Johnson Weld on CNN town meeting Weds nite is their best chance of qualifying.
Beyond that, their ticket is likely relegated to asterisk status.
Jill Stein should call Nader for guidance.
As to Trump building consensus within Congress, be prepared for incessant Executive Orders.
You're Fired is not a sustainable strategy. The only 'firing' we'd likely see would be from Iran or Korea.
brownman wrote:Johnson Weld on CNN town meeting Weds nite is their best chance of qualifying.
Beyond that, their ticket is likely relegated to asterisk status.
Jill Stein should call Nader for guidance.
As to Trump building consensus within Congress, be prepared for incessant Executive Orders. right now executive orders have the consent of enough people in congress not to be overturned,und fortunately... trumps platform is pretty middle even somewhat left in places, I see those as attracting enough people from across the aisle to pass, esp w trump using the bully pulpit as effectively as he does...he issues EO's outside the realm of his platform I'd expect to see a lot of opposition from both sides....EO's consistent with his platform still aren't the way I like to see things done and I wont; be happy if they are BUT it does seem the precedent has been set to abuse the scope of the EO and those in power are quick to adopt the transgression of the previous power when it suits their needs...something I've been cautioning against for a long time ie the slippery slope precedent...
You're Fired is not a sustainable strategy. The only 'firing' we'd likely see would be from Iran or Korea.yeah that's gonna happen
99 days and counting ..
I don;t expect a trump administration to exploit the machinations of political office anywhere near as often or as effectively as clinton who knows every trick in the book and has people embedded everywhere to help facilitate that exploitation...
never hillary....
mach es sehr schnell
'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
As it stands right now, I don't expect to see a Trump administration. Designating Pence was easy. Who would agree to serve a Cabinet role? Trump's ground attack is weak, and his 'air' attack has lost it's potency ... he's back-peddling on all his original cornerstone positions. Stirring up endless controversy via the airwaves and continuing to offer opaque, vile rhetoric was the vehicle he rode to Cleveland. Polls mean little once the electorate enters a voting booth.
The loyalists in this election are in base camp with Sir Edmund and Norgay.
In an unconventional year, and given the current political climate, anything can happen.
If Johnson/Weld can make 15% with little or no airtime whatsoever, can they achieve 30% with some debate exposure?
When that happens, the calculus changes considerably. Trump likely loses in a 3 way race. http://thefederalist.com/2016/05/16/the ... residency/
Watch for the meltdown debate moment .. it's just weeks away.
brownman wrote:As it stands right now, I don't expect to see a Trump administration. Designating Pence was easy. Who would agree to serve a Cabinet role? Trump's ground attack is weak, and his 'air' attack has lost it's potency ... he's back-peddling on all his original cornerstone positions. Stirring up endless controversy via the airwaves and continuing to offer opaque, vile rhetoric was the vehicle he rode to Cleveland. Polls mean little once the electorate enters a voting booth.
The loyalists in this election are in base camp with Sir Edmund and Norgay.
In an unconventional year, and given the current political climate, anything can happen. right, anything, like a guy w 7% having a better shot then trump?.sounds pretty far-fetched to me....
If Johnson/Weld can make 15% with little or no airtime whatsoever, can they achieve 30% with some debate exposure?about 7% right now..
When that happens, the calculus changes considerably. Trump likely loses in a 3 way race. http://thefederalist.com/2016/05/16/the ... residency/
Watch for the meltdown debate moment .. it's just weeks away.
if hillary is your "guy" then that's an ideal scenario....otherwise not so much....either way its nothing but conjecture....I'll agree the deck is stacked against trump ( or any non dem candidate) and if the electorate isn't intelligent enough ( and it very well may not be) then we'll become a perpetually failing nanny state consumed by it's own self centered stupidity...if we aren't there already....
mach es sehr schnell
'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
brownman wrote:As it stands right now, I don't expect to see a Trump administration. Designating Pence was easy. Who would agree to serve a Cabinet role?
What .. with blasting McCain and Paul Ryan ... people will be lining up to serve under Trump
brownman wrote:As it stands right now, I don't expect to see a Trump administration. Designating Pence was easy. Who would agree to serve a Cabinet role?
