2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pence's popularity saw a huge drop with both his own TP crowd and the general populace in IN after the RFRA fiasco. He's in for a tough re-election had he not been selected for Drumpf's VP. This is a way for the GOP to provide him a dignified exit and put up someone who is more electable for the governorship, especially as they are already likely to lose the other Senate seat there since Bayh got in.

I don't think the Cheeto Jesus is happy with this choice. He seems to prefer a lapdog like Fatty or a fellow first grade twunt who can sing from the same racist nativist hymn sheet like Grinch.
 
x42bn6 said:
I confess - the thing that annoys me the most about the Pence announcement is the fact that the words "TRUMP" and "PENCE" don't even align properly in the middle in their campaign logo. And I've spent more time than I should trying to figure out why they don't, because it's miles away from proper alignment.
Click to expand...
Just imagine the T banging the P.
 
3 polls came out today, showing Clinton winning by anywhere from 4-7 points.

Rasmussen poll showed Trump winning by 7 for the same time period. :lol:

Why do they even bother.
 
Ole's_toe_poke said:
3 polls came out today, showing Clinton winning by anywhere from 4-7 points.

Rasmussen poll showed Trump winning by 7 for the same time period. :lol:

Why do they even bother.
Click to expand...

In the scheme of things, were the higher end of those numbers to come out, that would be considered a devastating win, wouldn't it?

I went on wikipedia and answered myself. 7% would be the biggest since Clinton's first run.
 
The Trump-Pence interview on 60 minutes is cringeworthy. Pence is embarrassingly more articulate as Trump and Donald seems completely uncomfortable.
 
Just noticed that Mark Burns, who will speak at the GOP convention, is a prosperity televangelist and wholly believes the DNC is committing genocide against the black community by being pro-choice. I'd be curious to know what Burns net worth sits at. I imagine he's doing quite well for himself like most top level televangelists do.

Reeks of another evangelical using a political campaign for his own gain.
 
Wonder what's Chris meatballs Christie is up to these days? Imagine he didn't take the latest chain of events kindly?
 
Warren taken off the DNC speakers list altogether. Her prime time Monday spot has been taken over by Sanders. For comparison, 8 years ago Clinton spoke on a Tuesday. She also met with Clinton for an hour a few days ago at her house, alongside Tom Hickenlooper and Julian Castro ( both also not on the list fwiw).

There's a precedent for this, in 2004, John Edwards was slated to speak before being pulled and made VP.

Clinton-Warren 2016?
 
Last edited:
Would love Warren to be Clinton's VP pick. Would go a long way to establish credibility to Clinton's new left-leaning agenda, and help her pick up the Sanders supporters.
 
Right now I see Clinton vulnerable to a law-and-order campaign. An all-female ticket, with the 2nd being the liberal Warren, wouldn't help with that image. IMO.
 
berbatrick said:
Right now I see Clinton vulnerable to a law-and-order campaign. An all-female ticket, with the 2nd being the liberal Warren, wouldn't help with that image. IMO.
Click to expand...

Who would you pick? Kaine is hardly popular with the gun toting crowd, given his record as governor.

Out of all potential picks, probably only that retired Admiral (Stavridis? Can't remember his name) has law-and-order credentials.
 
Surely at a time when cultural tensions are at an all time high, it might be prudent to have some diversity on the ticket? Rather than four white people.
 
The likes of Booker, Warren, Brown etc would seem like good picks except that each of their states have GOP governors which would squash any chance of the Dems taking the Senate back - which is why I think Hillary is incentivized to look elsewhere. Kaine on the other hand would seem most logical in that he comes from a Dem Governed state (governed by a long time Clinton lackey no less), which leads me to think she may pick him. There is virtually no downside to Kaine and she would almost certainly win VA which is would choke off nearly every path for Trump to reach 270, even if he wins Florida, Ohio, and NC.

In terms of Latino choices, Castro is a bit young, Perez a bit generic, and my favorite of the group Xavier Becerra is also a bit too unknown and from CA which won't really help her much. Stavridis may be worth a look but he's just not politically polished enough to grapple with a neocon Android like Pence during the debates.
 
Raoul said:
The likes of Booker, Warren, Brown etc would seem like good picks except that each of their states have GOP governors which would squash any chance of the Dems taking the Senate back - which is why I think Hillary is incentivized to look elsewhere. Kaine on the other hand would seem most logical in that he comes from a Dem Governed state (governed by a long time Clinton lackey no less), which leads me to think she may pick him. There is virtually no downside to Kaine and she would almost certainly win VA which is would choke off nearly every path for Trump to reach 270, even if he wins Florida, Ohio, and NC.

