. Considering he wouldn't even let his own campaign conduct opposition research on his past I can't imagine he would be very interested in that.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

The two things are not mutually exclusive. A motion for injunctive relief would require that he had filed suit. That being said, there is no way any court would order injunctive relief, unless (and this would never happen) the Times reporters admitted that they knew the information was false at the time they wrote their stories.

Obviously I don't expect a lawsuit to actually be brought, though with Trump one never knows. In practice such a suit would open Pandora's box to all of the evidence regarding Trump's other acts of harassment and/or evidence of his admitting to engaging in conduct of this nature (since truth is a defense to defamation, and the fact that he has engaged in other unwelcome contact and bragged about it is at least potentially probative on the question of whether the allegations the Times posted are true). This could even, potentially, lead to a successful subpoena of all of the raw footage from the Apprentice. Even if no discovery were conducted, I find it hard to understand how the Times could successfully be sued for defamation, since they apparently interviewed not only the accusers but other people the accusers had told about his conduct shortly after it happened (not to mention the fact that Trump is on record bragging about having engaged in precisely the kind of conduct these women claim occurred). If Trump were foolish enough to sue the Times (he is, after all, an exceptionally foolish man), the ensuing release of damaging information would make what we've seen so far look like what it probably is - the tip of the iceberg.

The only thing that makes me think he might is that discovery would probably not occur before the election. While it's doubtful it would ever be successful given NYT having to have knowingly published a false story you just never know with Trump. He has his own reality.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

The only thing that makes me think he might is that discovery would probably not occur before the election. While it's doubtful it would ever be successful given NYT having to have knowingly published a false story you just never know with Trump. He has his own reality.

The thing is, he can't bring suit, then say, "I changed my mind" after the election. Once the Times has filed an answer, he can't dismiss his own action without their consent, or leave of the court. I expect the Times would fight hard to resist a voluntary dismissal, because the cost-benefit ratio of a prolonged fight between the Times and Donald Trump helps the paper more than it stands to hurt it.

 

[Thump553]

Just read a report that the Trump campaign is pulling out of Virgina.

Earlier this week the Trump campaign fired the head of it's Virginia office because he organized a "women for trump" rally in front of the RNC headquarters in Washington, DC (almost two dozen came). That may be what you heard.

 

[zinfamous]

Hypothesis #1: He will "formally" threaten to sue all of the women that have accused him of impropriety.
Hypothesis #2: Trump shows up naked as a way of trying to desensitize the electorate to the thought of his sexual advances.
Hypothesis #3: Trump admits to doing cocaine as a way of deflecting current scandal, since drugs are more forgivable than being a sex criminal.
Hypothesis #4: On stage heart attack. Because he is just so fat.

If he could manage to do all of this in one appearance, I might actually vote for him.

 

[zinfamous]

What if 100% of voters says "fuck it" and writes-in Obama?

 

[feralkid]

I wouldn't call Donald fat ... Big boned, yes and I can assure you he is fit and can out drive most amateurs on the golf course.

Are you serious?

The man is a bloated oaf.

 

[Jhhnn]

What if 100% of voters says "fuck it" and writes-in Obama?

By law, he can't serve, so it would fall to the HOR, iirc. Not a good thing.

Don't let the Hillary hate propaganda cloud your judgement. Obama is her biggest booster & that's not just about party affiliation.

 

[agent00f]

golf doesn't take fitness to outdrive amateur golfers.

Donny boy is fat. It's an objective fact. Fatty fatty fat fat. We're not just talking Fatty fatty fo-fatty. We're talking fatty boo-bolatty.

Watch your mailbox for a letter from his lawyer.

 

[trenchfoot]

I don't think Trump has much of a choice even if he desperately wants to quit. We're less than a month away from the election, and that's way too late to have a substitute candidate turn things around. Pence? He'd pick up the loyalists who worship anyone "blessed" by Trump, but he'd lose the personality (however terrible it is) and momentum. Undecideds would rightly see the GOP as weak and ineffective.

And I can't even imagine who would take over if not Pence. Cruz? He's almost as dishonest as Trump, doesn't have the charisma and is so cynical that he makes Clinton look like a doe-eyed optimist. And after that... well, a lot of the possible candidates just wouldn't have the star power or experience.

