Trump could still win this thing

[sportage]

I think we all knew, everyone knew, republicans knew that 2016 was going to go to Hillary Clinton.
I think we have all known that even before Hillary ever announced, which we all knew she would do.
Lets get real here...
We all knew Hillary would run, and she did.
And we all know that this election is hers and hers alone.
And it will be.

And that is probably why republicans allowed someone like Trump to flourish and succeed, because they knew that no one really wanted the job of running against Hillary.
Jeb had nothing to lose, Chris Christy had nothing to lose, Cruz had nothing to lose.
They were all losers and republicans had nothing to offer but losers.
If there were republicans that had the talent and skill to run and be president, they chose not to. At least not this time and certainly not with going up against Hillary.
Donald Trump is like the Bob Dole who ran against that other Clinton, another sure bet election republicans were destine to lose.

Everyone has known from the very beginning that (#1) Hillary would run and that (#2) Hillary would win.
We've all known ever since Obama entered his second term and people started looking to 2016.
At least Trump made things less boring. And Donald really doesn't have anything to lose either.
On his portfolio Donald can add that he once ran for president of the United States, just below the section stating I am a self made billionaire.
Trump doesn't really have anything to lose.
And when republicans blame Trump for losing this election, Donald will not care. Why should he?
Donald Trump care what republicans think? Yeah right...
Or care what anyone thinks for that matter.
Donald Trump will still have his money, his golf courses, his gold towers, and still have his unique Donald Trump piss in your face attitude.

Donald was the perfect guy for republicans to stick up there against Hillary.
And the perfect guy to lose against Hillary.

 

[Jhhnn]

I think we all knew, everyone knew, republicans knew that 2016 was going to go to Hillary Clinton.
I think we have all known that even before Hillary ever announced, which we all knew she would do.
Lets get real here...
We all knew Hillary would run, and she did.
And we all know that this election is hers and hers alone.
And it will be.

And that is probably why republicans allowed someone like Trump to flourish and succeed, because they knew that no one really wanted the job of running against Hillary.
Jeb had nothing to lose, Chris Christy had nothing to lose, Cruz had nothing to lose.
They were all losers and republicans had nothing to offer but losers.
If there were republicans that had the talent and skill to run and be president, they chose not to. At least not this time and certainly not with going up against Hillary.
Donald Trump is like the Bob Dole who ran against that other Clinton, another sure bet election republicans were destine to lose.

Everyone has known from the very beginning that (#1) Hillary would run and that (#2) Hillary would win.
We've all known ever since Obama entered his second term and people started looking to 2016.
At least Trump made things less boring. And Donald really doesn't have anything to lose either.
On his portfolio Donald can add that he once ran for president of the United States, just below the section stating I am a self made billionaire.
Trump doesn't really have anything to lose.
And when republicans blame Trump for losing this election, Donald will not care. Why should he?
Donald Trump care what republicans think? Yeah right...
Or care what anyone thinks for that matter.
Donald Trump will still have his money, his golf courses, his gold towers, and still have his unique Donald Trump piss in your face attitude.

Donald was the perfect guy for republicans to stick up there against Hillary.
And the perfect guy to lose against Hillary.

Meh. Trump took the Repub leadership on the blind side. They badly underestimated just how dissatisfied with their leadership their base had become as a result of their own bullshit. They reap the whirlwind.

They've doubled down on wedge issues & their own core trickledown ideology at every opportunity. When Bushonomics beat down working people in favor of the financial elite back in 2008, their answer has been to double down & dig in to preserve the class warfare gains made over the last 35 years. Just say no to constructive change, say no to cutting working people a little bit bigger slice of the pie. Say no to a govt that actually works & a govt that works for the people. Basic FUGM.

 

[rockyct]

Er, did someone just seriously argue that Clinton is a hypocrite for opposing a wall along our border but having a wall around...her house? Ladies and gentlemen, here we have it, the all time heavy weight champion of false equivalencies and shitty analogies!

This board needs something like the Stundie awards over at the JREF forum, where every month they vote on the most hilariously and entertainingly stupid posts of the month. TH, my hates off to you buddy. I haven't laughed this hard all week. And it was shaping up to be such a dreary evening.

Yep, I guess opposing a 50' tall border wall is exactly the same as being against every wall...