In terms of Latino choices, Castro is a bit young, Perez a bit generic, and my favorite of the group Xavier Becerra is also a bit too unknown and from CA which won't really help her much. Stavridis may be worth a look but he's just not politically polished enough to grapple with a neocon Android like Pence during the debates.
Click to expand...
Why are the Governors relevant to the Senate?
 
Rado_N said:
Why are the Governors relevant to the Senate?
Click to expand...

Most states allow governors to pick Senator replacements in the case of a vacancy. So Republican governors would likely pick a Republican Senator.

----

Personally, I don't know why Warren is even in contention. The President leads just one branch of the government and as Obama proved, he can largely be stopped by Congress. Both sides need strong people in both floors of Congress, and Warren will be more useful to Clinton there than as VP.

I also think her attacks could become rather whiny and annoying to the electorate at large during a campaign. Yes, she can attack Trump, but Hillary's Super PAC will be doing that just fine anyway. Kaine or Vilsack probably make more sense as VP. Warren can do more good in the Senate.
 
Rado_N said:
Why are the Governors relevant to the Senate?
Click to expand...

If a sitting Senator in a state becomes VP - the Governor selects his (or her) replacement. If the Governor is a Republican, he will 100% choose a Republican replacement (and vice versa for the Dems). If the Dems want to reclaim the Senate to go along with a Hillary win, they will need every single seat they can get and can't afford to gift any to the GOP by way of selecting a Dem from a GOP governed state.
 
Warren's seat will be filled by an appointment from Charlie Baker, MA's Republican governor, but only for 120 days, by which time a special election will take place. If Warren resigns from her seat by Nov.8 when she's the Vice-President Elect, by the time they are sworn in office Feb. 2017, they may look at just 1 month of that seat being held by a GOPer.

Still, there's danger of that seat going red. MA does have a quirky independent streak and Martha Coakley loss to Scott Brown after Teddy Kennedy died is evidence of that. Although, as long as MA Dems nominate a solid liberal, or a Kennedy, that seat should be safe.
 
The GOP primary in a nutshell

If Trump lost, Soltis Anderson said — which seems at this point, not an unreasonable possibility — the factions in the party would only become more entrenched. It would not just be the Trump supporters vs. the Never Trumps; instead, Never Trump would be pitted against Never Trump in a civil war of the moral resistance. Lacking a common enemy, they would revert to their differences.

“On the one hand, you have the autopsy folks, right?” she said, referring to those who concur with the findings of a 2012 report that said, among other things, that the GOP should reach out to minority voters. “You have the people that look at Donald Trump and they go, ‘He’s alienating Latino voters, he’s doing damage to the brand, he’s looking backwards, not forwards, he’s the opposite of what we needed.’”

The other Never Trump faction — “the Ted Cruz folks, the conservative purists,” as Soltis Anderson put it — would disagree with the diagnosis of why Trump was bad for the party. “Their main argument with Trump is not that he’s mean to Latinos; their main argument with Trump is that he’s not really a conservative, he’s not really one of us,” she said. “When all is said and done, those two Never Trump forces are going to blame each other for his existence.”

The prospect that the GOP leaders wouldn’t even be able to agree on why Trump — arguably the worst crisis the modern party has experienced — was even a crisis to begin with, seemed to say it all.

“There is no happy ending to this story,” she said.
Click to expand...


http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-end-of-a-republican-party/
 
x42bn6 said:
Most states allow governors to pick Senator replacements in the case of a vacancy. So Republican governors would likely pick a Republican Senator.

----

Personally, I don't know why Warren is even in contention. The President leads just one branch of the government and as Obama proved, he can largely be stopped by Congress. Both sides need strong people in both floors of Congress, and Warren will be more useful to Clinton there than as VP.

I also think her attacks could become rather whiny and annoying to the electorate at large during a campaign. Yes, she can attack Trump, but Hillary's Super PAC will be doing that just fine anyway. Kaine or Vilsack probably make more sense as VP. Warren can do more good in the Senate.
Click to expand...

Raoul said:
If a sitting Senator in a state becomes VP - the Governor selects his (or her) replacement. If the Governor is a Republican, he will 100% choose a Republican replacement (and vice versa for the Dems). If the Dems want to reclaim the Senate to go along with a Hillary win, they will need every single seat they can get and can't afford to gift any to the GOP by way of selecting a Dem from a GOP governed state.
Click to expand...

InfiniteBoredom said:
Warren's seat will be filled by an appointment from Charlie Baker, MA's Republican governor, but only for 120 days, by which time a special election will take place. If Warren resigns from her seat by Nov.8 when she's the Vice-President Elect, by the time they are sworn in office Feb. 2017, they may look at just 1 month of that seat being held by a GOPer.

Still, there's danger of that seat going red. MA does have a quirky independent streak and Martha Coakley loss to Scott Brown after Teddy Kennedy died is evidence of that. Although, as long as MA Dems nominate a solid liberal, or a Kennedy, that seat should be safe.
Click to expand...

