President Donald J. Trump

[GuerrillaUnReal]

Mexican Congresswoman Wants to Ban Internet Memes

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/05/05/mexican-congresswoman-wants-ban-memes/

The MEME WAR rages.

[TigerLily]

Vicente Fox is also apologizing now!

http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-gop-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/05/vicente-fox-apologizes-trump-222842

In Mexico Vicente Fox = George W. And about as well respected

[mikuthing01]

Mexican Congresswoman Wants to Ban Internet Memes

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/05/05/mexican-congresswoman-wants-ban-memes/

The MEME WAR rages.

[Lt.Uhura]

He was asking me a theoretical, or just a question in theory, and I talked about it only from that standpoint. Of course not. And that was done, he said, you know, I guess it was theoretically, but he was asking me a rhetorical question, and I gave an answer. And by the way, people thought from an academic standpoint, and asked rhetorically, people said that answer was an unbelievable academic answer. But of course not, and I said that afterwards. Everybody understands that. 

--Donald Trump attempting to clarify his previous suggestion that women be punished for having an abortion.

Either Trump is too stupid to adequately articulate his POV, or his 3-4 hours/night of sleep is not working for him.  Either way it's mind-boggling he would even be considered as a POTUS negotiating the future of our country.

Clearly his supporters haven't actually listened to him speak, or they simply zone out after hearing him repeat "I'm going to make America great again!"

[MV/Liberace!]

...the disbelief came from the notion that the GOP was more unified, stronger, better organized, whatever, and would prevent Trump from winning somehow.

only a non republican would have perceived the GOP that way, i think.

The campaign for the Dems, Hillary I assume, should be pretty easy.

i wouldn't be so sure.  the FBI investigation into hillary's email situation hasn't concluded, and when it does there will be blow back, regardless of the ultimate outcome.  to think otherwise is unrealistic.  she's highly compromised as a candidate, particularly as a presidential candidate.  hillary will be facing so many legal unknowns in the coming weeks that, to me, it seems impossible any objective observer could express confidence in her candidacy.

in the context of this email scandal, to imagine hillary receiving classified intel each morning in the oval office... ugh... the very thought upsets my stomach. 

if the united states is a nation of laws, then hillary will be criminally charged.  some very credible people have said good things about the integrity of attorney general loretta lynch, so despite her idiotic positions on certain issues, my gut tells me lynch will apply the law fairly and impartially in this case.  by the book.  if that happens, hillary has a problem.  lynch meets with fbi director comey numerous times per week, she says.  he is directly overseeing the investigation.  that's heavy stuff.

...demographically, I don't believe the R's can win.

if the R nominee were any of the 17 also-rans, i'd have the same expectation.  however, i think a trump candidacy brings with it a new electoral college paradigm.  everything the consultants/talking heads/writers/political class think they know about politics... that shit's out the window this time around.

[chefist]

He was asking me a theoretical, or just a question in theory, and I talked about it only from that standpoint. Of course not. And that was done, he said, you know, I guess it was theoretically, but he was asking me a rhetorical question, and I gave an answer. And by the way, people thought from an academic standpoint, and asked rhetorically, people said that answer was an unbelievable academic answer. But of course not, and I said that afterwards. Everybody understands that.

--Donald Trump attempting to clarify his previous suggestion that women be punished for having an abortion.

Either Trump is too stupid to adequately articulate his POV, or his 3-4 hours/night of sleep is not working for him.  Either way it's mind-boggling he would even be considered as a POTUS negotiating the future of our country.

Clearly his supporters haven't actually listened to him speak, or they simply zone out after hearing him repeat "I'm going to make America great again!"

$366 Billion trade deficit with China this year...looks like all the previous administrations have done a fantastic job!

[GravitySucks]

He was asking me a theoretical, or just a question in theory, and I talked about it only from that standpoint. Of course not. And that was done, he said, you know, I guess it was theoretically, but he was asking me a rhetorical question, and I gave an answer. And by the way, people thought from an academic standpoint, and asked rhetorically, people said that answer was an unbelievable academic answer. But of course not, and I said that afterwards. Everybody understands that.

--Donald Trump attempting to clarify his previous suggestion that women be punished for having an abortion.

Either Trump is too stupid to adequately articulate his POV, or his 3-4 hours/night of sleep is not working for him.  Either way it's mind-boggling he would even be considered as a POTUS negotiating the future of our country.

Clearly his supporters haven't actually listened to him speak, or they simply zone out after hearing him repeat "I'm going to make America great again!"

If you take the emotional key words of abortion and women out of the question Chris Mathews asked, the form of the question was basically "If congress passed a law and someone broke the law, should they be punished?"

What is the correct answer to that question?

It was a theoretical question used to set up and embarrass Trump. Anyone that considers Chis Mathews an ethical journalist must have really gotten a tingle up their leg when he asked that question.