This is why the Democrats will push to the very end. Watching the collective minds of conservatives in George, South Carolina, and maybe, just maybe Texas, explode would be delicious.

 

[MongGrel]

Yep, I guess opposing a 50' tall border wall is exactly the same as being against every wall...

This is why the Democrats will push to the very end. Watching the collective minds of conservatives in George, South Carolina, and maybe, just maybe Texas, explode would be delicious.

Unless it is some form of super secret ploy, seems a lot of conservative in those states do not want Trump in office either from most polls these days.

Everyone should vote their conscious at any rate, people that do not vote and bitch annoy me.

If you do not vote STFU, more or less.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

On the one hand, it doesn't seem like much of a choice.

No sane electorate with a proper sense of things would want someone like Trump in the White House. Period.

On the other hand, if there's only one sane choice, I'm willing to bet that the only thing that can ruin it is more of the lost opportunity we had with Obama: an obstructive, destructive Tea Party congress.

If all that gerrymandering in Red counties weren't a status quo, the House could flip. But as it is -- that's a long shot.

 

[theeedude]

Gerrymandering only delays the inevitable reckoning, and makes it worse. Because Republicans are more worried about primaries than general election, the GOP is in the process of alienating generations of young people by pondering to the older out of touch primary voters.

 

[DrPizza]

Gerrymandering also means that there are a lot of districts that are just barely majority Republican. If you're losing 52% to 48%, and you do a bit of gerrymandering, you can reverse that to 48% to 52% or 47% to 53%. The problem is, it may just backfire in spectacular fashion this fall - and very few people see it coming or are talking about it.

 

[DrPizza]

Trump offers real solutions to long term problems. hillary does nothing but fear monger. Given enough ketchup liberal democrats would eat each other. Liberal democrats moral compass is like a leaf in the wind, blowing here and there, but lacking the deep roots of a tree to weather a storm.

I cannot figure out how anyone is so separated from reality. I was going to quote your other posts, but no sense in filling this space up. Let's see how you address something you said was horrible - genocide. If a lot of innocent civilians are in a country, and are getting killed, do you think they should be able to flee their borders in order to preserve their own lives? Why or why not. Do you think they should be shipped back to their own country to face a significant chance of being killed? If yes, then why are you against allowing vetted refugees into our country. Though, oddly, I somehow expect you to answer no and have some idiotic explanation that isn't valid.

"Says we need to reign in the police, but has private bodyguards (secret service)."
Wtf does one have to do with the other? Are her private bodyguards running around shooting unarmed blacks? Are her private bodyguards racially profiling blacks and violating their rights?

 

[sportage]

The kool thing if Donald should win are that liberals, democrats, Hispanics and blacks could just stand aside and look on as republicans suffered a major freak out meltdown from within.
When your own party predicts doom and gloom should one of your own win the grand prize, and goes as far as to raise money and create an organization to stop one of their own, when that is happening then everyone else non republican need not worry.
If Trump is elected, the sane republicans that tried to stop Trump will not only have to live with the FrankenTrump monster, they will be fully responsible for his creation.
And THAT is going to scare the crap out of them for four long long, very long time to come.
So you see, if Donald does win, it all boils down to a win win situation for everyone else not republican.
Everyone else can just sit back, relax, and watch their party literally implode.

 

[Meghan54]

I cannot figure out how anyone is so separated from reality. I was going to quote your other posts, but no sense in filling this space up. Let's see how you address something you said was horrible - genocide. If a lot of innocent civilians are in a country, and are getting killed, do you think they should be able to flee their borders in order to preserve their own lives? Why or why not. Do you think they should be shipped back to their own country to face a significant chance of being killed? If yes, then why are you against allowing vetted refugees into our country. Though, oddly, I somehow expect you to answer no and have some idiotic explanation that isn't valid.

"Says we need to reign in the police, but has private bodyguards (secret service)."
Wtf does one have to do with the other? Are her private bodyguards running around shooting unarmed blacks? Are her private bodyguards racially profiling blacks and violating their rights?

But, but, but....emails! Benghazi! Diapers!

