tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post3464094539540892285..comments2023-10-24T09:06:30.200-04:00Comments on No More Mister Nice Blog: THE ONLY PEOPLE IN THE POLITICAL ESTABLISHMENT WHO THINK TRUMP CAN WIN ARE DEMOCRATSSteve M.http://www.blogger.com/profile/11963290427258439242noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-73959008323738500252016-03-03T13:55:52.701-05:002016-03-03T13:55:52.701-05:00The GOP has been saying the things that Trump says...The GOP has been saying the things that Trump says for at least 40 years, and doing worse, but only now are people on both sides seriously getting busy tearing their hair out. I suppose the GOP establishment is scared because he doesn't truckle to them, and seems to have some semi liberal positions. But what's up with liberals? Are they just catching on? Is it his style that sets people off? That they can't pretend it's just policy and politics and we'll all just talk it out? In what way is he worse than Rubio? Cruz? Even Kaisich? Doughttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00926738824255895273noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-64574684634044147402016-03-03T10:01:31.295-05:002016-03-03T10:01:31.295-05:00@Blackstone - good point: the window is rapidly cl...@Blackstone - good point: the window is rapidly closing. Since the campaign has been going on for an eternity, I had lost sight of that essential fact. Knight of Nothinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00258071389769083850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-76584613758993603482016-03-03T08:56:18.083-05:002016-03-03T08:56:18.083-05:00Pat Buchanan, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, and the...Pat Buchanan, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, and the whole set of paleocons and neo-Confederates are not Democrats.<br /><br />They are gleefully sacrificing the central goal of Wall Street, neoliberal conservatism, destroying Big Government and entitlement programs, to achieve their own longtime major aims regarding immigration, trade, and non-intervention.<br /><br />They might see it as a long shot, but all of them will remember that after the failure of Goldwater came the triumph of Reagan that established long-term control of the GOP by the movement conservatives.<br /><br />They imagine long term control of the GOP by the spiritual heirs of Sam Francis, Ross Perot, and Pat Buchanan can be a long term triumph in American politics.<br /><br />Personally, I think it would plunge the GOP into deeper isolation and eventual extinction.<br /><br />But the prospect is scary, all the same.Philo Vaihingerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17150326435392881297noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-81899599260001514842016-03-02T22:49:00.937-05:002016-03-02T22:49:00.937-05:00I don't think for one minute that the GOP/Repu...I don't think for one minute that the GOP/Republican leadership will NOT support their current front runner!<br /><br />The white supremacist aka KKK worn hoods for a reason ...they did not want outsiders to know who they are ...the GOP/Republican "establishment" are upset BECAUSE their front runner has whipped off the hood ... they still believe govern and agree with their front runner!<br /><br />The GOP/Republican's will dance with the one that brung them to the dance! Gerald Parkshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14086005170803865460noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-81872673839889452752016-03-02T22:07:56.956-05:002016-03-02T22:07:56.956-05:00A 3rd party candidate needs to be organized by Apr...A 3rd party candidate needs to be organized by April otherwise will not be on the ballot in Texas among other states. The longer a 3rd party candidate waits, the less states s/he can run in. This also means the short fingered vulgarian's threats to run as an independent are as bout as likely as building a yuge wall and making Mexico pay for itBlackstonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13223950796885238684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-53902670266801838852016-03-02T18:34:50.333-05:002016-03-02T18:34:50.333-05:00How Republican of you.How <i>Republican</i> of you.Ten Bearshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06594307610015584119noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-44631539038483808042016-03-02T17:44:55.050-05:002016-03-02T17:44:55.050-05:00There is a crucial distinction between what the Re...There is a crucial distinction between what the Reps and Dems are saying. What the Dems are saying is normal, essentially "don't be overconfident because Trump's a clown, we need every vote to win".<br /><br />If the Reps were saying "Hillary can turn out the brown and black voters and demographics give her an advantage so we need every vote" that would be normal and neither of these statements means anything. <br /><br />But when once side says "Our candidate is a fucking joke and I would rather see Hillary in office than vote for Trump", wow, that means something.Pragmatic Idealisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06375225814206930812noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-61760754990209880762016-03-02T17:35:19.128-05:002016-03-02T17:35:19.128-05:00First of all, Mudcat Saunders can kiss my Yankee a...First of all, Mudcat Saunders can kiss my Yankee ass.<br /><br />Second, I think <i>probably</i> the massive revulsion of African-American and Latino and Muslim voters will be reflected in big registration and turnout numbers that outweigh Trump's racialized appeals. Which<br /><br />Third, vindicates Clinton's strategy of going all in on the party base (i.e., African-American and Latino voters) from the very start. And<br /><br />Fourth, makes Sanders' neglect of and/or incompetent outreach to those voters look incredibly foolish. (I mean, more foolish than the primary results make them look.) His whole general election strategy was based on chasing the ever-elusive White Working Class voters, while taking the party base for granted. That would have been catastrophic.Tom Hiltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17575511424823512042noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-89807756705666970842016-03-02T16:13:47.008-05:002016-03-02T16:13:47.008-05:00Beyond all argument, this is the single most impor...Beyond all argument, this is the single most important thing to bear constantly in mind about pre-election polling of US presidential elections, particularly during the general, and, IMO, worthy of finding constantly new creative ways to remind voters of it:<br /><br />A pre-election presidential poll is a snapshot still-life depiction of the gross distribution over, at best, a possibly arguably representative sample of the total of some number of individual's inherently unstable perceptions enlisted into predicting their feelings off into some future time of a necessarily dynamical and materially unknowable context.