Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-22-2016, 12:36 AM
Rhythmdvl Rhythmdvl is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Shakedown Street
Posts: 12,948
How will Trump upstage Hillary during the DNC?

So we saw Trump fly his plane and enter the convention hall during Cruz's speech. Trump's a master sensationalist and an attention whore bar none. I can't imagine him remaining silent during the DNC --- what will he do to try to steal the spotlight or grab headlines?
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 07-26-2016, 07:08 AM
QuickSilver QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 15,246
Threaten not to pay his hotel bill.
  #3  
Old 07-26-2016, 07:21 AM
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 26,714
I wouldn't be surprised if he schedules a speech at the same time.
  #4  
Old 07-26-2016, 07:44 AM
Vinyl Turnip Vinyl Turnip is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 18,587
Glasses of Chardonnay quiver as the attendees begin to hear the pneumatic whine and stomp of Trump's robotic exoskeleton.
  #5  
Old 07-26-2016, 08:13 AM
madmonk28 madmonk28 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 10,525
Release his and Ivanka's sex tape.
  #6  
Old 07-26-2016, 08:19 AM
pool pool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Inside
Posts: 3,653
Fly over in the Trump-Copter and dump a million dollars on Bernie Babies.
  #7  
Old 07-26-2016, 09:09 AM
Vinyl Turnip Vinyl Turnip is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 18,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by pool View Post
Fly over in the Trump-Copter and dump a million dollars on Bernie Babies.
TrumpBux. Good for up to 10% off on select goods and services at Trump hotels and golf courses. Many, many, many restrictions apply. Expires August 1, 2016. No cash value. One per customer. Not valid with or without any other offer. Rebate form must be notarized and sent by certified mail. Allow 8-18 months for processing. You won't get the check, and if you complain he'll sue you. Sad!
  #8  
Old 07-26-2016, 09:23 AM
BobLibDem BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 19,133
I'm sure he'll have some devastating tweets, the BEST tweets ever tweeted, mind you.
  #9  
Old 07-26-2016, 10:25 AM
Rhythmdvl Rhythmdvl is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Shakedown Street
Posts: 12,948
Yuuge tweets. Yuuger than 140 characters!
  #10  
Old 07-26-2016, 10:31 AM
Crotalus Crotalus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Chillicothe, Ohio
Posts: 5,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhythmdvl View Post
Yuuge tweets. Yuuger than 140 characters!
He can do that, you know. He made the best deal with Twitter.
  #11  
Old 07-26-2016, 10:38 AM
Smapti Smapti is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Swerve City, WA
Posts: 14,420
Maybe he'll finally get around to shooting someone on 5th Avenue.
  #12  
Old 07-26-2016, 10:54 AM
Crotalus Crotalus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Chillicothe, Ohio
Posts: 5,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smapti View Post
Maybe he'll finally get around to shooting someone on 5th Avenue.
Or he could release his tax returns.
  #13  
Old 07-26-2016, 03:28 PM
jasg jasg is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Upper left hand corner
Posts: 4,317
Bare chested equestrian photo shoots?
  #14  
Old 07-26-2016, 03:55 PM
Buck Godot Buck Godot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 4,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crotalus View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smapti View Post
Maybe he'll finally get around to shooting someone on 5th Avenue.
Or he could release his tax returns.

Please Crotalus, Smapti's idea may have slightly stretched plausibility but you're way out in la la land.
  #15  
Old 07-26-2016, 10:58 PM
Saint Cad Saint Cad is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 12,158
Announce that he will offer Sanders a cabinet position, maybe Secretary of Health and Human Services.
  #16  
Old 07-26-2016, 11:02 PM
JohnT JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 18,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
Announce that he will offer Sanders a cabinet position, maybe Secretary of Health and Human Services.
Hillary gave him effective control of the DNC. Why would he want HHS with a platform like that?
  #17  
Old 07-27-2016, 11:29 AM
Jophiel Jophiel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Chicago suburbia
Posts: 16,628
Well, I guess the answer to this was: Openly invite Russia to conduct cyberattacks and espionage against the United States.

Wouldn't have guessed that one.
  #18  
Old 07-27-2016, 11:35 AM
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 26,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jophiel View Post
Well, I guess the answer to this was: Openly invite Russia to conduct cyberattacks and espionage against the United States.

Wouldn't have guessed that one.
Me neither. But I think Hillary will take that kind of upstaging.
  #19  
Old 07-27-2016, 11:37 AM
Jophiel Jophiel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Chicago suburbia
Posts: 16,628
Somewhere, Biden is frantically revising tonight's speech.
  #20  
Old 07-27-2016, 11:39 AM
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 26,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jophiel View Post
Somewhere, Biden is frantically revising tonight's speech.
Biden, and Obama (he's tonight, right?), and Tim Kaine (ditto?)...
  #21  
Old 07-27-2016, 11:41 AM
JohnT JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 18,593
Everyone is revising their speeches right now.

