Mark Shields, the Avatar of Frumpy, said it best: “An egomaniac with an inferiority complex”.
On MSNBC, an unnamed Republican source characterized the election as a choice between Berlusconi and Nixon, and they might have to vote for Nixon.
I guess that’s why Berlusconi is now trending… people trying to figure out what the hell is meant by that. 
Mike Pence grudgingly admits Obama is a US Citizen:
I think Trump’s chances in Florida are in serious jeopardy. Although the Hispanic population of Florida is distinct from that of the American Southwest, the anti-Latino race baiting and just race baiting in general is probably going to take its toll, and the pay-for-play scheme probably adds to the mess there.
For the same reason I don’t think nominating Nixon was one of the Republicans’ finer moments.
Bullshit. Hillary’s had plenty of times when her approval ratings have been in the high 50s to mid 60s– like when she was doing the work of Secretary of State and Senator. Or when she was First Lady. She was admired and respected by people on both sides of the aisle when she was SoS AND Senator.
So historically, people like her and think she does good work, except when the GOP goes on attack mode during her campaigns and they start flinging horse shit at her.
And, too, it has to be admitted that many Americans have a problem with women asking for promotions. It’s just not seemly (or something).
Hillary Clinton’s new ad shows Donald saying, “I love war” over images of dead bodies.
It’s war alright.
Politifact notes that the comments are taken out of context - that’s Trump’s party line, too - but he did say the things he’s accused of saying. Here’s a brief transcript -
Frankly, there is no context in which Trump’s remarks about knowing more than anyone else about wars is either true or acceptable. Context doesn’t make his egomania less batshit.
It’s a good ad. And today, right before their first scheduled meeting, is the perfect time for Clinton to unveil it. The topic of that meeting will be back to back speeches before military veterans about Foreign Policy. /snicker
What does that have to do with all your previous criticisms of why the Democrats nominated him, which had nothing to do with corruption?
The Democrats nominated Nixon? Guess my memory ain’t what it used to be. Or it is, and I just don’t remember.
Virtually all of Clinton’s ads are just clips of Trump saying stuff.
On the anti-Clinton side, I think there was one ad that showed clips of her using some ‘ers’ and ‘ums’ (in replying to questions about the email server, I believe). I guess that was intended to prove dishonesty, or lack of confidence, or something. But all the other Trump ads rely on an authoritative-sounding narrator telling us that unemployment and general misery will skyrocket due to some unspecified Clinton policies.
We just have to take the narrator’s word for it. Whereas on the other side, we can judge for ourselves whether or not Trump’s remarks are acceptable.
Had the Democrats been able to run Johnson, Nixon would have lost. I think that’s the reasoning.
Or…
If Humphrey wasn’t such a bad candidate, the Dems would’ve wiped the floor in '68.
We’re in a post truth society. The entire Trump campaign is a Gish Gallop. Just lie so often that it’s impossible to fact check and even if you get fact checked it happens so often that it just turns into background noise that everyone ignores.
Truthiness was supposed to be parody, now it’s the status quo.
Wouldn’t the race baiting already have taken a toll if that was the case? It’s not like she’s running away with it in the polls. Maybe there will be a higher Latino turnout which isn’t being factored into the polling methodology but as it stands things look close in Florida.
Florida was destined to be tight from the start, and it will end up a tight race. But Florida was a state Trump could have and should have taken. I now have doubts that he will. In response to your comment, I think Trump could have gotten away with his earlier comments about Mexicans – Florida is Hispanic but Puerto Rican, Cuban, and South American. He could have done okay with Latinos had he not decided to turn to the Alt Right and had there been the much-discussed ‘pivot’. But the recent stunt in Mexico and the speech in Arizona make it clear that there is not going to be a pivot at all, and I think there is probably heightened concern among all minorities, especially all Latinos, about what a Trump presidency would mean for people who are visible minorities. I also suspect that, upon realizing his fading chances to pick up votes among minorities, he’s going to continue to be repugnant in the eyes of minority voters.
I don’t see why he “could have and should have” won Florida. It’s gone Dem 3 of the last 5 elections even if you don’t count Gore in 2000. For months with only short breaks Clinton has had some sort of lead in the polls. And Trump announced his election campaign with his rapist Mexicans line so it’s not like he didn’t start off on the wrong foot.
Also working against your point is the last 4 way poll had Trump +1.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/fl/florida_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5963.html
I suspect you are right, which makes me want to cry…or scream. People are being so unfair to Hillary. 
Merneith, great ad. I especially like the red “UNFIT”. It’s “Daisy” 2016.
Exactly. And it’s not just that she was once popular and has declined. I posted numbers a while ago showing that there have been at least three distinct periods when she had those high approval ratings after periods when her ratings were in the shitter like they are now.
::standing ovation::
Do you really think the millions of Republicans who are happily eating up the Trump-served red meat are going to blink blearily after the election and wonder how they were fooled? Sure, there are going to be some who want some sort of realpolitik lesson out of this, but there a lot more who will end this election convinced that the “murderers” and “crooks” in Hillary’s employ stole the election from Trump, and they’ll carry that attitude forward with them into future political cycles.
Trump has advantages in Florida, such as the fact that he is essentially a partial resident and he has a lot of name-brand recognition in the state. Not all of it good, but he did win the state’s primary by thrashing its junior senator in his home state. The state also elected a Florida governor who is fairly popular and has strongly supported Trump’s campaign.
Trump’s problem is that he has probably lowered his already low favorability among the minority population in that state. For instance, there are a LOT of Puerto Ricans moving into the state, and many of them are not supporters of Trump. Beyond that, the recent bribe, er, donation to the AG can’t be a particularly beneficial development for his campaign efforts there.
The larger problem that Trump has – maybe his biggest logistical challenge – is that he doesn’t have Hillary’s organization. His poll numbers might be rising nationally and even in swing states. But there will almost surely be another Trump crisis, and he has a bad track record of handling these things. It usually devolves into Trump having to shake up the campaign team. He gains ground in some states but then loses ground in others. There’s no unified campaign that can act with a single strategy.