Saturday, September 24, 2016


Because he's completely overmatched in the areas of policy knowledge, experience, temperament, intelligence, and judgment, Donald Trump, naturally, is Going There:
Gennifer Flowers, who revealed a sexual relationship with Bill Clinton in the 1990s, will reportedly accept Donald Trump's invitation to attend the first presidential debate between Trump and Hillary Clinton....
This is said to be all Hillary Clinton's fault:

The decision was the latest play in a bizarre bit of gamesmanship between the Clinton and Trump campaigns over the debate. Clinton's camp confirmed this week that they would invite billionaire mogul Mark Cuban, a Trump antagonist, to the debate.
Of course, Cubn and Flowers are not analogous -- Cuban did not have an affair with Trump's spouse. (As far as we know!)

I want to believe that the Clinton campaign knows that the Cuban invitation is just a little something extra -- it's not going to make a diffrence in how things turn out Monday night. On the other hand, I suspect the Trump campaign thinks this might be a brilliant, game-changing move.

In fact, these provocative invitations are pointless. Paula Jones, another of the women linked to Bill Clinton, was invited to the 1998 White House Correspondents' Dinner by the Moonie right-wing magazine Insight; she and the president sat at separate tables, sparks did not fly, and life went on.

In 2013, wingnut congressman Steve Stockman invited Ted Nugent to attend President Obama's State of the Union address; Obama was unfazed by the aging rocker, who sat there like a bored delinquent at detention.

As Politico's Zack Stanton has noted, there was an attempted debate psych-out of this kind in the 2004 debates:
In a famous incident on the floor of the U.S. Senate in June 2004, Vice President Dick Cheney told Vermont Democrat Patrick Leahy, “go f--k yourself,” after the senator had accused Cheney’s former employer, Halliburton, of war profiteering.

So when it came time for the vice presidential debates that October, Senator John Edwards (D-NC) had a plan to get inside Cheney’s head during the debate: He reserved a seat for Leahy in the second row of the debate’s audience, where Cheney would almost certainly see him.
But Cheney debated effectively that night, and his ticket went on to win.

So this sort of thing is meaningless, except to journalists who'll make way too much of it ... unless, of course, it's seen as offensive by female voters:

Is Trump going to go further than this? Is he going to try to hijack discussions of actual issues in the debate by bringing up Bill's sex life and the Clintons' response to infidelity allegations? And does he seriously think that a woman who's spent nearly 35 questions dealing with this in public isn't going to be ready for that?

The only risk is that idiot journalists -- the Chuck Todds, the Mark Halperins -- will think it's a good move to go in this direction. But I don't think the public will respond well. And if it's just a matter of Flowers sitting mutely in the audience, and later giving an interview to Sean Hannity afterward that will be watched exclusively by people who are already certain to vote for Trump, it won't matter at all.




Donald Trump's campaign manager and running mate said Sunday the GOP candidate doesn't want Gennifer Flowers -- who had an affair with Bill Clinton in the 1970s -- at Monday night's presidential debate.

"We have not invited her formally, and we do not expect her to be there as a guest of the Trump campaign," Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway told CNN's Jake Tapper on "State of the Union."

Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, Trump's vice presidential nominee, told "Fox News Sunday" host Chris Wallace that Trump's suggestion he'd invite Flowers was just "mocking" Clinton's campaign for distracting from the real issues at stake on Monday night.
So now will the Trumpers get credit for, um, trumping the Clinton campaign's Cuban gambit and for high-mindedness because Flowers won't actually be there?


Nefer said...

Perhaps Gennifer Flowers is a conscientious citizen thoughtfully considering all options in this presidential race and is thrilled to be able to watch a presidential debate ini person as it happens.


Or maybe she is just as crass and boorish as the giant orange toad who invited her, sniggering with anticipation all the while. Yeah, I'll go with boorish pigs, the both of them. Too bad Ms. Flowers doesn't realize that she is very likely, as a member of such a lamentably sizable group, just not as memorable in Hillary's eyes as she thinks she is.

rclz said...

the slogan for Trump's campaign should be "how low will he go"

sdhays said...

It's yet another example of Trump's incredibly misogynistic mindset. Clinton invites Mark Cuban because Mark Cuban ticks all the box's that Trump supposedly brings to the table and thus has credibility when critiquing his supposed strengths:
Trump claims he's a successful businessman -> Cuban is a successful businessman
Trump claims he's a billionaire -> Cuban is definitely a billionaire
Trump was the host of a modestly successful, yet really crappy, reality TV show -> Cuban is also the host of modestly successful reality TV show (I've never seen it, so I can't judge how crappy it is)
... What else does Trump say his qualifications are? White supremacy? Knows how to build a wall? Shits bricks of solid gold?

Anyway, Trump invites Gennifer Flowers because she ticks all the boxes that Trump considers Hillary brings to the table: they have both had sex with Bill Clinton. That's it. That's all women are to Trump, even his own daughter - it's clear that it kills him that he can't have sex with Ivanka (if he hasn't, which I would not bet on).

He is such a disgusting, revolting person.

homelessonthehighdesert said...

Though I would like to apply it to the Retards in general - it is my long-held conviction we are witnessing in painful slow motion the demise of the Retard Party - as Donald T Dumpf uck continues to implode exponentially you all are going to be standing around with your thumbs in your ears wondering why the logical outcome wasn't readily apparent months ago. And Clinton will, of course, be your next president.

If it weren't so serious I'd roll on the floor and laugh my ass off, but it is worth a good chuckle.

Cavaet Emptor
Ten Bears

Buford said...

I think Ms. Flowers is expecting a big payoff...It she thinks Trump will pay her, she is just as deluded as the rest of the Trumpanzees...
My evolution with the Trump person, has been of mild amusement when he first slithered down the stairs, to today, Of which I hold total contempt and a visceral Hatred of the man...I mean, wow...May some God, Jesus, Buddha, or Vishnu forgive me my weakness and my and my HATRED...I was always taught to LOVE and that HATE is bad...well, I still think that LOVE is all we need, but there are folks, like Trump, who come along every once in a while, to trigger that intense, surreal hatred of another human...I will never forgive Trump for forcing me into this spiritual wasteland..

Victor said...

"Everything I, I, I, me, me, ME, needed to know, me, me, ME, I, I, I learned in Junior High School!!!"

One person will be ecstatic about this:
MoDo, of the NY Times!

rclz said...

I read, admittedly on Twitter, Pence says Flowers won't be there, that Trump was just tweaking Hillary because of Cuban.

Sounds like someone pointed out that this would not endear him to those college educated women.

Jim Snyder said...

SteveM: "So now will the Trumpers get credit for, um, trumping the Clinton campaign's Cuban gambit and for high-mindedness because Flowers won't actually be there?"

Who knows what our courtier / lickspittle / failed press corpse will say and write? "... worse than you imagine possible, even after you take account of the fact that it is worse than you imagine possible."

Bottom line is that the adults in the Trump campaign trumped Trump on this one.

Garrett Epps' column in the Atlantic last week is relevant (substitute "norms" for "rule of law"):

aldabe said...

What bothered me was that Trump said he would "put" her in the front row like she was an object. He didn't say he would invite her.