Last edited by JohnT; 07-27-2016 at 11:45 AM.
  #22  
Old 07-27-2016, 11:43 AM
Euphonious Polemic Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 10,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jophiel View Post
Well, I guess the answer to this was: Openly invite Russia to conduct cyberattacks and espionage against the United States.

Wouldn't have guessed that one.
... and to state that "I think you (Russians) will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.

Nice. Would that be FoxNews who will pay the Russians directly?

Is what Trump said even legal? Can I openly encourage a third party to commit a crime, and then say that they'd be "rewarded mightily"?
  #23  
Old 07-27-2016, 11:44 AM
Kolak of Twilo Kolak of Twilo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edgewater/Chicago
Posts: 3,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jophiel View Post
Somewhere, Biden is frantically revising tonight's speech.
[nitpick]I think "hurriedly" would be a better word. "Frantically" conveys a sense of panic or desperation. I think "excitedly" would work well. [/nitpick]
  #24  
Old 07-27-2016, 11:44 AM
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 26,714
Whether it's legal or not, prosecuting Trump would be a terrible political move. It would turn him into a free speech martyr.

Just keep attacking, and he'll do what Trump does -- never back down.
  #25  
Old 07-27-2016, 11:49 AM
BobLibDem BobLibDem is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Home 07 NCAA HockeyChamps
Posts: 19,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolak of Twilo View Post
[nitpick]I think "hurriedly" would be a better word. "Frantically" conveys a sense of panic or desperation. I think "excitedly" would work well. [/nitpick]
I can see Obama, Kaine, and Biden steepling their fingers while muttering "Excellent" like Montgomery Burns.
  #26  
Old 07-27-2016, 11:55 AM
Happy Lendervedder Happy Lendervedder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 13,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
I can see Obama, Kaine, and Biden steepling their fingers while muttering "Excellent" like Montgomery Burns.
I was picturing one of them as Ice-T from New Jack City: "I want to give this speech so bad my dick's hard."
  #27  
Old 07-27-2016, 11:56 AM
Jophiel Jophiel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Chicago suburbia
Posts: 16,628
I was guessing Biden since I'm guessing he'll give more of the attack-dog speech. Obama will be talking up Clinton in lofty tones. Kaine I'm not familiar enough with. Liked his VP-intro speech a lot but didn't see him as someone with a lot of bite.
  #28  
Old 07-27-2016, 12:01 PM
Rhythmdvl Rhythmdvl is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Shakedown Street
Posts: 12,948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jophiel
Well, I guess the answer to this was: Openly invite Russia to conduct cyberattacks and espionage against the United States.

Per the Washington Post
Quote:
The real estate mogul sought ... to distance himself from allegations that the Russian government hacked into the [DN]to benefit his campaign ... .

It is so farfetched. Its so ridiculous. Honestly I wish I had that power. Id love to have that power but Russia has no respect for our country, Trump said. (emphasis added)

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobLibDem View Post
I can see Obama, Kaine, and Biden steepling their fingers while muttering "Excellent" like Montgomery Burns.
Number one line they're trying to incorporate:
Please proceed, Trumpernor
  #29  
Old 07-27-2016, 12:06 PM
bengangmo bengangmo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jophiel View Post
Well, I guess the answer to this was: Openly invite Russia to conduct cyberattacks and espionage against the United States.

Wouldn't have guessed that one.
Storm in a thimble compared to other crap he's said.

This one comes off more as sarcasm than anything else...A ridiculous comment to rebut a ridiculous (in his eyes) accusation of Russian hacking.

Last edited by bengangmo; 07-27-2016 at 12:07 PM.
  #30  
Old 07-27-2016, 12:42 PM
Euphonious Polemic Euphonious Polemic is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 10,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by bengangmo View Post
Storm in a thimble compared to other crap he's said.

This one comes off more as sarcasm than anything else...A ridiculous comment to rebut a ridiculous (in his eyes) accusation of Russian hacking.
This seems to be the only position that the Trump apologists have now:

"He didn't really mean what he said". Just keep repeating that line until November.
  #31  
Old 07-27-2016, 12:49 PM
JohnT JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 18,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by bengangmo View Post
Storm in a thimble compared to other crap he's said.

