wsj takes trump to task

face it bud, they are just a "basket of deplorables"

If trump tactfully stuck with the "we're going to change things from top to bottom" message without all the crazy departures into name calling, conspiracy theories, thinly veilled racism, and constant doom and gloom I do believe he'd be elected today. Some actual policies that aren't illegal, against the very constitution he loves to crow about, or simply batshit crazy wouldn't have hurt either.

In short, his personality did him in. All he needed to do was act like a grown up "presidential" type guy from day 1 and given his competition he'd have walked away with it.

In the end I still am not convinced that would have been a positive, going back to his very clear lack of understanding about many things outside of his own head, but he'd have had a chance.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...lintonkaine-campaign-book-is-just-deplorable/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ainst-hillary-clinton/?utm_term=.9f09146c4916
 
Last edited:
Yep, pretty damn important state.. Bush won it by 200(?) votes back in 2000. Remember that fiasco?

200 votes! Out of like 3,000,000.
 
Pardon me for repeating myself, but you're repeating your irrational line of argument so you're not leaving me much choice.

Again, this question isn't about what I think. I haven't told you what I think. However you told me what you think and I asked why. Your reply that my commentary is spurious, my according-to-you opinion is invalid, and my according-to-you reasons for holding that opinion are based on bias and a lack of critical reasoning, and so on. You could be a hobo complaining that no one's dealing with the aliens all around us, and when asked "what aliens" you go on a tirade about sheeple and media conspiracies, as if that proves the existence of aliens!

My question, once again, was what has he ever done to earn forgiveness? If you're going to compare him with your example of Byrd, it's pretty self-evident that the comparison should be equivalent, and if not, it's a pretty straightforward question to ask you to demonstrate the equivalence where the comparison seems to fail.

Byrd said racist things. Trump said sexist things.
Byrd later atoned for his racism. Trump later... what did he do to atone for his sexism?

I cherish your view on my political bias and intellectual dishonesty, but it shouldn't be an excuse for you to evade answering the question.

Do you even recall what brought you jumping back to this conversation? The comparison was to show how ridiculous it would be to call out Hillary for her associations, same as it was ridiculous for Obama to get on a stage and call out Trump for his KKK "association" which was, a group, of it's own volition, endorsing a candidate. Last check, they always endorse the Republican.

The real issue....

I talk about the leaks; investigations; foundation dealings; emails; collusion; Podesta/media dinner parties; podesta DOJ dinner parties; DOJ WJC private meetings whilst HC is under investigation; ties to Kissinger and Kagen; project veritas; breaches in numerous campaign laws and the ensuing fallout within the DNC; red scare propaganda merging WikiLeaks, Trump and even Comey with a Russian plot; even Jeffrey Epstien and what the implications regarding the Clinton's and Trump.. You dismiss all of that, shutting down conversations, or ignoring all together...

But the second the topic of Trump's a this or that POS, and all of a sudden you want to have in depth discussion. Why you act surprised that someone might feel your bias is showing is truly laughable.

Small example...

Trump allegations of abuse of women. You believe that, and jump right on the bandwagon though no charges have been laid.
Clinton emails and mishandling of classified docs; no charges, no problem, non issue.

If that's not "intellectual dishonesty" to quote what I believe is a pretty smart guy, what is?
 
Last edited:
I'm in the US on business right now.

If you go by election signs ... there are occasional signs for Trump but nowhere near as many as there are for local candidates. There are NO signs for Clinton. I have seen not one (this is in Tennessee but it was the same in South Carolina on my last business trip a couple weeks ago).

What that suggests is that Trump has supporters but not many, but literally no one actually wants Clinton. I suspect that this vote is for or against Trump, not for Trump or for Clinton. People voting for Clinton will be doing so not because they want to, but because it's the only viable way to vote against Trump.

Were I to be an American citizen ... that would be my viewpoint.
 
36915117.jpg
 
Last edited:
As of 11:00 PM trump was ahead in the national average by a few % with just over half the votes in. I'm trying to predict the headlines if he wins. Maybe "Holy Crap"
 
As of 11:00 PM trump was ahead in the national average by a few % with just over half the votes in. I'm trying to predict the headlines if he wins. Maybe "Holy Crap"

It certainly looks like Master Overlord Trump for 4 years! Finally something entertaining!
 
Not getting any better at 12:20. Red paint all over the map with the exception of the coasts.

Ivanka will be bringing out a line of woman's jockstraps.
 
Not getting any better at 12:20. Red paint all over the map with the exception of the coasts.

It always looks like that. Every single election. This is what it looked like when Obama won in 08:

524px-ElectoralCollege2008.svg.png


The problem is that she lost both Florida (29 electoral votes), Ohio (18 electoral votes) and North Carolina (15 electoral votes) - three key swing states. Also, she is currently losing Wisconsin (10), Michigan (16) and PA (20). Those 46 electoral votes were supposedly "in the bag" according to the pre-voting polls...

