OMG Politics, I'm over it already.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Chad made a reasonable point about the number of GOP candidates. However let's say there was a third of the amount there was from the get go.

More or less the top 5 (+ Bush lol). A variety pack- 3 regular crazy, and 3 extra crispy crazy:

Bush
Rubio
Kasich
Carson
Cruz
Trump

Even if that was the sole lineup, I imagine Trump still would've sealed it.

:shrug:
 
sonik said:
Count Cruz well definitely be running again in 2020.
Click to expand...

And get his ass handed to him again. He just can't get it through his head that the majority of people find him smug, insincere, not nearly as intelligent as he thinks he is* (see also Gingrich), and frankly pretty damned creepy.

* In his 2013 fauxlibuster against the ACA, he proved himself unable to failed to grasp the point of Green Eggs & Ham, which hundreds of millions of 5 year olds have understood for fifty years: don't reflexively refuse to try new things, because you just might end up liking them.
 
Beyer160 said:
You can't assume that all non-Trump votes would have automatically gone to a single challenger, though- he got 45% of the vote, all he'd have needed to do was get 6% of the rest (I know it's not that simple, but you get the idea).
Click to expand...

What Trump did was similar to Obama in 2008, he got a lot of folks that normally don't vote to go out and vote.

With Obama it was about the idea of being a part of something that people have been excluded from. Finally having that voice in our nation's top office.

With Trump it was about finally being able to be openly hateful after being oppressed by "political correctness" that has suppressed these shitheads from being comfortable being unfettered in their hatred, fear, and ignorance. These twits are too dense to realize that our nation moved away from this because it makes you look hateful, afraid, and stupid. One of the ideas of the founders was that we wouldn't be this way (despite buying and selling and suppressing humans based on their melanin levels).

I've never come anywhere near not wanting to even look a person, let alone talk to them, based on who they are supporting during an election. Trump has changed that.
 
14449866_312166735823066_7086429293904399956_n.jpg


Even just the sound of him is really quite atrocious!
 
sonik said:
Chad made a reasonable point about the number of GOP candidates. However let's say there was a third of the amount there was from the get go.

More or less the top 5 (+ Bush lol). A variety pack- 3 regular crazy, and 3 extra crispy crazy:

Bush
Rubio
Kasich
Carson
Cruz
Trump

Even if that was the sole lineup, I imagine Trump still would've sealed it.

:shrug:
Click to expand...

I think another reason for Trump's success is the fact that he is famous. Let's face it, a ton of folks who vote don't keep up with politics. They have no idea who Kasich or Rubio are. They see Trump and go, I heard him on Howard Stern and The Apprentice. I'm voting for him.
 
Chad said:
I think another reason for Trump's success is the fact that he is famous. Let's face it, a ton of folks who vote don't keep up with politics. They have no idea who Kasich or Rubio are. They see Trump and go, I heard him on Howard Stern and The Apprentice. I'm voting for him.
Click to expand...

Definitely. That works for Hillary too. Not to the extent as Trump, and for different reasons, but I'd say pretty much anyone who was/is going vote in this election knew who she was beforehand.
 
sonik said:
Definitely. That works for Hillary too. Not to the extent as Trump, and for different reasons, but I'd say pretty much anyone who was/is going vote in this election knew who she was beforehand.
Click to expand...

But, a lot of her public persona is tied to FOX's incessant, fact-free screaming about how crooked she and her husband are. So I wouldn't consider that as much of an advantage as Trump's fame. I'll bet if you asked 100 Trump voters why they think Hillary's "crooked," you won't get one coherent answer that has any basis in reality.
 
Beyer160 said:
But, a lot of her public persona is tied to FOX's incessant, fact-free screaming about how crooked she and her husband are. So I wouldn't consider that as much of an advantage as Trump's fame. I'll bet if you asked 100 Trump voters why they think Hillary's "crooked," you won't get one coherent answer that has any basis in reality.
Click to expand...

All publicity is good publicity :thu:

krollshow_206_publizity_cassandra_quits_640x360.jpg
 
sonik said:
Definitely. That works for Hillary too. Not to the extent as Trump, and for different reasons, but I'd say pretty much anyone who was/is going vote in this election knew who she was beforehand.
Click to expand...
unless they just moved here from a gulag in siberia rolleyes1
 
Nobody wants to factor in the possibility that there may be a percentage of HRC voters who are voting for her because she's female?
 
jelloman said:
Nobody wants to factor in the possibility that there may be a percentage of HRC voters who are voting for her because she's female?
Click to expand...

I honestly don't think there is a sizable enough percentage of those voters to really tip the scales. When you spend as long as she has in the political arena you become more of a known entity and most of her support comes from those channels, rather than her gender.
 
jelloman said:
Nobody wants to factor in the possibility that there may be a percentage of HRC voters who are voting for her because she's female?
Click to expand...

I think that's hard to calculate, given the fact that HRC's opponent's campaign has been one long strand of misogyny and anti-feminist rhetoric, combined with support for restricting women's rights.
 
Dogsinotpalc said:
Gotta disagree, for two primary reasons:

1) either while he was running or soon after he took office, Rush Limbaugh started his groundswell. As he ascended to his former height it was HUGELY on the back of Hillary being a "fem-Nazi". He coined a term to express his disgust in her wanting to be active in the political process of the President and the White House. The yuppy-frat mentality of his early listeners ate that shit up and have stuck with it ever since.

2) if you were watching while it was happening the Republicans, led by Newt were on a full-tilt witch hunt to vilify President Clinton. They were going after everything to discredit him, his wife, and any dealings they have ever had. The Clintons were put under a bigger and more powerful microscope than any other President and First family up to that point. Hell, it might have been even bigger than the one on Obama. Almost every politician has skeletons in their closets (not the least of which is Gingrich), but very few have had congressional committees working day and night to find and uncover them.

The GOP and their myriad mouthpieces made a concerted effort to try and expose anything that could be perceived as wrongdoing by the Clintons (not that there hasn't been). The literately were trying to get the President thrown out of office (which many thought impeachment would do, not realizing that it's actually just censuring the President as opposed to something that requires him/her to resign)!

I believe this is when the real agenda change began. Instead of working for the people in way that could help them using "conservative" actions and measures, the goal of the Republicans started to focus more on obstructing any movement that wasn't part of their agenda. With the tea party candidates actually getting into office,we've seen this in all its glory. And even now, so much of the talk during the Republican primaries was about undoing legislation instead of presenting improvements or alternatives, let alone any new ideas that would benefit the country.

Fuck, I did it again...
Click to expand...

Agree. I think the reason they went on their witch hunt was Bill was the first Dem prez after Reagan I think they decided, they had to find something after Reagan and Iran Contra.
 
Bob411 said:
Agree. I think the reason they went on their witch hunt was Bill was the first Dem prez after Reagan I think they decided, they had to find something after Reagan and Iran Contra.
Click to expand...

Agreed, and add a heaping helping of lingering butthurt over the whole Nixon's shitshow. Allow to fester, then whip vigorously until it forms a frothing bloodlust.
 
Kerouac said:
I stayed sober for the debate and statements like that actually left me feeling intoxicated.
Click to expand...
i had to turn the channel after about 20 minutes. i don't think the guy is capable of forming and conveying a single cohesive thought without it turning into a rambling rant.

it's like when someone gets drunk and all the social filters come down. if the thought pops into his head, it immediately comes out his mouth. no thought process at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top