[VtaGeezer]

Why would you believe he's sincere about keeping jobs in the U.S. when his own business model depends on cheap foreign labor.  His daughter too.  Evidently, another benefit of using overseas labor is not having to abide by U.S. safety standards.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/07/ivanka-trump-scarves-made-in-china-recalled.html

This is a weak argument.  Trump is still running businesses, not social programs.  His ties etc are intended to be profitable and that's virtually impossible with US manufactured consumer goods.  To make them in the US under the current trade conditions would be stupidity.  Martyrdom is not a good business plan.

[Lt.Uhura]

If you take the emotional key words of abortion and women out of the question Chris Mathews asked, the form of the question was basically "If congress passed a law and someone broke the law, should they be punished?"

What is the correct answer to that question?

It was a theoretical question used to set up and embarrass Trump. Anyone that considers Chis Mathews an ethical journalist must have really gotten a tingle up their leg when he asked that question.

If Trump is so easily flummoxed by a theoretical question from a U.S. journalist, imagine his babbling incoherence in response to serious issues with world leaders.  Putin is salivating.

[Billy Joe Mulgreavey]

If Trump is so easily flummoxed by a theoretical question from a U.S. journalist, imagine his babbling incoherence in response to serious issues with world leaders.  Putin is salivating.

The guy who takes his shirt off for a photo op?  All posturing.  Trump can posture with the best of them. 

[GravitySucks]

If Trump is so easily flummoxed by a theoretical question from a U.S. journalist, imagine his babbling incoherence in response to serious issues with world leaders.  Putin is salivating.

I see you still have that whole "Tingle moving up your leg" thing going on.

[Lt.Uhura]

The guy who takes his shirt off for a photo op?  All posturing.  Trump can posture with the best of them.

Think again if all you see in Putin is an innocuous poser.

[Billy Joe Mulgreavey]

Think again if all you see in Putin is an innocuous poser.

Good point.  I wouldn't underestimate Trump either. 

[21st Century Man]

lol. 21. I am so glad I hang out here. Such an education for me. All my evil progressive liberal democrat friends, including me, have been saying the exact opposite forever.
But I have to say the cognitive dissonance between the "factions" depresses me.

TL, no offense.  I would not say that the actual Democratic candidates play dirty much of the time.  Mainly it comes from their allies in the news media.  It is weird how we perceive things from our own biases.

[starrmtn001]

That isn't the BG way!! How very dare you.

Reported.

But it is YP, it is!  Oh wow!  Look down there . . . SHINY!

[starrmtn001]

But it is YP, it is!  Oh wow!  Look down there . . . SHINY!

NO!  It's NOT Curtis in drag.  STOP THAT!

[GuerrillaUnReal]

Trump likes tacos. I like tacos. That's why he's my President.

[RealCool Daddio]

Trump likes tacos. I like tacos. That's why he's my President.

What is your position on well done steaks?

[GuerrillaUnReal]

What is your position on well done steaks?

I couldn't say this in the south because I'd be lynched but I'm a medium-well guy.

[starrmtn001]

Trump likes tacos. I like tacos. That's why he's my President.

He's looking at a delicious "Taco Bowl" and says; "I love Hispanics!"


Is there a subliminal message in there somewhere?

[GravitySucks]

He's looking at a delicious "Taco Bowl" and says; "I love Hispanics!"


Is there a subliminal message in there somewhere?

No, I think he only loves them for lunch.

[chefist]

What is your position on well done steaks?

Prison...

[Lt.Uhura]

This is a weak argument.  Trump is still running businesses, not social programs.  His ties etc are intended to be profitable and that's virtually impossible with US manufactured consumer goods.  To make them in the US under the current trade conditions would be stupidity.  Martyrdom is not a good business plan.

True. And neither is patriotism.  Fittingly, even the symbol of our national pride is made in China.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, nearly $4 million worth of imported American flags are sold in the United States each year. The vast majority of this amount ($3.6 million) is for U.S. flags made in China.

http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20150527005955/en/‘Made-USA’-Buying-American-Flag

[starrmtn001]

No, I think he only loves them for lunch.

Soooo . . . not subliminal?  Got it.

[VtaGeezer]

If you take the emotional key words of abortion and women out of the question Chris Mathews asked, the form of the question was basically "If congress passed a law and someone broke the law, should they be punished?"

I agree. Unlike the career pols, Trump hasn't spent a lifetime being interviewed on political issues, hasn't developed and rehearsed a talking point response to all conceivable media questions. Trump's accessibility and frankness are huge political vulnerabilities.

[starrmtn001]

I agree. Unlike the career pols, Trump hasn't spent a lifetime being interviewed on political issues, hasn't developed and rehearsed a talking point response to all conceivable media questions. Trump's accessibility and frankness are huge political vulnerabilities.

I see that as an advantage, but I don't know squat about politics.  This may, or may not, be to my benefit.

[RealCool Daddio]

only a non republican would have perceived the GOP that way, i think.

