2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wow. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...-vote-for-trump-if-clinton-picks-warren-as-vp

"We need to be more center. This country needs solutions, right? We don’t need headline porn,” Cuban said, dismissing efforts at “playing to progressives” or “playing to conservatives.”

“Elizabeth Warren has accomplished a lot in her life, but taking it that far left would be a huge mistake, any more than if Donald Trump went the other way. We need to come center,” he added…

Cuban predicted that Clinton will win the November election in “a landslide” because supporters of Bernie Sanders will eventually support her over Trump.

-----

I get his points and partially agree. However, going left isn't worse off than Trump going the other way. Trump could truly crush the country with his erratic behaviors and arrogance.
 
Genius, the best genius, lots of people are telling me, with the best words.

BYn8rVv.jpg
 
sun_tzu said:
he is just a lot better at twitter than Clinton - sadly I fear he is going to make it a pretty close run thing mainly due to using social media to set the agenda
Click to expand...

Is he really? It took him two hours to come up with this, and it's pretty lame and unoriginal as it is. By then, the fact that his ass had been burned to a crisp on his favorite tool of communication was all over the internet.

This isn't really a case of him being that good at Twitter as opposed to no one really going after him on it yet. I mean, look at Elizabeth Warren. She's only done that to him a few times and has already got under his doughy orange skin big time. Imagine if as VP candidate she went full attack dog on him. He'd spend all the time he should be campaigning trying to come up with ways to online replies. :lol:
 
Chekhov said:
Is he really? It took him two hours to come up with this, and it's pretty lame and unoriginal as it is. By then, the fact that his ass had been burned to a crisp on his favorite tool of communication was all over the internet.

This isn't really a case of him being that good at Twitter as opposed to no one really going after him on it yet. I mean, look at Elizabeth Warren. She's only done that to him a few times and has already got under his doughy orange skin big time. Imagine if as VP candidate she went full attack dog on him. He'd spend all the time he should be campaigning trying to come up with ways to online replies. :lol:
Click to expand...
If warren is vp he will be tweeting this interview pretty much non stop
 
Raoul said:
Sort of likes its already been posted numerous times in this thread.
Click to expand...
Pretty much.... Repetition is something he seems to have mastered.... Lyin Ted, crooked Hillary, build a wall, make murica great again.
I wouldn't expect him to change and if warren is the vp pick he is not going to pass up on the opportunity to quote / link sections of the interview at every opportunity... He may even run it as an ad?
 
sun_tzu said:
Pretty much.... Repetition is something he seems to have mastered.... Lyin Ted, crooked Hillary, build a wall, make murica great again.
I wouldn't expect him to change and if warren is the vp pick he is not going to pass up on the opportunity to quote / link sections of the interview at every opportunity... He may even run it as an ad?
Click to expand...

Warren would be a tremendous asset to Hillary as she's far more popular than her among Dems. They would probably squash Trump by 150 electoral votes.

Apparently Liz visited Hillary's house yesterday to strategize how to make Trump look small and insignificant.
 
Raoul said:
Warren would be a tremendous asset to Hillary as she's far more popular than her among Dems. They would probably squash Trump by 150 electoral votes.

Apparently Liz visited Hillary's house yesterday to strategize how to make Trump look small and insignificant.
Click to expand...

I've never seen an American presidential campaign where the vice-presidential picks, however ballyhooed when they were chosen, didn't fade into the wallpaper as November approached. The exception, I suppose, being Sarah Palin; but that was a conscious decision of the liberal media, who thought a negative campaign focused on her was the best way to put Obama in the White House.
 
EVs is not the aim for a Clinton-Warren ticket. Winning's winning, by an inch or a mile.

The only thing that can make Liz gives up her clout in the Senate is concessions from Clinton on banking/finance reforms and commitments on student loan debt relief. What they are aiming for should Warren be chosen is to drive up turnouts in likely R congressional seats put in play by Drumpf's incompetence. They are trying to put the House in play. It can of course backfire spectacularly and the moderates would be turned off by Warren's leftistness, but it's a gamble worth taken. Liz herself was a Republican as late as the mid-90s, voted for Reagan and Bush Snr. no less, so they are banking on her ability to persuade urban, fiscally conservative but socially liberal Republicans through her populism.

