Just a reminder: the language changes and using usage as a shibboleth to identify “decent” people is silly. Beyond that, using such a shibboleth to indicate that another poster is not “decent” is a violation of SDMB rules.
Do not do this again.
[ /Moderating ]
Paul Ryan also said he’d support Trump as the nominee so I guess he won’t be party shipping just yet.
Trump is holding a press conference tonight for some unknown reason.
That phrase deserves a moment of admiration all by itself.
He’s proved his point and he’s dropping out and endorsing John Kasich and giving him $50 million.
“John Kasich is a beautiful man. He’s going to be huge, you’re going to love him…”
Wait, what? I thought Ryan said he’ll support whoever the nominee is. And he’s the chairman of the nomination, he’s in favor of new “unbinding” delegate rules… Let’s just say Trump shouldn’t drink any drinks made by Paul Ryan.
It was really something, wasn’t it?
In the wake of Super Tuesday, an interesting dynamic is appearing that does not bode well for Trump. Donald does well in states with an open primary, but loses in states that have closed primaries. There has been a disproportionate number of open primaries thus far, artificially inflating Trump’s popularity in the Republican party. In the coming weeks, most tof the primaries are closed, portending a much steeper climb for Trump. If Trump falters in closed primaries, his momentum could take a crippling hit.
I have a stupid theory about Trump that leads to a series of stupid questions.
My stupid theory: Trump’s net worth is way lower than he says it is, and way lower than Forbes says it is. Forbes is probably pretty accurate about the net worth of people whose assets are primarily shares of publicly-traded companies. They may even be fairly accurate about the Koch brothers, despite the fact that their company is privately held. I don’t see how they can be accurate at all about Trump. They list the source of his wealth as “television, real estate”, and I don’t see how they can possibly evaluate those things, given that the primary source of information is probably Trump. I suspect that Trump is wealthy, but with a net worth in the tens of millions rather than billions.
My stupid questions.
Are candidates for POTUS required, or just pressured by the media, to disclose the details of their businesses and net worth?
If required is the answer to the first question, are the disclosures required to be detailed enough to debunk?
What would the likely impact be on Trump’s electability (assume here that he has some degree of electabilty, don’t fight the hypothetical) of a disclosure that he has been totally lying about his net worth by a couple of orders of magnitude?
About the same amount of damage that Aurthur Dent would have caused to the bulldozer by laying in front of it.
If this has already been posted here, my apologies. Here’s John Oliver’s epic takedown of Trump: Donald Trump: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO) - YouTube
That’s just wishful Trump hater thinking. Even the most realistic “he ain’t that rich” estimates is hundreds of millions, not tens.
That *is *interesting.
The thing we have to decide is whether that difference represents:A) Hard-core D voters pranking the Rs’ open primaries hoping to force them to nominate what those D voters see as a loser clown.
OR
B) Proof that there’s a large, angry, and mostly unaligned group of voters voting in the primaries who will be yuge in the general and will draw from both historical non-voters, plus both traditional R & D voters.If the former, it says Trump may not get nominated and if so he’ll lose massively. If the latter, it says Trump may well get nominated and if so he’ll win massively.
There’s still time for voters in the later closed primaries to switch their party registration. In many states they don’t need to register a party choice in advance; they simply choose which ballot to vote on primary day.
My opinion is that “B” is the predominant effect. Yes, “A” is happening some. But that’s not the bulk of it. My evidence is the change in turnouts vs. 2012. This is about new voters, not rearranging the usual voters.
Not discounting the open/closed theory, but only Oklahoma was the real surprise closed primary Cruz win, no? (even though the WaPo article says OK "performed as expected)To dig into it you’d have to really look how much the polling/predictions were off for closed v open.
The internet is to the point now that death threats get sent to anybody with a public profile.
I’m not sure this represents anything other more than that.
Sorry, but I know many examples of what happens to targets of the professional bullshitters on the internet, they do post the contacts and sites of their enemies so as to get their viewers or readers to “get rid of the meddlesome ‘priests’”.
Point being that yes, I can see how from time to time everyone in the public will get threats, but it is really disingenuous from those radio or internet trolls to claim that sending a concerted mob to do so is just “the usual” is asinine.
So, here’s another prediction from me. And my track record is perfect (perfectly wrong).
Trump gets a plurality but not majority of the delegates. In exchange for dropping out and publicly supporting the GOP’s nominee, Trump gets the first born child (or the equivalent political favor) from every Republican Senator, Congressman, and Governor.
All this political capital, along with the increase of the Trump brand from this political season, and Trump will be worth the billions that he already thinks he is.
Nah. Like Clinton in 2008, he’ll drop out in exchange for being name Secretary of State.
And shortly thereafter, he will start a massive global war.
As long as he’s not President, I’m actually OK with that.