 

[Texashiker]

I cannot figure out how anyone is so separated from reality. I was going to quote your other posts, but no sense in filling this space up. Let's see how you address something you said was horrible - genocide. If a lot of innocent civilians are in a country, and are getting killed, do you think they should be able to flee their borders in order to preserve their own lives? Why or why not. Do you think they should be shipped back to their own country to face a significant chance of being killed? If yes, then why are you against allowing vetted refugees into our country. Though, oddly, I somehow expect you to answer no and have some idiotic explanation that isn't valid.

Why hasn't Saudi Srabia, Kuwait, Iran, United Arab Emirates,,, taken in the immigrants? The immigrants would be much better suited to live in a nation that already lives by their religion.

Islam is not compatible with liberals, gay rights, Christians, freedom of speech, freedom of religion,,,,. But yet liberals would have the united states open our borders to hundreds of thousands of muslims? That is like throwing oil in water, the two just do not mix.

Look at France. How many people have been killed by muslims there? Was that a magazine or newspaper office that was shot up because they published a picture of muhammed?

Islam can not even live in peace with itself - isis, saddam hussien, iran iraq war, arab spring, bombings almost everyday,,, but liberals and president obama and hillary want to open our borders?

Take the immigrants, send them to Saudi Srabia, Kuwait, Iran or even Iraq. Let them live in peace with members of their own religion and in their own lands.

"Says we need to reign in the police, but has private bodyguards (secret service)."
Wtf does one have to do with the other? Are her private bodyguards running around shooting unarmed blacks? Are her private bodyguards racially profiling blacks and violating their rights?

Means her bodyguards do not have to deal with criminals, but she is protected.

Police running around shooting blacks? That is a troll comment and nothing but bait trying to get me to bite.

 

[DrPizza]

Why hasn't Saudi Srabia, Kuwait, Iran, United Arab Emirates,,, taken in the immigrants? The immigrants would be much better suited to live in a nation that already lives by their religion...

Means her bodyguards do not have to deal with criminals, but she is protected.

Police running around shooting blacks? That is a troll comment and nothing but bait trying to get me to bite.

So, if those countries aren't taking in refugees, we shouldn't either? That sounds like a rather childish argument, and taking the low road rather than the high road. Further, you understand there are different factions of Islam that don't seem to get along with each other, right? An analogy might be Catholics vs. Protestants - but a lot more bitter toward one another as a result of historical events. Also, not everyone from Syria is a Muslim. And about 30% of the population here do not identify as Christians. There are several million Muslims in the US.

So, you don't recognize that prominent politicians and celebrities are high profile targets for nutcases? They're protected because there are a lot of people who would specifically target them otherwise.

 

[MrSquished]

. But yet liberals would have the united states open our borders to hundreds of thousands of muslims? That is like throwing oil in water, the two just do not mix..

i keep hearing righties talk about Hundreds of Thousands of muslim immigrants that liberals want to let in. any sources? last i checked this liberal government said 10,000 Syrians are allowed in after thorough vetting

 

[werepossum]

Er, did someone just seriously argue that Clinton is a hypocrite for opposing a wall along our border but having a wall around...her house? Ladies and gentlemen, here we have it, the all time heavy weight champion of false equivalencies and shitty analogies!

This board needs something like the Stundie awards over at the JREF forum, where every month they vote on the most hilariously and entertainingly stupid posts of the month. TH, my hates off to you buddy. I haven't laughed this hard all week. And it was shaping up to be such a dreary evening.

How is that a false equivalency? Rich people can pay others to control their environment; poor people have to depend on government.

 

[TheGardener]

Yes, no complacency! We need to also vote for a Democrat Congress to provide checks and balances in case Trump wins.

It would probably not be a cake walk for a President Trump. Many Republicans in Congress are not happy that the grassroots took away the voice of the mainstream pols to decide who their candidate would be. Then again, they caved with Obama on many issues, so why not Trump. So ya, your side should not be complacent.

 

[TheGardener]

i keep hearing righties talk about Hundreds of Thousands of muslim immigrants that liberals want to let in. any sources? last i checked this liberal government said 10,000 Syrians are allowed in after thorough vetting

The number is more like 1 to 1.5 million. Clinton said that she wants to take in as many 'refugees' as Obama took in over his 8 years.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

It would probably not be a cake walk for a President Trump. Many Republicans in Congress are not happy that the grassroots took away the voice of the mainstream pols to decide who their candidate would be. Then again, they caved with Obama on many issues, so why not Trump. So ya, your side should not be complacent.