Barbara Boxer was on Bill Maher last Friday and pretty much endorsed this ticket. It's very likely, moreso than a Clinton-Kaine one.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
EVs is not the aim for a Clinton-Warren ticket. Winning's winning, by an inch or a mile.

The only thing that can make Liz gives up her clout in the Senate is concessions from Clinton on banking/finance reforms and commitments on student loan debt relief. What they are aiming for should Warren be chosen is to drive up turnouts in likely R congressional seats put in play by Drumpf's incompetence. They are trying to put the House in play. It can of course backfire spectacularly and the moderates would be turned off by Warren's leftistness, but it's a gamble worth taken. Liz herself was a Republican as late as the mid-90s, voted for Reagan and Bush Snr. no less, so they are banking on her ability to persuade urban, fiscally conservative but socially liberal Republicans through her populism.

Barbara Boxer was on Bill Maher last Friday and pretty much endorsed this ticket. It's very likely, moreso than a Clinton-Kaine one.
Click to expand...

Warren giving up a seat on an influential committee just to be Clinton's lapdog is something that would benefit Clinton's campaign, but not America.
 
Will Absolute said:
I've never seen an American presidential campaign where the vice-presidential picks, however ballyhooed when they were chosen, didn't fade into the wallpaper as November approached. The exception, I suppose, being Sarah Palin; but that was a conscious decision of the liberal media, who thought a negative campaign focused on her was the best way to put Obama in the White House.
Click to expand...

Have you ever seen an election cycle with someone like Trump? This is a completely different construct than what we've seen in the past.
 
adexkola said:
Warren giving up a seat on an influential committee just to be Clinton's lapdog is something that would benefit Clinton's campaign, but not America.
Click to expand...

Yeap, and I think as VP, she'd have more of a say in the vetting of appointments to financial seats within the administration. A rebellious VP is disastrous for Clinton's reelection prospect, so this is not happening unless the two camps have concrete guarantee on what they want respectively.
 
unchanged_lineup said:
Genius, the best genius, lots of people are telling me, with the best words.

BYn8rVv.jpg
Click to expand...

:lol: :lol: That's tremendous.

Will Absolute said:
I've never seen an American presidential campaign where the vice-presidential picks, however ballyhooed when they were chosen, didn't fade into the wallpaper as November approached. The exception, I suppose, being Sarah Palin; but that was a conscious decision of the liberal media, who thought a negative campaign focused on her was the best way to put Obama in the White House.
Click to expand...

:lol: You seriously think that? Or do you think that maybe, just maybe, because she didn't even know where any countries in the world were on a map, or that she didn't even know the first thing about anything, probably had more to do with her downfall than the media? The media just found her out for what she was and that is dim-witted, stupid, uneducated, and completely insane, and certainly not suitable for the job of Vice President of the USA. Look at it like a job interview, and the public and media are like the final stage of the interview. She got found out! Sure, sometimes charlatans slip through the net (most recently G W Bush) but you would hope most of the time, the best candidate wins.

Sarah Palin was an embarrassment to McCain, an embarrassment to the Republican party, and in truth an embarrassment to humans. If aliens invaded the earth she would be one of the people everyone would distance themselves from saying "oh she's not one of us" The same as Trump. An embarrassment, a joke of a man!
 
Will Absolute said:
I've never seen an American presidential campaign where the vice-presidential picks, however ballyhooed when they were chosen, didn't fade into the wallpaper as November approached. The exception, I suppose, being Sarah Palin; but that was a conscious decision of the liberal media, who thought a negative campaign focused on her was the best way to put Obama in the White House.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Dick Cheney really ballyhooed and faded into the wallpaper. You really think the liberal media made this "conscious decision" that a negative campaign was the best way to put Obama in the White House? Really? I think it was pretty obvious to anybody but you that running on Bush´s record of two failed, endless trillion dollar wars and a right wing, blown out economy bleeding jobs massively was probably a little more logical in being the best way to put Obama in the White House.
 