This one comes off more as sarcasm than anything else...A ridiculous comment to rebut a ridiculous (in his eyes) accusation of Russian hacking.
Trump's spokesman denies he was joking.
  #32  
Old 07-27-2016, 12:56 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 14,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by bengangmo View Post
Storm in a thimble compared to other crap he's said.

This one comes off more as sarcasm than anything else...A ridiculous comment to rebut a ridiculous (in his eyes) accusation of Russian hacking.
"Sir, they're refusing to let us dock."
"They're WHAT? Admiral, I'd sure like you to bomb that place to hell and back."
"Mister President?"
"You heard me: show 'em who's BOSS! Knock over some BUILDINGS!"
"Very well, sir."
"And I can assure you that you'd be rewarded mightily."
"Understood, sir."
"I mean, why even HAVE aircraft carriers, if we're gonna put up with this crap?"
  #33  
Old 07-27-2016, 01:02 PM
Sunny Daze Sunny Daze is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 7,183
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jophiel View Post
Well, I guess the answer to this was: Openly invite Russia to conduct cyberattacks and espionage against the United States.

Wouldn't have guessed that one.
Say what now? Apparently I tuned him out and missed a doozy. Just when you think he can't sink any lower...
  #34  
Old 07-27-2016, 01:08 PM
Locrian Locrian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Valley Village, CA
Posts: 3,530
Oh, Russians, shmushians. He really upstaged the DNC with his comment about stage sets.

Quote:
Originally Posted by @realDonaldTrump
I hate to say it, but the Republican Convention was far more interesting (with a much more beautiful set) than the Democratic Convention!
The SETS, mind you! The horror...
  #35  
Old 07-27-2016, 04:20 PM
Corry El Corry El is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by bengangmo View Post
Storm in a thimble compared to other crap he's said.

This one comes off more as sarcasm than anything else...A ridiculous comment to rebut a ridiculous (in his eyes) accusation of Russian hacking.
I agree. One of the problems in countering Trump is as it was put in a conservative anti-Trump piece I read recently the 'fainting couch' the media keeps rolling out as their response to various dumb Trump statements.

If Trump opponents convince themselves 'this is it!' with this statement, as they have for others before *with better reason*, they are just going to look hysterical and desperate. It's part of why this guy is so hard to counter: the reactions he provokes.

Among irresponsible totally non-sarcastic Trump statements relating to Russia, the recent one about about checking to see first whether the Baltic countries had 'held up their end' before coming to their aid in case of Russian aggression, as the US is treaty bound to do with no so such 'check', was 10 times more irresponsible than a sarcastic jab about Hillary's emails (which in reality the Russian security services either already have from when they were on her non-secure home server, or they probably can't get to now).
  #36  
Old 07-27-2016, 04:21 PM
JohnT JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 18,593
Yes, but "here's footage showing him asking Russia to hack emails" is a lot easier to show people than wording in a treaty.
  #37  
Old 07-27-2016, 04:27 PM
Sherrerd Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 4,195
How will Trump upstage Hillary during the DNC?

Quote:
Originally Posted by madmonk28 View Post
Release his and Ivanka's sex tape.
Release his and Putin's sex tape.
  #38  
Old 07-27-2016, 04:35 PM
Corry El Corry El is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
Yes, but "here's footage showing him asking Russia to hack emails" is a lot easier to show people than wording in a treaty.
I predict disappointment for people thinking this latest comment will turn into a big problem for Trump, or even a significant 'straw' in a pile that will break the camel's back...at some point, they keep hoping. The Baltics comment made barely ripple it's true. But people not desperate to stop Trump are going to tend to see this latest as a tempest in a teapot, which it kind of is.
  #39  
Old 07-27-2016, 04:42 PM
JohnT JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 18,593
I don't know why people keep arguing that HRC needs a "straw" that will "break backs" en masse or that her supporters are looking for one. It's the steady drip-drip of constant news and controversy that is breaking Trump, losing him supporters and donors, making his campaign always play catch up.

Is this going to "break" him? No, but it will lose him a significant amount of voters. The next controversy will lose him more. And so on.

Last edited by JohnT; 07-27-2016 at 04:42 PM.
  #40  
Old 07-27-2016, 05:03 PM
Happy Lendervedder Happy Lendervedder is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 13,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
I don't know why people keep arguing that HRC needs a "straw" that will "break backs" en masse or that her supporters are looking for one. It's the steady drip-drip of constant news and controversy that is breaking Trump, losing him supporters and donors, making his campaign always play catch up.