Um... WAT?

 

[Texashiker]

So, if those countries aren't taking in refugees, we shouldn't either? That sounds like a rather childish argument, and taking the low road rather than the high road. Further, you understand there are different factions of Islam that don't seem to get along with each other, right?

Troll, troll your boat gently down the stream,,,, I never said anything of the such.

An analogy might be Catholics vs. Protestants - but a lot more bitter toward one another as a result of historical events. Also, not everyone from Syria is a Muslim. And about 30% of the population here do not identify as Christians. There are several million Muslims in the US.

Really? "somehow" Catholics vs. Protestants is like islam,,,? WTF are you talking about?

Please tell me where Jesus said to kill the non-believers. Tell me where Jesus said to kill anyone who insults him. How about killing people who draw an image of Jesus?

In present day, how many Christians do suicide bombings? How about throwing gays off cliffs? How about hanging gays, like in Iran?

The immigration plan obama and hillary offer are not feasible.

Look at France and Germany. How well is open borders for muslims working there?

Islam can not even live in peace with itself, but somehow, someway, islam is supposed to magically be at peace here and in europe? There was a bombing at a wedding in Turkey. A damn wedding and people are blown up.

Hillary and obama want to import that kind of violence into the USA, and why? All in the name of tolerance? Understand people willing to blow themselves up do not care about your "tolerance."

 

[Jhhnn]

The number is more like 1 to 1.5 million. Clinton said that she wants to take in as many 'refugees' as Obama took in over his 8 years.

Bullshit. She said 65,000-

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-u-s-should-take-65000-syrian-refugees/

But, be afraid. Be very afraid. Otherwise it'll be Sharia Law & non-sop Terrarism! all at the same time.

 

[MongGrel]

Really? "somehow" Catholics vs. Protestants is like islam,,,? WTF are you talking about?

You come off as so uninformed sometimes it's really sad.

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/northireland1.html

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Troll, troll your boat gently down the stream,,,, I never said anything of the such.



Really? "somehow" Catholics vs. Protestants is like islam,,,? WTF are you talking about?

Please tell me where Jesus said to kill the non-believers. Tell me where Jesus said to kill anyone who insults him. How about killing people who draw an image of Jesus?

In present day, how many Christians do suicide bombings? How about throwing gays off cliffs? How about hanging gays, like in Iran?

The immigration plan obama and hillary offer are not feasible.

Look at France and Germany. How well is open borders for muslims working there?

Islam can not even live in peace with itself, but somehow, someway, islam is supposed to magically be at peace here and in europe? There was a bombing at a wedding in Turkey. A damn wedding and people are blown up.

Hillary and obama want to import that kind of violence into the USA, and why? All in the name of tolerance? Understand people willing to blow themselves up do not care about your "tolerance."

"Hillary and Obama . . . Hillary and Obama . . . "

I think this business about refugees is a straw-man issue. The "vetting" process currently in place was made clear in recent weeks -- and it is quite thorough. It isn't "thorough" simply because some component of the electorate doesn't like the Pres, doesn't like Clinton, so they've constructed this inference about the future.

Then, of course, my chucklehead cousin tried to tell me last month that this issue about calling the terrorism phenomenon "Radical Islamic Terrorism" is "really an issue" or that it matters.

It has been quite clear since 911 that those people are criminally insane. They WANT to create an apocalyptic conflict between Islam and the west. They WANT us to expend massive resources inserting troop presence in their part of the world. And they WANT us to alienate Muslims. They WANT to define a conflict on THEIR terms.

Call it what you want. The Guantanamo inmates have been transferred, but they're still under lock and key. Suppose, considering that we are "at war" with the criminals, that MSNBC "Lockup" broadcast a steady stream of shows to the Middle East with titles like:

"Osama skips his meds"
"Al Zarkowi meets with his shrink to discuss his problems with his mother and his sister"

The programs would feature -- if not the real terrorists, then actors -- foaming at the mouth, blabbering nonsense, and acting crazy.

THAT'S psychological warfare. Terrorism IS psychological warfare of a sort. But -- "Lockup?" It just might be effective.