What .. with blasting McCain and Paul Ryan ... people will be lining up to serve under Trump
hillary supporters:
where do you get your news? the daily show? samantha bee? he said he doesn't support mccain because of his failure on veterans affairs and wasn't "there yet" with ryan... that's blasting? if that's your understanding of it there's no wondering why we're in the predicament we are in now...
so in your opinion THOSE are huge disqualifiers while the DNC scandal, clinton foundation, email scandal, benghazi scandal etc are all irrelevant? seems the media ( dem propaganda arm) has it's hold on you...hard to fight the pervasive propaganda of the left for sure...always an uphill battle ( and often a losing one) vs embedded corruption but it's still necessary...
mach es sehr schnell
'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
madhatter wrote:so in your opinion THOSE are huge disqualifiers while the DNC scandal, clinton foundation, email scandal, benghazi scandal etc are all irrelevant? seems the media ( dem propaganda arm) has it's hold on you...hard to fight the pervasive propaganda of the left for sure...always an uphill battle ( and often a losing one) vs embedded corruption but it's still necessary...
Why does it have to be one or the other? I don't care for either of them. Clinton is a corrupt, lying, disingenuous person and Trump is an inarticulate, knee-jerk reaction, say what ever is on his mind, ungraceful imbecile. Can't I dislike both of them?
I won't vote for either of them. Hell, Trump isn't even a conservative despite being the parties candidate. Reagan is rolling over in his grave.
madhatter wrote:so in your opinion THOSE are huge disqualifiers while the DNC scandal, clinton foundation, email scandal, benghazi scandal etc are all irrelevant? seems the media ( dem propaganda arm) has it's hold on you...hard to fight the pervasive propaganda of the left for sure...always an uphill battle ( and often a losing one) vs embedded corruption but it's still necessary...
Why does it have to be one or the other? cuz ONE of them WILL be president... I don't care for either of them. Clinton is a corrupt, lying,FACTS disingenuous person and Trump is an inarticulate, knee-jerk reaction, say what ever is on his mind, ungraceful imbecile. personal opinion Can't I dislike both of them? yes of course, but one will still be the next president...
I won't vote for either of them. Hell, Trump isn't even a conservative despite being the parties candidate. Reagan is rolling over in his grave.
you can hate em both but at least be objective about it... yer ready to hang trump at every request from the media...for what calling out khan man? failing to make a PC response when offered the purple heart from a vet? I'm not seeing where any of these largely irrelevant "faux pas" are anywhere near as reprehensible ( or disqualifying) as the absolute corruption of the clintons...
mach es sehr schnell
'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
madhatter wrote:so in your opinion THOSE are huge disqualifiers while the DNC scandal, clinton foundation, email scandal, benghazi scandal etc are all irrelevant? seems the media ( dem propaganda arm) has it's hold on you...hard to fight the pervasive propaganda of the left for sure...always an uphill battle ( and often a losing one) vs embedded corruption but it's still necessary...
Why does it have to be one or the other? cuz ONE of them WILL be president... I don't care for either of them. Clinton is a corrupt, lying,FACTS disingenuous person and Trump is an inarticulate, knee-jerk reaction, say what ever is on his mind, ungraceful imbecile. personal opinion Can't I dislike both of them? yes of course, but one will still be the next president...
I won't vote for either of them. Hell, Trump isn't even a conservative despite being the parties candidate. Reagan is rolling over in his grave.
you can hate em both but at least be objective about it... yer ready to hang trump at every request from the media...for what calling out khan man? failing to make a PC response when offered the purple heart from a vet? I'm not seeing where any of these largely irrelevant "faux pas" are anywhere near as reprehensible ( or disqualifying) as the absolute corruption of the clintons...
You are his base. Of course you think that. Millions of others do not. He needs some of their vote. Continuing to double down is a bad strategy unless there is some seriously damaging information on Clinton yet to come that even the left can't ignore.
madhatter wrote:so in your opinion THOSE are huge disqualifiers while the DNC scandal, clinton foundation, email scandal, benghazi scandal etc are all irrelevant? seems the media ( dem propaganda arm) has it's hold on you...hard to fight the pervasive propaganda of the left for sure...always an uphill battle ( and often a losing one) vs embedded corruption but it's still necessary...
