|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On May 04 2016 10:11 LegalLord wrote:
Clinton, for all her weakness, is a hell of a lot stronger of a candidate than any of the Republicans that Trump steamrolled. She will be able to appeal to the voters she needs, hopefully without going for a suicide "attack Trump" strategy that has failed pretty badly so far by everyone who has tried it.
When you look back at the Republican race, it's mind blowing that with 17 candidates, that you could have such a lack of strong candidates. What it showed me was a lack of strength in the GOP, not a overflow of good ones. Everyone jumped in because they thought this was the year a lesser known won.
|
On May 04 2016 10:19 Hexe wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2016 10:07 Adreme wrote:On May 04 2016 10:03 Hexe wrote:
Trump is going to devour Clinton, because no one has figured out how to beat him. She will just attack and belittle him like the conservatives tried, and look how well that did. Or she can just let him talk and dig his own grave. He won a republican party that basically enjoys his bigotry and sexism but the country as a whole despises him for it and its why he is losing by a ton in every election poll and he cant get out of his own way. I doubt this. The way politicians speak, comes across as fake, and next to Trump its amplified. Clinton will look pathetic, because she sounds like a politician.
You may not believe it, but there are still some voters, even in the US, who want a politician and not a clown as president.
|
On May 04 2016 10:14 FiWiFaKi wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2016 10:11 LegalLord wrote:
Clinton, for all her weakness, is a hell of a lot stronger of a candidate than any of the Republicans that Trump steamrolled. She will be able to appeal to the voters she needs, hopefully without going for a suicide "attack Trump" strategy that has failed pretty badly so far by everyone who has tried it. I agree it will be a hell of a battle, I think Trump will do much better than before because people have actually spent some time trying to educate themselves on Trump instead of blindly following the media, but like you said, Hillary is the most seasoned and experienced person he will have to go up against. That said, stylistically, I think Trump is a person that is particularly good at breaking down people like Hillary, so we will see. I think at the moment, if I'm being completely unbiased, I'd give Hillary a 70% chance of winning, though my heart tells me Trump will take this.
You remember that 11.5 hour Benghazi hearing where the best Republican congressmen ended the night covered in sweat with nothing to show for the only hope they had of stopping Madam President? I have full faith in Hillary's ability to weather a storm of false and preposterous slurs by Trump. Weathering rubbish attacks by wingnuts is her strongest quality.
Always good for a laugh, especially tonight:
![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CMDtSgMUsAENxxu.jpg:large)
|
On May 04 2016 10:24 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2016 10:11 LegalLord wrote:
Clinton, for all her weakness, is a hell of a lot stronger of a candidate than any of the Republicans that Trump steamrolled. She will be able to appeal to the voters she needs, hopefully without going for a suicide "attack Trump" strategy that has failed pretty badly so far by everyone who has tried it. When you look back at the Republican race, it's mind blowing that with 17 candidates, that you could have such a lack of strong candidates. What it showed me was a lack of strength in the GOP, not a overflow of good ones. Everyone jumped in because they thought this was the year a lesser known won.
Who would feel like running against Clinton's machine? What democrat has the army Clinton does? Wait it out, run against the next democrat. This is the strongest democrats have been in a while. Obama's ratings are high too.
|
Meanwhile, no GOP establishment candidates were defeated in their primaries. Contrast to 2010. Trump isn't the Tea Party. This is something else.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
I do wonder how Sanders is going to influence the campaign at this point. Obviously he isn't going to win at this point, but he has a pretty reasonable argument in that he's consistently doing well with youth and with independents. He has a good argument for having a somewhat important for playing a part in the rest of this campaign, and for Hillary supporting his positions. Sanders and Clinton aren't hard to reconcile ideologically, they're not all that far apart.
I will also say that Trump deserves a lot of credit for his ability to play the media to his favor. He's done a remarkable job of that this entire election cycle to his tremendous benefit, and ran one of the most money-efficient campaigns in post-CU history.
|
This is where Trump can destroy Clinton by tapping into the Libertarian mood.
|
On May 04 2016 10:24 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2016 10:11 LegalLord wrote:
Clinton, for all her weakness, is a hell of a lot stronger of a candidate than any of the Republicans that Trump steamrolled. She will be able to appeal to the voters she needs, hopefully without going for a suicide "attack Trump" strategy that has failed pretty badly so far by everyone who has tried it. When you look back at the Republican race, it's mind blowing that with 17 candidates, that you could have such a lack of strong candidates. What it showed me was a lack of strength in the GOP, not a overflow of good ones. Everyone jumped in because they thought this was the year a lesser known won.