I picture Reince Priebus sobbing into his hands, knowing that the election is almost a foregone conclusion, and that it's so bad that Trump's negative aura could hurt House and Senate representatives just by association. I'm not counting on the Dems getting majorities in both Congress and the Senate, but if they did, it'd trigger a cataclysm in the GOP.

I could think of a thousand quips, quotes and adages that would be apropos for how the Repubs are finally getting their just rewards, but in this particular instance, a new one needs to be made up to describe how their building a huge wall out of scary looking smelly bullshit would eventually come crashing down on their heads in a really hurtful, humiliating kind of way.

And to think it all started when they realized that the shiny steamroller they thought they were running their opponents over with was actually a honey wagon with a chronic backfiring problem. And when they hired a slick used car salesman to drive it, well, let's just say that history books of the future will record this event as a, shall we say, a most odoriferous moment in their lives?

 

[MongGrel]

I thought he has to make it to the 28th

 

[rudder]

So decades of being a rich playboy and only a couple of women come forward after all those years .... Within weeks of an election. Hmmmmm

Now look at a serial pervert such as Bill Clinton. Women have been reporting sexual misconduct since he was a student at Oxford.

 

[zinfamous]

By law, he can't serve, so it would fall to the HOR, iirc. Not a good thing.

Don't let the Hillary hate propaganda cloud your judgement. Obama is her biggest booster & that's not just about party affiliation.

Who said I hate Hilary? I just:

--don't like the idea of dynasties in the USA
--will thoroughly miss the poise, elegance, success, and general badass speechifying of Barry. Kinda like when we went from Bill to B-Dubs. total let-down.

Hilary will make a fine president, but she will never be anyone that you want to stop and listen to.

 

[zinfamous]

So decades of being a rich playboy and only a couple of women come forward after all those years .... Within weeks of an election. Hmmmmm

Now look at a serial pervert such as Bill Clinton. Women have been reporting sexual misconduct since he was a student at Oxford.

Then you probably shouldn't vote for Bill Clinton.

 

[Jhhnn]

So decades of being a rich playboy and only a couple of women come forward after all those years .... Within weeks of an election. Hmmmmm

Now look at a serial pervert such as Bill Clinton. Women have been reporting sexual misconduct since he was a student at Oxford.

Heh. Women coming forward only confirm Donald's boasts of sexual exploitation of women.

That's the part that matters, the part you're trying desperately to avoid.

 

[MongGrel]

So decades of being a rich playboy and only a couple of women come forward after all those years .... Within weeks of an election. Hmmmmm

Now look at a serial pervert such as Bill Clinton. Women have been reporting sexual misconduct since he was a student at Oxford.

Trump is pushing himself to have been one of the "Bestest, smartest" married business men ever to exist.

Married and Playboy should not go together in the religious rights mind.

And like Zin said, Bill isn't running.

 

[DrDoug]

So decades of being a rich playboy and only a couple of women come forward after all those years .... Within weeks of an election. Hmmmmm

Now look at a serial pervert such as Bill Clinton. Women have been reporting sexual misconduct since he was a student at Oxford.

I think you should trust the Republican billionaire who gropes women, lusts after prepubescent girls and makes his money off of rubes who he then dares to sue him.

He sounds like your kind of guy!

 

[agent00f]

So decades of being a rich playboy and only a couple of women come forward after all those years .... Within weeks of an election. Hmmmmm

Now look at a serial pervert such as Bill Clinton. Women have been reporting sexual misconduct since he was a student at Oxford.

If you have trouble counting past 2 please do the country a favor and don't make a mockery out of the democratic system.

 

[hal2kilo]

Maybe he's saving what little resources he's going to have.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/14/us/politics/republican-donors-trump.html

WASHINGTON — Several of the Republican Party’s most generous donors called on the Republican National Committee on Thursday to disavow Donald J. Trump, saying that allegations by multiple women that Mr. Trump had groped or made inappropriate sexual advances toward them threatened to inflict lasting damage on the party’s image.

 

[Puffnstuff]

I predict that Trump will roll out Jerry Falwell who will anoint his head with olive oil and lay hands on him and pray in tongues after which they will both dance around a giant sombrero to rally the troops in the hour of desperation.