I, RitterSport, by the power vested in delicious chocolate, hereby admit that the discussion of Obama’s birthplace was not started by Trump.
I’m not sure why you’re looking for that, though, since I’ve never seen anyone make the claim that it was started by him. Your second paragraph is from some alternate universe or something.
OK, your turn. Did Trump lie when he claimed Clinton or her campaign started the rumor?
Doubtful that the Republicans paid that much attention to Obama at the time, didn’t bother to tear him down. He was more a threat to Hillary than to them. I remember it well, really liked him, really thought he had no chance, because America had an objection to his complexion.
Time out. Why is there even a debate about Trump or Hillary starting this? Wasn’t this started by right-wing media like Rush Limbaugh and a few republicans before Obama’s first term?
Hillary certainly didn’t start this. Trumpy Wumpy had a news conference about his private investigators, saying HIS people found “amazing stuff” in Hawaii. That was well after we saw the start of this conspiracy. If you wanna credit someone for starting this, credit the hat made of tinfoil people around the globe.
Mango Mussolini should just start his own religion. The Say-Whatever-You-Think-and-Swear-It’s-True-Thus-Making-It-Fact religion.
No, it was probably started by some Clinton supporters (not Clinton or her campaign). Trump didn’t jump in until 2010 or something like that. His people “found” “amazing stuff” in 2011, I think. The right-wing media kept it going, I think (no cite at hand), but they weren’t the genesis of it.
Bolding mine.
If it was “probably” supporters of another democratic candidate in 2008, then I say it was probably John Edwards supporters. Wait, not him. I meant probably Joe Biden supporters. Or probably Christopher Dodd supporters. No, no, no. Probably Bill Richardson supporters. Yes. Definitely probably him. Probably him.
We all now know Barack was born in Hawaii, is a United States citizen. Trumpy Wumpy found this out just yesterday. Did he figure this out from his “investigators”? Was the “amazing stuff” they found the proof that refuted his (and many others) claims of Obama’s false citizenship? I can only wonder how much he paid them. I bet John Miller knows. 
Miller & Baron, PIs.
Here’s a decent timeline of the birth certificate business.
Here’s a part that I don’t think has been mentioned in this thread yet.
Anyone who is still a birther after this date no longer has a legitimate concern. Trump didn’t come out as birther until 2011.
And here’s a bit clearing up the release of the long form.
First, I think there’s a typo in there. Where it says Friday April 2 it should probably Friday, April 22. I just quoted it as is.
Second, the long form was clearly not just sitting in Obama’s closet with him refusing to release it. He had to go to quite a bit of effort to get it. He did so in part because of Trump rekindling the birther fires.
Third, anyone who is still a birther after April, 27 2011 is severely deluded. Donald Trump continued with birther nonsense for more than five years after this date.
The fact that Trump (and the other birthers) kept birthering on after the long-form was released in 2011 shows (if it wasn’t abundantly clear before) that birtherism was never about records, never about proof or evidence, and never about anything other than deligitimizing and de-Americanizing Barack Obama.
I agree that it was a legit question in 2008, but I also think it was answered in 2008.
magellan01, given the timeline linked above after what date was it no longer reasonable to be a birther?
In my opinion even the most skeptical person should have accepted Linda Lingle’s statement on October 31, 2008. She was a Republican Governor actively campaigning for McCain. She is also currently a Republican in good standing having recently worked in Rauner administration in IL and having a speaking spot at the 2016 convention.
Good point.
I think there were many shitheads out there that were saying:
SHITHEAD CT/GOPer - “There’s no way we can elect him! Let everybody know that he’s actually black!”
Normal Citizen - “Um… we can already see that. So what?”
SHITHEAD CT/GOPer - “Well, um, his dad was from Kenya. Maybe he was born there! Let everybody know he was not born in the US, disqualifying him!”
Donald Trump lost the election on day 1 of his campaign and he’s been working hard to lose it ever since. Hillary Clinton lost the election when her email server was revealed.
Only one of them can actually lose the election though. The other will “win” with 42% and a historically awful approval rating and enter office with zero political capital. The most powerful man in DC over the next four years will be Paul Ryan no matter who wins.
Also, Trump is not “teflon”. There have only been two teflon candidates in our lifetimes: Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton. Trump, Clinton, and Obama are mere mortals who may survive their problems, but do in fact pay dearly in approval for the things they say and do(or fail to do). Trump only seems like teflon because his candidacy just won’t die. But that has more to do with his competition, first among the crowded GOP field and now against the fatally flawed Clinton, than anything else. Voters do not like Donald Trump. At all. That’s the opposite of teflon.
No. There are no constitutional requirements for “upbringing” for presidential candidates. And “upbringing” has nothing to do with “birthplace” or “citizenship”.
BWAHAHAHA…!!! The poster child for early onset Alzheimer’s.
Incidentally, there’s a great documentary coming out called “The 13th” on October 17th. (Netflix and limited theater release). It’s about the 13th Amendment, of course, and our prison system. Bill, Ronny and now Trumpy Wumpy are well focused on in this doc.
I’d say it’s not for you.
Yeah, but he was actually teflon. He took some hits during his Presidency but his popularity always recovered and he is still fondly remembered by most Americans. Much like FDR, his enemies will use plenty of ammunition to posthumously degrade his reputation. It’ll work about as well. I’ve been hearing the Reagan haters make very valid arguments for decades. Hasn’t made a dent in the guy’s rep.
Many of us who actually remember Reagan feel no fondness. But, even on the edge of dementia, he could “act” more presidential than Trump.
Many of us, as in about 35%, since Ronald Reagan left office with a 65% approval rating.
There areother ways to look at Reagan’s popularity.
But the article goes on to record Reagan’s great rise in popularity after he left office. Partly because journalists didn’t want to get tough on someone suffering from a dreadful disease. And some Young Republicans are eager to swallow the “legend.” (Do you actually remember his presidency?)
Besides, who can the Republicans get all misty about?
I don’t care what Trump said. I remain convinced Obama is a Keynesian.
:rolleyes:
Yes most were happy with him as he left the building. And a mythology has been created since. But he really was not so particularly loved while in office.
Overall? Pretty average or below depending on the time scale.
Overall average approval was below WJ Clinton’s, GHW Bush’s, L Johnson’s, Kennedy’s, and Eisenhower’s. Of the eleven Trump through GW Bush, Reagan ranked 6th on overall approval ratings.
First term’s average was below Nixon’s and Truman’s. And Johnson’s and GHW Bush’s and GW Bush’s … ranking 8th of 11 for first term average approval rating.
Second term beat by Bill Clinton and Eisenhower for a middling ranking or 3rd out of 7 second terms since Truman.
Bill Clinton left with a higher approval rating.
Reagan was roughly as disliked by his opposition party as Bill Clinton was by his. And the dislike by the opposition has only grown during the GW Bush and Obama years.
Maybe he is misremembered fondly? But agreed - compared to Trump he was amazingly presidential.