Thanks all, very helpful.
 
Barry probably fecked his mom. Christ.

In an interview Monday morning on Fox News’ “Fox and Friends,” Trump seemed to imply that the president had sided with those attacking police officers, despite Obama’s words to the contrary.

“I mean, you know, I watched the president and sometimes the words are okay,” Trump said. “But you just look at the body language. There's something going on. Look, there’s something going on and the words are not often okay, by the way.”

“What does that mean, there’s something going on?” host Steve Doocy replied.

“There's just a bad feeling, a lot of bad feeling about him,” Trump said. “I see it too. There's a lot of bad feeling about him. We have a country that has not been like this since I can remember it.”
Click to expand...

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/trump-obama-police-shooting-225694
 
Trump Says He Will Declare War Against Is If Elected

CLEVELAND (US), July 18 (Bernama) -- Republican presidential Donald Trump has said if elected he will "declare war" on the Islamic State (IS), but would send "very few" US troops on the ground to combat the dreaded terror outfit, reports the Press Trust of India (PTI).

"It is war. By the way, it is war," Trump told '60 Minute' of the CBS News in an interview.

"We have people that want to wipe us out. We're gonna declare war against IS. We have to wipe out IS," he said in response to a question.

"I am going to have very few troops on the ground. We're going to have unbelievable intelligence, which we need; which, right now, we don't have. We don't have the people over there," he explained.

"We are going to have surrounding states and, very importantly, get NATO involved because we support NATO far more than we should, frankly, because you have a lot of countries that aren't doing what they're supposed to be doing. And we have to wipe out IS," he said, adding that he would send "very little" US troops on the ground.

Joining Trump in the interview his vice presidential running mate Mike Pence said this is the kind of leadership that is needed in the US.

"This is the kind of leadership that America needs and it begins with deciding to destroy the enemies of our freedom," he said.

Trump claimed the US under his administration would get rid of IS, big league.

"We are going to get rid of them fast. And we're going to use surrounding states. We're going to use NATO, probably. And we're going to declare war. It is war. When the World Trade Centre comes tumbling down, with thousands of people being killed," he said.

When pointed out that Pence also voted for war in Iraq as did his Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, Trump said the Indiana Governor is entitled to make mistake once in a while, but the former Secretary of State is not.



How the feck did he get this far.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Warren's seat will be filled by an appointment from Charlie Baker, MA's Republican governor, but only for 120 days, by which time a special election will take place. If Warren resigns from her seat by Nov.8 when she's the Vice-President Elect, by the time they are sworn in office Feb. 2017, they may look at just 1 month of that seat being held by a GOPer.

Still, there's danger of that seat going red. MA does have a quirky independent streak and Martha Coakley loss to Scott Brown after Teddy Kennedy died is evidence of that. Although, as long as MA Dems nominate a solid liberal, or a Kennedy, that seat should be safe.
Click to expand...

Scott Brown was a fecking aberration. Teddy held that seat for how many years? Mass Dems probably got complacent. No way that occurs again.
 
adexkola said:
Scott Brown was a fecking aberration. Teddy held that seat for how many years? Mass Dems probably got complacent. No way that occurs again.
Click to expand...

Martha Oakley lost again in 2014 to Charlie Baker in the gubernatorial election.

There's a fair amount of socially moderate, fiscal conservatives there. Romney was a two term governor. Plus, the Kennedys are an institution unto themselves there.
 
adexkola said:
Scott Brown was a fecking aberration. Teddy held that seat for how many years? Mass Dems probably got complacent. No way that occurs again.
Click to expand...

Mass Republicans are pretty liberal which explains the likes of Bill Weld, Romney, Brown etc. That said, it doesn't matter where on the right leaning spectrum they fall, they will still select a Republican to replace a sitting Senator which is bad for the Dems.
 
Raoul said:
Good read - "“Lying is second nature to him"......

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/donald-trumps-ghostwriter-tells-all
Click to expand...

Great read. The attention span thing is apparent in his whole speaking and thinking. Its just a superficial child, there is no deeper Donald. I don't know why some people don't want to acknowledge that there isn't a deeper Donald... its not surprising once you've met people similar to him in real life, that other people can also be that way. The only thing is that usually such characters are kind of losers, they get found out and consistently exposed as frauds, which in turn keeps the serious people away from them. The only difference with Donald is that he was the son of Fred... and now he wants to be President. At least he's an apt candidate for our ADD society.
 
I am quite impressed by his ability to talk for month without saying anything meaningful at all and at the same time he is able to contradict himself in almost every sentence.

"I am going to have very few troops on the ground. We're going to have unbelievable intelligence, which we need; which, right now, we don't have. We don't have the people over there.“
Click to expand...

Sentences like that are just a work of art. He should publish all these declarations in one poetry collection.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.