This would seem to be true.

i wouldn't be so sure.  the FBI investigation into hillary's email situation hasn't concluded, and when it does there will be blow back, regardless of the ultimate outcome.  to think otherwise is unrealistic.  she's highly compromised as a candidate, particularly as a presidential candidate.  hillary will be facing so many legal unknowns in the coming weeks that, to me, it seems impossible any objective observer could express confidence in her candidacy.

in the context of this email scandal, to imagine hillary receiving classified intel each morning in the oval office... ugh... the very thought upsets my stomach. 

if the united states is a nation of laws, then hillary will be criminally charged.  some very credible people have said good things about the integrity of attorney general loretta lynch, so despite her idiotic positions on certain issues, my gut tells me lynch will apply the law fairly and impartially in this case.  by the book.  if that happens, hillary has a problem.  lynch meets with fbi director comey numerous times per week, she says.  he is directly overseeing the investigation.  that's heavy stuff.

I don't disagree, but this would fall into the category of outside events affecting the campaign.  A terror attack on US soil (Vishnu forbid) would radically change the landscape in Trump's favor as well.  Everyone seems to forget that any number of things could surface about Trump to decimate his numbers, too.  Tax issues, paying for abortions for mistresses, whatever.

if the R nominee were any of the 17 also-rans, i'd have the same expectation.  however, i think a trump candidacy brings with it a new electoral college paradigm.  everything the consultants/talking heads/writers/political class think they know about politics... that shit's out the window this time around.

I need a better explanation of how Trump radically changes the electoral college paradigm than "shit's out the window this time" - not demanding one from you, MV, just in general.  So far, all I have seen is the shit being out the window with respect to the Republican primary. The great disruption of Trump really hasn't disrupted the Democrat campaign in any major way.  He has blown up the Republican party.  I still don't see how that does anything but help the Dems. Seems to be business as usual for Democrats, and they will be more than happy to take 2012's numbers again as is.  The added bonus is that they get to hold up Trump as perfectly fitting the caricature of an "angry white man", which will surely help mobilize the base.

[MV/Liberace!]

...all that traditional attributes that were considered virtues in the public sphere are being disregarded by Trump supporters.

that's because in the US and most other western nations, the "traditional attributes" of politicians includes support for growing the debt, indifference to or outright support of illegal immigration, support for harmful trade deals, and support for endless foreign wars that breed only expense and chaos.  despite the familiar complaint about trump's lack of specificity, those are very specific issues that a large chunk of the electorate really does care about... and along comes trump.

If you point out Trump's lies, they giggle and say "oh, that's just Trump being Trump".

the reason this critique doesn't peel trump's supporters away is that it doesn't outweigh their belief that he is the only candidate who can and will address those four core issues: debt, immigration, trade, and military misuse.  they see his inaccurate statements or other liabilities as a secondary concern relative to, they believe, the once in a lifetime opportunity to fix some huge problems that remain neglected by traditional politicians of both parties.  they believe the nation's decline will irreversibly continue if those issues aren't resolved, so it doesn't matter to them that the messenger is flawed.

Trump even admitted himself that his support is so deeply rooted that there was almost nothing he could do, including murder, that would dissuade them from their support.

did you really hear that and perceive it to be a serious statement of unfortunate fact?  because when i heard it i chuckled, as did lots of people.  i chuckled because it painted a funny image, but i also chuckled because i knew how it would upset those who don't like him.  he's the master troll.  anyway, that statement, to me, just sounded like a guy (successfully) working a room, being himself.   but, at its root, that's what much of this is all about: personal impressions.  there's nothing i'm going to say that will convince you to hear that statement the way i did or to appreciate trump's shtick as i do.

[starrmtn001]

"California's 'Big One' is locked, loaded, and ready to roll."  Starts at about 3:54:23.  After that, a story on "Freeway Skateboarders."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIzdu3B9-04

[MV/Liberace!]

I need a better explanation of how Trump radically changes the electoral college paradigm than "shit's out the window this time" - not demanding one from you, MV, just in general.

every poll shows significant numbers of democrats crossing over to vote for trump in primaries.  i know there are numerous theories as to why that's happening, including sabotage, but i think the simplest explanation is probably the most likely:  they support him.  trump is not a conservative ideologue, and that's not what he's selling.  he's selling nationalism and he seems like someone who knows how to get things done.  i think that's going to resonate with lots of people in states that traditionally aren't in play for a republican candidate, but since i'm essentially predicting the future here, it's fair to note that i could be completely wrong.  it's just that i think a nationalist pitch resonates with voters in ways that a traditional republican pitch wouldn't.  in former industrial states like pennsylvania, ohio, and michigan, i think trump's chances far outpace a typical republican prattling on with 25 year old talking points about "reducing the size of government and putting god back in our lives."

The great disruption of Trump really hasn't disrupted the Democrat campaign in any major way.  He has blown up the Republican party.

trump didn't create the disruption.  he's its beneficiary.  your statement implies there's no disruption in the democratic primaries, but there is and similarly, bernie sanders didn't create it.  he's it's beneficiary.  if hillary somehow escapes criminal charges and is her party's candidate, i just don't believe sanders' supporters are going to dependably gather to kiss hillary's ring.  sure, many of them will, but a measurable number won't.  what's happening right now in the democrat primaries wasn't supposed to happen.  i think the electoral map is going to surprise lots of people in november.