The only pickle of this 'liberal media conspired to put Obama in the WH' schtick is that they were writing his campaign eulogies in May 08 with the Rev. Wright stuff. A completely inane episode blown out of proportion.

The mainstream media is incentivized for conflict. Their ideology is a green one, not red or blue.
 
Will Absolute said:
I've never seen an American presidential campaign where the vice-presidential picks, however ballyhooed when they were chosen, didn't fade into the wallpaper as November approached. The exception, I suppose, being Sarah Palin; but that was a conscious decision of the liberal media, who thought a negative campaign focused on her was the best way to put Obama in the White House.
Click to expand...

:lol: Do you even read the shite you spout?
 
sun_tzu said:
Pretty much.... Repetition is something he seems to have mastered.... Lyin Ted, crooked Hillary, build a wall, make murica great again.
I wouldn't expect him to change and if warren is the vp pick he is not going to pass up on the opportunity to quote / link sections of the interview at every opportunity... He may even run it as an ad?
Click to expand...

Everyone in politics at the national level has mastered repetition. Trump might be an ignorant buffoon and his team a bunch of amateurs compared to Clinton's, but even his people at least are somewhat familiar with Campaigning 101--but that's what repetition constitutes, the absolute most basic level shit that the Clinton machine will punch him in the face with even worse. And, furthermore, Trump and those who've chosen to endorse him, however tepidly, have provided the potential Clinton-Warren ticket far more ammunition than vice versa.

This fight hasn't even started.
 
Always the victim the right-wing trolls. Apparently, it's the media's fault that Sen Perdue used Psalm 109:8...

---
UPDATE: After publication, Perdue spokeswoman Caroline Vanvick gave this statement to Bloomberg’s Sahil Kapur:

“Senator Perdue said we are called to pray for our country, for our leaders, and for our president. He in no way wishes harm towards our president and everyone in the room understood that. However, we should add the media to our prayer list because they are pushing a narrative to create controversy and that is exactly what the American people are tired of.”
---
 
InfiniteBoredom said:


The 'Fauxcahontas' smear was cooked up by the right, especially Scott Brown camp in their 2012 Senate run. There's been zero evidence that she cooked it up to profit academically from the claim. Drumpf has brought it up for weeks now and no one gave a shit. It was debunked.
Click to expand...


It's the kind of vague smear that's tough to disprove and pushes all the right-wing buttons: liberal woman, affirmative action, "benefits cheat", the whiff of race, and a semi-racist catchy hashtag.
 
berbatrick said:
It's the kind of vague smear that's tough to disprove and pushes all the right-wing buttons: liberal woman, affirmative action, "benefits cheat", the whiff of race, and a semi-racist catchy hashtag.
Click to expand...

I'd say he's already maxed out on his racist support.

The worry with Warren is that while she's electric on the stump, she's also perceived to be very ideological. Not Sanders-lite, but arguably more of a liberal icon in the public's eye. That can potentially turn off the more socially conservative moderates Clinton is hoping to get her hands on. And there's always the risk that an all woman ticket can be spun to be purely identity politics.

That said, if it pays off, it'll be huge. Plus, any rational Sandersnista should hope this happen, as they will have someone who will hold Clinton's feet to the progressive fire.
 
I hate Fox and regularly pray that I'll wake up one morning and find that Hannity has been implicated in a gay sex scandal!

But those primary night stats are misleading...of course the numbers are down, the Republican primary is over...naturally people weren't going to tune in.
 
I wonder how polls may shift over the coming days as "radical islam, 2nd amendment, ISIS" takes effect - Now I am not saying this event will define the election (of course like any event it ultimately could depending how things play out) but if for example Trump sees a huge spike in numbers for a few weeks it makes you wonder how an attack in late October / early November may swing things.

