Donald Trump's 2016 General Election Campaign

If she couldn’t meet her husband’s needs, how can she meet the country’s? It’s dumb but I have heard people say exactly that.

The other thing I think they’re doing is saying that Hillary mistreated Lewinsky and Flowers. I seem to recall hearing someone putting forth that idea recently. The whole incident was so long ago that I don’t recall if she actually attacked them or not, but it could be claimed that simply by defending her husband, or simply by staying with him, she was belittling their concerns, and therefore she’s not concerned about women’s issues. It’s a totally bogus and unfair line of attack but that doesn’t stop them.

I think they want to bring up issues about how she handled the accusations, and in ways that she turned them around against his accusers.

I still don’t think that’s much of a winning hand, but it’s arguably better than “Her husband cheated on her so she is a loser!”

People are saying that all this necessitates RICO indictments, otherwise too many agencies, jurisdictions, and other complications come in. It is obvious institutional attitudes regarding violating and flouting US laws have permeated both organisations up and down the org chart, they have brought other organizations into their web of crimes, all of which is pretty much the standard definition of a corrupt organization.

The other thing they could be doing is trying to head off attacks on Trump about his infidelities. Reminding the country of Bill’s infidelity, and how Hillary (and a good portion of the country) has forgiven him, makes it seem hypocritical to attack Trump for his past.

I think I’ve mentioned it before, but this is literally the one and only thing that many of the conservative Republican women of my acquaintance grudgingly respect HRC for. Standing by your man and working out your marriage is not considered a negative by them. This is a constituency Trump desperately needs, so I think this line of attack is insane.

Sounds like the Ministry of Truth (whose main purpose is to perpetuates lies).
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can actually picture this.

Trump: “You’re a yuuggge loser. A tremendous loser. You’re so successful as a loser. You’re a better loser than anyone, believe me! Everyone is telling me this. You’re as big of a loser as my hands!”

He can’t help himself and, apparently, neither can his advisors. Hopefully, we can say this to Trump after the election.

As soon as I have no reason to worry about him, I will have no reason to think about him.

I don’t think it is something strategically thought out. He uses it because he thinks it is a sore point and he doesn’t like being attacked, period. It’s a middle school level attempt at insulting her.

That might make sense if they think the Clinton campaign has dirt on a recent infidelity. Otherwise, Trump’s cheating is as far in the past as Bill’s, and doesn’t make a good line of attack for either campaign.

This documentary does a good job of comparing the seriousness of Trump’s and Clinton’s scandals.

Trump says junk like that about his opponents because in his mind people are attracted to the strong and are repulsed by the weak. Not being able to keep her man satisfied and then sticking with him even though he’s abusing the power differential of US President vs intern implies that 1) she is weak and 2) she would rather have power than stand up for any feminist ideal.

Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pierson: Media can ‘no longer report’ Trump won’t release his tax returns

Wait for it…it’s Hillary that is the problem. Yep. He’ll release his tax returns as soon as she comes up with deleted emails.

Little Marco is paddling furiously.

Kellyanne Conway was on “The View” this morning, and for every single question she was asked, she answered with “Why didn’t Hillary …” So when she was specifically asked about Trump’s dealings with Cuba, her reply was, “Why did Hillary take money from Saudi Arabia?”

To further emphasize the possible insanity of this type of attack, Hillary Clinton’s approval rating actually went up during the Lewinsky scandal.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/11/why-hillary-clinton-would-be-strong-in-2016-its-not-her-favorability-ratings/

Every posting you read in a typical newspaper comments section will kill 30 of your brain cells. Don’t do it.

Quote of the Day! Thank you.

Of course, the implication is that her opponent, by contrast, will be *great *at screwing the country.

That’s pretty much how all his surrogates have handled questions all along.

You know, you guys are completely misunderstanding the story. He didn’t make $68k, he spent that to trying to make connections so he could be a government favourite in opening the first American casino in Cuba since the revolution as soon as the embargo lifted. That would probably be a good paycheck. And $68k probably greases quite a few wheels in Cuba.