<br /><br />You could write a book on that premise. I know of hundreds written on lesser premises, with even less certainty, or significance, or both.<br /><br />Drumpf could win on no more compelling basis than on who won in 1960, 1968, 1980, 1992, 2000 and 2004.<br /><br />Those 6 p-elections constitute well over ONE THIRD of the p-elections in my lifetime. <br /><br />It's almost the same ration for the p-elections since I turned voting age.<br /><br />Now ... of those 6 p-elections since 1944 that were close enough to be essentially decided by some combination of distributional fluke, election fraud &/or theft, local &/or state government shenanigans, judicial chicanery, and freaking emotional WHIM, only 2 - only ONE THIRD - were won by the D nominee. <br /><br />IOW ... since WWII, whenever a presidential election has been close enough for factors BEYOND what may reasonably be allocated to the will of the people and the consent of the governed, TWO THIRDS of the time, the Republican nom has won.<br /><br />And from those two thirds - those 4 R wins in what have effectively been the 6 too-close-to-pre-call p-elections since WWII, America received the following legacies.<br /><br />From 1968:<br />1. the Southern Strategy<br />2. Watergate<br />From 1980:<br />3. Iran-Contra <br />4. Supply side Reaganomics<br />From 2000:<br />5. materially increased risk of the risk of 9/11 going unaddressed<br />6. the Bush Tax Cuts<br />7. invasion of Iraq, <br />8. Gitmo Justice <br />9. SCOTUS Justice Sam Alito<br />10. the Roberts Court<br />11. the financial collapse of 2008<br />12. the worldwide Great Recession.<br /><br />By way of contrast, in ONLY ONE of 11 p-elections since WWII where the nominee of one major party has clearly been elected by the people and received a mandate that included the unquestioned consent of the governed, has there been a truly objectively bad outcome for the country: 1984 -<br /><br />when We The Peeps came together in agreement to entrust the fate our collective experiment AGAIN to a brain-dead ham-acting incompetent, while administering a thorough-going shit-kicking ball-stomping beat-down to a proven able statesman & fine person, Walter Mondale.Feud Turgidsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05379322096770703017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-57979793902642392752016-03-02T16:12:35.915-05:002016-03-02T16:12:35.915-05:00I know it's Trump, but still, language should ...I know it's Trump, but still, language should matter.<br /><i>"At this moment, absolutely not."</i><br />What does that mean? an absolute is impossible in that context. I'm surprised he didn't say, "<b>very</b> absolutely not." Trumpspeak uses the word <b>very</b>, very very often.petrillihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17889489779105405703noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-80763858153527882742016-03-02T16:07:14.103-05:002016-03-02T16:07:14.103-05:00A third party candidate is almost a sure thing. C...A third party candidate is almost a sure thing. Candidate Ted Cruz of the Constitutional Party wouldn't have to win in the Electoral College, he would just have to make sure neither Trump nor Clinton does.<br /><br />The House of Representatives would elect him President.biz5thhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17274752715396083700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-27894819767040366632016-03-02T15:53:36.659-05:002016-03-02T15:53:36.659-05:00Three thoughts:
1) Having lived through the Vent...Three thoughts: <br /><br />1) Having lived through the Ventura administration here in Minnesota, and having witnessed the installment of the Governator in California, I am quite certain that 'President Trump' is possible. Way too many people are entertained by celebrity candidates. Remember, 50% of the people are below average. <br /><br />2) I'm in the camp that believes that Trump might be the least-bad Republican candidate this year (and that's really saying something, because he is of course awful). <br /><br />3) What worries me most about Trump is that I think if he wins the nomination, it increases the chances of a third-party candidate, who would be as likely to draw votes away from Clinton as Trump. <br />Knight of Nothinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00258071389769083850noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-9298680021542774582016-03-02T15:16:17.124-05:002016-03-02T15:16:17.124-05:00Nixon lost in 1960, barely, by 0.7%; then won in 1...Nixon lost in 1960, barely, by 0.7%; then won in 1968, by not much, only 400,000 more votes than he lost by in 1960; and won in 1972, by a landslide, which he didn't survive. <br /><br />IMO that suggests the word "shrewd" here is pulling a lot of freight that more accurately is creditable to "calculating".<br /><br />Feud Turgidsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05379322096770703017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-59187098271484787032016-03-02T14:48:42.042-05:002016-03-02T14:48:42.042-05:00I don't know either.
All I know, is that I wi...I don't know either.<br /><br />All I know, is that I wish I had $1.00 for everone today who says they won't ever vote for Trump, but do!<br /><br />Victorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06609452382111686086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-7213506140554178942016-03-02T14:42:29.715-05:002016-03-02T14:42:29.715-05:00Nixon also had the advantage of there being no int...Nixon also had the advantage of there being no internet to hold all the videos of him pandering to radically different crowds.<br /><br />I'm actually glad that Democrats aren't taking the threat of Trump lightly. Maybe the GOP could have stopped him if they had treated him seriously from the beginning. I somehow doubt it since the formula by which Trump is winning has been baked into the GOP cake for decades. You don't change that in less than a year.Chris Andersenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18139817527808942227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3856837.post-70740825960457356472016-03-02T14:42:01.342-05:002016-03-02T14:42:01.342-05:00There should be a GEICO ad with the punchline &quo...There should be a GEICO ad with the punchline "If you're a Democrat, you fret. It's what you do."AllieGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07994768860067988405noreply@blogger.com