Is this going to "break" him? No, but it will lose him a significant amount of voters. The next controversy will lose him more. And so on.
Unless it doesn't.
  #41  
Old 07-27-2016, 05:04 PM
Locrian Locrian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Valley Village, CA
Posts: 3,530
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
I don't know why people keep arguing that HRC needs a "straw" that will "break backs" en masse or that her supporters are looking for one. It's the steady drip-drip of constant news and controversy that is breaking Trump, losing him supporters and donors, making his campaign always play catch up.

Is this going to "break" him? No, but it will lose him a significant amount of voters. The next controversy will lose him more. And so on.
Agreed. How many companies dropped out of the RNC? How about the infamous Koch brothers? Grass Roots Republicans thinking it's okay to ask "the commies" for help in infiltration of the good ol' USA? Let's not forget the women and ethnicities that keep dropping further away from Trumpy Wumpy and the GOP in general...

We can all argue that it may or may not bring Hillary more votes, but regardless, it's always less votes for him and the GOP and their putrid 18th century platform.

Last edited by Locrian; 07-27-2016 at 05:04 PM.
  #42  
Old 07-27-2016, 05:16 PM
Leaper Leaper is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: In my own little world...
Posts: 12,153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Lendervedder View Post
Unless it doesn't.
But as I asked in another thread, how often does a major presidential candidate actually lose a significant amount of support in polls that way? It seems to me one side thinks that the polls right now indicate that Trump is bulletproof, while the other thinks that they're just one scandal away from a HYUUGE collapse, and I don't think either is the case.

Last edited by Leaper; 07-27-2016 at 05:17 PM.
  #43  
Old 07-27-2016, 05:20 PM
Corry El Corry El is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
I don't know why people keep arguing that HRC needs a "straw" that will "break backs" en masse or that her supporters are looking for one. It's the steady drip-drip of constant news and controversy that is breaking Trump, losing him supporters and donors, making his campaign always play catch up.
Except the trend from even back before his convention is that Trump's been gaining on HRC to where it's now basically tied. You can never prove that a given potential negative for a candidate isn't one because they've been gaining. It might be a significant negative simply outweighed by more significant ones for the opponent*.

But the premise that Trump's faux pas are gradually weighing him down in some monotonic trend is lacking in evidence IMO. In terms of visible permanent impact on the race I think anti-Trumpers are in fact hoping for more of a camel's back or dam break or some similar metaphor: that outrageous statements by Trump will reach some critical mass that puts him behind from where he won't bounce back. That just hasn't happened so far, despite many stupid, offensive, etc comments by Trump.

*eg. the Comey press conference's impact on HRC: graphic in today's WSJ from NBC/WSJ poll is sobering, sizable increase in % in almost every demographic saying they are now more likely to factor the (original) email scandal into their voting decision, and I doubt many people would factor it in more heavily but come out more positively for Clinton.

Last edited by Corry El; 07-27-2016 at 05:22 PM.
  #44  
Old 07-27-2016, 05:46 PM
JRDelirious JRDelirious is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Displaced
Posts: 14,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corry El View Post
Among irresponsible totally non-sarcastic Trump statements relating to Russia, the recent one about about checking to see first whether the Baltic countries had 'held up their end' before coming to their aid in case of Russian aggression, as the US is treaty bound to do with no so such 'check', was 10 times more irresponsible than a sarcastic jab about Hillary's emails (which in reality the Russian security services either already have from when they were on her non-secure home server, or they probably can't get to now).
Good point -- that bit about "I'll check if they're making their contribution" was appalling and yet nobody really called him on the core issue (one point of NATO's all-for-one-one-for-all policy is so that nobody gets thrown under the bus just because the big hitters feel it's not worth the bother), probably thinking not unjustifiably that the American audience would itself say "ehhh, so, f*** Latvia, never heard of it".
  #45  
Old 07-27-2016, 06:48 PM
Kolak of Twilo Kolak of Twilo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Edgewater/Chicago
Posts: 3,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
"Sir, they're refusing to let us dock."
"They're WHAT? Admiral, I'd sure like you to bomb that place to hell and back."
"Mister President?"
"You heard me: show 'em who's BOSS! Knock over some BUILDINGS!"
"Very well, sir."
"And I can assure you that you'd be rewarded mightily."
"Understood, sir."
"I mean, why even HAVE aircraft carriers, if we're gonna put up with this crap?"
I'm having the increasing sense this is the EXACT dialogue going through the minds of a disturbingly large number of Americans. To the point where they think bombing, attacking or going to war with the rest of the world is actually a good idea. And I'm becoming worried they will make up the majority who vote come election day.
  #46  
Old 07-27-2016, 06:53 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper The Other Waldo Pepper is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 14,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolak of Twilo View Post
I'm having the increasing sense this is the EXACT dialogue going through the minds of a disturbingly large number of Americans. To the point where they think bombing, attacking or going to war with the rest of the world is actually a good idea. And I'm becoming worried they will make up the majority who vote come election day.
Right, but, see, the really horrifying part is that he might say whatever damn fool thing comes into his head, play out that conversation, elicit the obvious response, and later mention that it was all just a joke that wasn't supposed to be taken seriously.
  #47  
Old 07-27-2016, 07:16 PM
Count Blucher Count Blucher is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Near Baroni&Kelly's Jail.
Posts: 13,668
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jophiel View Post
Somewhere, Biden is frantically revising tonight's speech.

Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Biden, and Obama (he's tonight, right?), and Tim Kaine (ditto?)...
Orange you glad no one on stage tonight ever did anything so stupid as to ally with a foreign power against the United States of America?
  #48  
Old 07-27-2016, 07:50 PM
JohnT JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 18,593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corry El View Post
Except the trend from even back before his convention is that Trump's been gaining on HRC to where it's now basically tied. You can never prove that a given potential negative for a candidate isn't one because they've been gaining. It might be a significant negative simply outweighed by more significant ones for the opponent*.

But the premise that Trump's faux pas are gradually weighing him down in some monotonic trend is lacking in evidence IMO. In terms of visible permanent impact on the race I think anti-Trumpers are in fact hoping for more of a camel's back or dam break or some similar metaphor: that outrageous statements by Trump will reach some critical mass that puts him behind from where he won't bounce back. That just hasn't happened so far, despite many stupid, offensive, etc comments by Trump.

*eg. the Comey press conference's impact on HRC: graphic in today's WSJ from NBC/WSJ poll is sobering, sizable increase in % in almost every demographic saying they are now more likely to factor the (original) email scandal into their voting decision, and I doubt many people would factor it in more heavily but come out more positively for Clinton.
I'm sorry, but I can't buy into the logic of the "the more unelectable things he does, the more likely it is that he is going to be elected" argument.

He is getting the traditional bumps one would expect to occur because of bad news hitting his opponent three weeks ago and his convention occurring last week, exciting the Republicans who didn't bother to vote in the primary, and that's largely it.
  #49  
Old 07-27-2016, 10:04 PM
Corry El Corry El is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 2,277
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnT View Post
I'm sorry, but I can't buy into the logic of the "the more unelectable things he does, the more likely it is that he is going to be elected" argument.
But you're relying on your own judgment, or perhaps people too like minded and not broadly representative enough to decide what are 'unelectable things'. If you are wrong (although you could be right) that Trump's upward trend is a transient bounce but instead it's a permanent change to race, and he goes on to win, I think you might look back and agree on this possible flaw in your logic. It's not pure logic.

I don't know what a 270 EV plurality of the people who are actually going to show up at the polls this year find to be 'unelectable things'. I think it's possible Trump will capture that plurality among people who don't think his previous statements outweighed their positive desire to put a bull in the china shop of a broken system (in their view) and relative to the flaws of Clinton. I'm particularly unconvinced that this latest thing, which is being overhyped IMO by now alarmed Democrats and their media allies, is going to amount to anything net.
  #50  
Old 07-27-2016, 10:25 PM
JohnT JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 18,593
Quote:
I don't know what a 270 EV plurality of the people who are actually going to show up at the polls this year find to be 'unelectable things'.
Neither do I. But I do know that Donald Trump gives more people... more often... more "unelectable things" on a daily basis than Hillary. When the Undecideds go into the polls and consider "unelectable things", they have to choose from:

Emails/Benghazi/Bunch of 90s Crap ... on the Hillary side

Russia/Tax Returns/Muslim Bans/Mexican Rapists/Stupid & Dangerous Things Said #1-3,452/Russia/Stealing From Contractors including Pre-teen Girls/Not Knowing the Constitution/Mexican Judges/Russia/Trump University/3,000 Lawsuits and Counting/Twitter Rage/I Love Brexit/Russia/I Made The Call in Orlando!/My Convention Was a Mess/My Campaign Organization Is A Mess/I have No GOTV/All The People I Voted For Over The Past 28 Years To The Presidency Are Telling Me Not To Vote For This Guy (and my Senator too)/Lets Give Nukes To Saudi Arabia & Japan/Whatever Else JohnT Has Forgotten ... on the other side.

So give him the expected bad news and convention bump, I would be shocked if this double-whammy didn't move the needle in July. But "Possible FBI Indictments" is dead as an ongoing political issue and Benghazi isn't going to move the needle at all... and Trump cannot help but keep feeding the American electorate a never-ending list of "unelectable things".

After all, I don't make him say these things... he does.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:42 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright 2017 Sun-Times Media, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017