Personally I hope the outcome is that at a minimum there is some bi-partisan traction on restricting access to assault rifles - but in truth I suspect we are more likely to see the NRA (and some republicans) saying if all the people in the club had guns then this would not have happened
 
I never would have expected it, but "Delete your account" has actually become a thing. It's becoming the most liked comment on most of Trump's tweets now, and usually there are stacks of "delete your account"s. Guess something simple can work!
 
sun_tzu said:
I wonder how polls may shift over the coming days as "radical islam, 2nd amendment, ISIS" takes effect - Now I am not saying this event will define the election (of course like any event it ultimately could depending how things play out) but if for example Trump sees a huge spike in numbers for a few weeks it makes you wonder how an attack in late October / early November may swing things.

Personally I hope the outcome is that at a minimum there is some bi-partisan traction on restricting access to assault rifles - but in truth I suspect we are more likely to see the NRA (and some republicans) saying if all the people in the club had guns then this would not have happened
Click to expand...

Yup, I'm wondering how gun control will play into this phase of the election process.
 
sun_tzu said:
but in truth I suspect we are more likely to see the NRA (and some republicans) saying if all the people in the club had guns then this would not have happened
Click to expand...

They tried that shit on Fox last night and (excuse the pun) got shot down. And badly. Apparently there was an armed security guard at the club and he was either an off duty Policeman working extra, or he used to be a Policeman, anyway, he traded fire with the gunman, before getting shot himself. Apparently they don't know what happened exactly, but obviously It didn't end well, and there was some debate of the other guy shooting and hitting club goers rather than the shooter, but obviously it was too delicate a subject to touch really.

The point still stood though, there was a trained armed guard at the club and he didn't help, nor stop the shootings.
 
langster said:
They tried that shit on Fox last night and (excuse the pun) got shot down. And badly. Apparently there was an armed security guard at the club and he was either an off duty Policeman working extra, or he used to be a Policeman, anyway, he traded fire with the gunman, before getting shot himself. Apparently they don't know what happened exactly, but obviously It didn't end well, and there was some debate of the other guy shooting and hitting club goers rather than the shooter, but obviously it was too delicate a subject to touch really.

The point still stood though, there was a trained armed guard at the club and he didn't help, nor stop the shootings.
Click to expand...
ah yes - but the NRA will say clearly then 1 person with a gun is not enough - everybody in the club must carry guns (and inevitably loads of people get killed in cross fire etc but whatever - as long as more people buy guns)
 
sun_tzu said:
ah yes - but the NRA will say clearly then 1 person with a gun is not enough - everybody in the club must carry guns (and inevitably loads of people get killed in cross fire etc but whatever - as long as more people buy guns)
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, of course they will. I already posted a tweet in the shooting thread yesterday that pretty much says exactly that.




But on Fox last night they had to take a kind of more sympathetic and less hard tone. Megyn Kelly was on her worst form, shame, she can be ok at times, but was back to her nasty worst last night, basically just repeating over and over than Obama should be ashamed for not saying the attack was carried out by a Radical Islamic Terrorist. Just echoing Trump's statement of the same and not going as far as Trump by saying Obama should step down, but not far from it. Then that mental cow Judge Janine came on and she was saying more guns = more safety, but I was tired and fell asleep by then.
 
langster said:
But on Fox last night they had to take a kind of more sympathetic and less hard tone. Megyn Kelly was on her worst form, shame, she can be ok at times, but was back to her nasty worst last night, basically just repeating over and over than Obama should be ashamed for not saying the attack was carried out by a Radical Islamic Terrorist. Just echoing Trump's statement of the same and not going as far as Trump by saying Obama should step down, but not far from it. Then that mental cow Judge Janine came on and she was saying more guns = more safety, but I was tired and fell asleep by then.
Click to expand...

Megyn Kelly - VP

That would (in theory) put the trump hates women argument to bed

Obviously its unlikely - but so was him actually being the nominee...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.