Why does it have to be one or the other? cuz ONE of them WILL be president... I don't care for either of them. Clinton is a corrupt, lying,FACTS disingenuous person and Trump is an inarticulate, knee-jerk reaction, say what ever is on his mind, ungraceful imbecile. personal opinion Can't I dislike both of them? yes of course, but one will still be the next president...
I won't vote for either of them. Hell, Trump isn't even a conservative despite being the parties candidate. Reagan is rolling over in his grave.
you can hate em both but at least be objective about it... yer ready to hang trump at every request from the media...for what calling out khan man? failing to make a PC response when offered the purple heart from a vet? I'm not seeing where any of these largely irrelevant "faux pas" are anywhere near as reprehensible ( or disqualifying) as the absolute corruption of the clintons...
You are his base. Of course you think that. Millions of others do not. ya can;t fix stupid... especially willful stupid....the base of the left will believe ANYTHING no matter how preposterous it is...ANYTHING at all that allows them to justify their beliefs....zero integrity.... absolutely zero...kelvin is jealous....He needs some of their vote. Continuing to double down is a bad strategy unless there is some seriously damaging information on Clinton yet to come that even the left can't ignore.
good grief there's NOTHING the left won't ignore, nothing including khans obvious staged and planned attack on trump, his ties to saudi arabia, sharia law, muslim immigration, eb5 fraud, ties to clinton etc... nope trump is the bad guy he responded to a strawman attack...sorry but when you enter your son into the political arena as a pawn you've given up any "protected status" you may have had...not hillary and the DNC's clear and blatant corruption and illegal primary tampering, not clear evidence that she's an absolute liar, not clear evidence that she grossly mishandled classified information... nope trump said he always wanted a purple heart...there is absolutely no end and no bounds to what the left won't ignore, they are of course the ( barely) useful idiots herded like sheep to slaughter...ignore is the root of ignorance and ignorance is the root of the left...
mach es sehr schnell
'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
deadheadskier wrote:Oh, Khan was a staged attack. I'm assuming you think Patricia Smith was a staged attack as well yes?
Or Trump telling the mother to get her baby out of the town hall? Probably a staged attack
The base of the left may believe anything, but there are lot of votes that aren't part of the left that don't think of Trump in very high regard ... these are the people he needs to appeal to in order to win ... not the left, not his base, but all of us in the middle. Right now, he's doing a good job falling on his face.
deadheadskier wrote:Oh, Khan was a staged attack. I'm assuming you think Patricia Smith was a staged attack as well yes?
similar for sure ... the biggest difference was trump had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the death of khans son in 2004 while on active duty vs hillary's direct implication in the death of four americans in banghazi...otherwise yeah same thing....
additionally I didn't see smith's speech but I doubt she had a "prop" constitution handy and a straw man argument trump never made to set afire either...I didn't see anyone in the news or here rebut clintons assertions that smith was a liar, obviously cuz she couched with one of those most venerable platitudes you consider genuine heartfelt responses...again I'll take the straight talker over the purveyor of platitudes and perpetual plausible deniability....
mach es sehr schnell
'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
deadheadskier wrote:Oh, Khan was a staged attack. I'm assuming you think Patricia Smith was a staged attack as well yes?
similar for sure ... the biggest difference was trump had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the death of khans son in 2004 while on active duty vs hillary's direct implication in the death of four americans in banghazi...otherwise yeah same thing....
additionally I didn't see smith's speech but I doubt she had a "prop" constitution handy and a straw man argument trump never made to set afire either...I didn't see anyone in the news or here rebut clintons assertions that smith was a liar, obviously cuz she couched with one of those most venerable platitudes you consider genuine heartfelt responses...again I'll take the straight talker over the purveyor of platitudes and perpetual plausible deniability....
The whole position of the DNC in placing Khan was to demonstrate you can have a blanket policy to ban muslims from coming to the US. While this characterization may have been wrong or misinterpreted by what Trump said ... he made things worse by basically slamming the Khan family. He took the bait even better than the DNC imagined. I can only imagine a vets reaction hear Trump double down saying he made sacrifices too in building the Trump Organization
Trump's ground attack is weak, and his 'air' attack has lost it's potency ... he's back-peddling on all his original cornerstone positions. Stirring up endless controversy via the airwaves and continuing to offer opaque, vile rhetoric was the vehicle he rode to Cleveland. Polls mean little once the electorate enters a voting booth. 