Well the saner the were the earlier they were sorted out, I think it's more of a problem of the base that they have created over the last 8 years of Obama
|
On May 04 2016 10:25 mahrgell wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2016 10:19 Hexe wrote:On May 04 2016 10:07 Adreme wrote:On May 04 2016 10:03 Hexe wrote:
Trump is going to devour Clinton, because no one has figured out how to beat him. She will just attack and belittle him like the conservatives tried, and look how well that did. Or she can just let him talk and dig his own grave. He won a republican party that basically enjoys his bigotry and sexism but the country as a whole despises him for it and its why he is losing by a ton in every election poll and he cant get out of his own way. I doubt this. The way politicians speak, comes across as fake, and next to Trump its amplified. Clinton will look pathetic, because she sounds like a politician. You may not believe it, but there are still some voters, even in the US, who want a politician and not a clown as president.
I just hope Hillary Clinton pulls that approach, Trump will be a shoe in.
|
Turns out the best way to get the nomination is actually to be even more vapid, centrist, and vague on substantive policy than Mitt Romney, just while constantly spewing B.S. At least if Trump loses, the right-wing pundits dismissing him from the party might be right for once.
|
I mean really. You think 4 years ago people were talking about all the strong candidates that weren't running. 4 years later they're all terribad shitlords. The bush in the race was probably the parties best chance but he even turned out to be as good of a candidate as an actual bush.
It was a wide open race to anyone who could shut trump up. and no one had the balls to do it.
|
On May 04 2016 10:27 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
This is where Trump can destroy Clinton by tapping into the Libertarian mood.
Libertarians are free traders to the core. I don't even think Trump's waffling on social issues could bring any of them in.
I assume you mean libertarians cause you capitalized it.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On May 04 2016 10:24 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2016 10:11 LegalLord wrote:
Clinton, for all her weakness, is a hell of a lot stronger of a candidate than any of the Republicans that Trump steamrolled. She will be able to appeal to the voters she needs, hopefully without going for a suicide "attack Trump" strategy that has failed pretty badly so far by everyone who has tried it. When you look back at the Republican race, it's mind blowing that with 17 candidates, that you could have such a lack of strong candidates. What it showed me was a lack of strength in the GOP, not a overflow of good ones. Everyone jumped in because they thought this was the year a lesser known won.
Having 17 candidates is a sign of weakness. It means there's no clear favorite that the party supports and that the voters would vote for. Jeb was their favorite but I think we can see how well that worked out.
|
On May 04 2016 10:19 Hexe wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2016 10:07 Adreme wrote:On May 04 2016 10:03 Hexe wrote:
Trump is going to devour Clinton, because no one has figured out how to beat him. She will just attack and belittle him like the conservatives tried, and look how well that did. Or she can just let him talk and dig his own grave. He won a republican party that basically enjoys his bigotry and sexism but the country as a whole despises him for it and its why he is losing by a ton in every election poll and he cant get out of his own way. I doubt this. The way politicians speak, comes across as fake, and next to Trump its amplified. Clinton will look pathetic, because she sounds like a politician.
He sounds like a sexist bigot because of the things he says. No matter how political you sound or fake the country as a whole despises the fact that he is a arrogant bigot whose words make no sense and how when he talks policy he can contradict himself by the end of his own sentences. People are smart enough to see past that and its why he is losing nationally and unlike past candidates he cant just pretend he didnt say all of these things because he wanted the cameras on him at all times so he cant walk it back.
|
On May 04 2016 10:31 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2016 10:27 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
This is where Trump can destroy Clinton by tapping into the Libertarian mood. Libertarians are free traders to the core. I don't even think Trump's waffling on social issues could bring any of them in. I assume you mean libertarians cause you capitalized it.
But not subsidies and paying for majority of NATO, and Policing the globe.
|
On May 04 2016 10:27 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
This is where Trump can destroy Clinton by tapping into the Libertarian mood.
Dyed-in-the-wool libertarians support Ron Paul, Gary Johnson or Rand Paul, and I can't imagine they have any good words for Trump. He could practically be the villain of an Ayn Rand novel if she had decided to even have a businessman villain.
They also do not care about voting for someone that loses out of principle, which is honestly admirable of them. So they'll probably just vote libertarian.
Only the LINOS (hehe) would drink the Trump kool-aid, I think.
|
The 17 candidates was not a sign of weakness, nor is Trump beating them. They all wanted to run vs Hillary, is the thing. He got to an early lead by being bombastic. For GOP voters (this was a GOP primary) there were great candidates. Walker, Rubio, etc. Even Bush had a record in Florida that voters liked. Of course by Dem standards they all sucked, but that's perspective. You just have to give Trump credit for picking the perfect time to be himself.
And Trump lost "very conservative" and "goes to church at least once a week." So basically the same as always.
|
I wonder how the Stones would feel about Start Me Up being used as a campaign song after Trump's speech.
|
You meant to say the "Libertine" vote.
|
On May 04 2016 10:33 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2016 10:31 Introvert wrote:On May 04 2016 10:27 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
This is where Trump can destroy Clinton by tapping into the Libertarian mood. Libertarians are free traders to the core. I don't even think Trump's waffling on social issues could bring any of them in. I assume you mean libertarians cause you capitalized it. But not subsidies and paying for majority of NATO, and Policing the globe.
Economics is the thing to many libertarians. Not happening.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