I live 30 miles from the San Berdoo attacks, and I've had people tell me "Oh! That's just Tewwible!! How can you sleep at night?!"

About as well as I could sleep knowing that some Millennial might run me down on the street with an illegally-modified speedster.

And it really kills me. People are whining about the ACA, Social Security and a lot of other government processes to reduce risk. "Get rid of 'em! Those Social Security recipients will all be dead soon!" On the other hand, the world is filled with risk. People in Texas lived under much more risk a hundred years ago than they do today.

The biggest risk would arise if some of those nutcases managed to get hold of a nuke. In the Cold War, you'd have "early warning" and "duck and cover." With an unannounced explosion, millions of people would be permanently blinded just for looking in the wrong direction.

But we're all in a tizzy because some maladjusted teenager might make a pressure-cooker bomb, pick up an AR-15 and do what a much larger number of non-Islamic nutcases have done all over the country during the past 5 years.

The biggest Sissies and Chicken-Littles today are also the biggest Chest-Thumpers and Bullies. No doubt about it.

 

[Texashiker]

"Hillary and Obama . . . Hillary and Obama . . . "

I think this business about refugees is a straw-man issue. The "vetting" process currently in place was made clear in recent weeks -- and it is quite thorough. It isn't "thorough" simply because some component of the electorate doesn't like the Pres, doesn't like Clinton, so they've constructed this inference about the future.

Proof of such vetting?

Is this the same people who said the ACA would keep cost down, and if you liked your doctor you can keep him?

And it really kills me. People are whining about the ACA, Social Security and a lot of other government processes to reduce risk. "Get rid of 'em! Those Social Security recipients will all be dead soon!" On the other hand, the world is filled with risk. People in Texas lived under much more risk a hundred years ago than they do today.

Rarely do I try to inject religion into my comments, but this deserves a Christian reply.

Mathew 25:40, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

We as a society need to take care of those who can not take care of themselves. I do not understand where you liberal fruitcakes get conservatives want to do away with stuff like social security and welfare.

On the flip side of the coin, the most liberal cities also have some of the highest homeless rates in the nation. Stop with the hypocrisy.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Proof of such vetting?

Is this the same people who said the ACA would keep cost down, and if you liked your doctor you can keep him?




Rarely do I try to inject religion into my comments, but this deserves a Christian reply.

Mathew 25:40, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

We as a society need to take care of those who can not take care of themselves. I do not understand where you liberal fruitcakes get conservatives want to do away with stuff like social security and welfare.

On the flip side of the coin, the most liberal cities also have some of the highest homeless rates in the nation. Stop with the hypocrisy.

When you're this deep in the bubble, I fear there's no hope.

 

[MrSquished]

Bullshit. She said 65,000-

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-u-s-should-take-65000-syrian-refugees/

But, be afraid. Be very afraid. Otherwise it'll be Sharia Law & non-sop Terrarism! all at the same time.

ahhh the gardener is just another Trump Troll throwing around crazy info as the truth

 

[Jhhnn]

Proof of such vetting?

Is this the same people who said the ACA would keep cost down, and if you liked your doctor you can keep him?




Rarely do I try to inject religion into my comments, but this deserves a Christian reply.

Mathew 25:40, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

We as a society need to take care of those who can not take care of themselves. I do not understand where you liberal fruitcakes get conservatives want to do away with stuff like social security and welfare.

On the flip side of the coin, the most liberal cities also have some of the highest homeless rates in the nation. Stop with the hypocrisy.

The vetting process is explained from varying pov's Like this-

http://www.heritage.org/research/commentary/2015/12/how-the-refugee-vetting-process-works

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-is-the-syrian-refugee-vetting-process/

http://www.npr.org/2015/11/17/456395388/paris-attacks-ignite-debate-over-u-s-refugee-policy

It's fairly common knowledge that it's an exhaustive process.

I could cover the page with links to Repub raving about SS, welfare, the ACA & so forth, some of it having come from you, even more from the people that conservatives send to Congress. The notion that they can be trusted with social welfare programs is absurd.

Of course liberal cities have more homeless. They're highly mobile people & have their own forms of networking. They know where they'll be treated better. A lot of Denver's homeless are actually seasonal snowbirds of a sort.