You need to win 270 votes to win the election. She gave away 46 and then lost 62 votes. That's how she's losing (already lost) this election.
 
BBC is discussing the role that Bernie Sanders may have had in possibly splitting some votes in vulnerable states even though he's not on the ticket. I think that's hogwash. This lies squarely on the shoulders of democrats by not putting forward someone more popular than Hillary.
 
I think there are a lot of uncomfortable truths that people have to face.

There's obviously a huge disenfranchised population of white, deeply conservative, religious, non-college-educated people living in the rural areas of America. Their values and their way of life are under-represented by the media and they get regularly shouted down by the vocal minority living in cities on the coasts of the country. They don't bother posting status updates, sharing memes, or changing Facebook profile pictures. They chose to voice their opinion in the only way that really matters: at the voting stations.

The media grossly misrepresents the true face of the country. The newspapers and TV stations are run by the same shouty types of people in the cities on the coasts and they only broadcast what the shouty minority wants to hear. It's a big circle-jerk and now they're all standing around with their mouths open wondering how the hell this happened.

Both the DNC and GOP didn't offer this disenfranchised silent majority a viable option for change. They were going to be no better off with a Hillary or a Ryan in the White House. Trump, as a political outsider, represented the most viable option for actual change. At the very least, it would be a big F-U to both Washington and the shouty minority that if life only sucked for them before, it would suck for everyone now.

This election is a wake-up call for everyone. The country is divided and you don't fix it by shouting down the obviously larger segment of the population. You do it by having a dialogue. Which means more listening and less shouting.

BTW, if I was an American, I would be a Democrat. And I am a liberal.
 
Last edited:
The angry white man vote is what got Brexit in. When that happened I worried the same thing would happen in the US. Wonder what will happen to the $CDN.
 
Wonder what will happen to the $CDN.

In our position, I'm watching this with great interest. USD/CAD forex has remained the same throughout the entire election. However, both are falling lockstep against the Euro. It seems the fate of the Loonie is tied to the Greenback, which as their largest trading partner shouldn't affect too many Canadians.

Unless they are traveling to other places than the US... :(
 
I think there are a lot of uncomfortable truths that people have to face.

There's obviously a huge disenfranchised population of white, deeply conservative, religious, non-college-educated people living in the rural areas of America. Their values and their way of life are under-represented by the media and they get regularly shouted down by the vocal minority living in cities on the coasts of the country. They don't bother posting status updates, sharing memes, or changing Facebook profile pictures. They chose to voice their opinion in the only way that really matters: at the voting stations.

The media grossly misrepresents the true face of the country. The newspapers and TV stations are run by the same shouty types of people in the cities on the coasts and they only broadcast what the shouty minority wants to hear. It's a big circle-jerk and now they're all standing around with their mouths open wondering how the hell this happened.

Both the DNC and GOP didn't offer this disenfranchised silent majority a viable option for change. They were going to be no better off with a Hillary or a Ryan in the White House. Trump, as a political outsider, represented the most viable option for actual change. At the very least, it would be a big F-U to both Washington and the shouty minority that if life only sucked for them before, it would suck for everyone now.

This election is a wake-up call for everyone. The country is divided and you don't fix it by shouting down the obviously larger segment of the population. You do it by having a dialogue. Which means more listening and less shouting.

BTW, if I was an American, I would be a Democrat. And I am a liberal.

Very well said
 
Well, lets start a tally of all the batshit crazy promises he made that quietly go away now, or that he tries to do but gets stonewalled because..well, they're batshit crazy and/or simply not realistic. I think his own party is going to stand in his way with a lot of it.

I think the **** is going to hit the fan when markets open today, and if he starts a trade war that ends up blowing up in his face it's going to take a long long time to undo the damage.

There's no choice now except to hope for the best, but for anyone who actually looked behind the rhetoric of the race and spent any time looking at his policies (or lack thereof in many cases), well, it's hard to not question the path ahead.

It's gonna be an interesting next 4 years.
 
Well, lets start a tally of all the batshit crazy promises he made that quietly go away now, or that he tries to do but gets stonewalled because..well, they're batshit crazy and/or simply not realistic. I think his own party is going to stand in his way with a lot of it.

I think the **** is going to hit the fan when markets open today, and if he starts a trade war that ends up blowing up in his face it's going to take a long long time to undo the damage.

There's no choice now except to hope for the best, but for anyone who actually looked behind the rhetoric of the race and spent any time looking at his policies (or lack thereof in many cases), well, it's hard to not question the path ahead.

It's gonna be an interesting next 4 years.

Spoken like a politician.
 
Back
Top Bottom