Republican Election 2016 - Donald Trump Megathread [OFFICIAL]

[Pangean]

Hmmm looks like Trump has problems with another religious group.

Donald Trump has a massive Catholic problem


Much has been made of Donald Trump’s problems with a few voting groups — female voters, blacks and Hispanics, and young voters, in particular. And, to be sure, they are all problems.

But relatively speaking, his biggest problem actually appears to be with a different group: Catholics.

Yes, the man who once feuded with the pope (how soon we forget that actually happened) is cratering among Catholics.

Back in 2012, GOP nominee Mitt Romney lost the Catholic vote by just 2 points, 50 percent to 48 percent. And the GOP has actually won the Catholic vote as recently as 2004 and in 5 of the last 10 presidential elections.

But Trump trails among Catholics by a huge margin. A new poll from the Public Religion Research Institute released this week shows him down 23 points, 55-32.

A Washington Post-ABC News poll released earlier this month painted an even worse picture for Trump’s Catholic support. He was down by 27 points, 61-34.

If you compare the difference between Romney’s margin among Catholics in 2012 and Trump’s margin among Catholics this year, the 25-point difference is tied for the biggest shift of any demographic group in the Post-ABC poll.

(The only group that matches that 25-point shift is white, college-educated women. Romney won them by 6 points; Trump trails by 19.)

Trump’s deficits among non-whites and young voters, by contrast, are similar to where Romney and Republicans have been in recent years. The Post-ABC poll, in fact, showed Hillary Clinton failing to match Obama’s margin among non-whites — though not in a statistically meaningful way — while her margin among young voters ages 18-to-29 was three points better.

These are groups, in other words, that Republicans don’t expect to do well with. And they still don’t.

But Catholics have long been a swing vote in presidential elections, and right now they’re swinging hard for Clinton.

It’s also hard to overstate just how significant Trump’s poor performance among Catholics is. That’s because they comprise about one-quarter of voters in the United States (25 percent in 2012 exit polls) and are about as big a voting bloc as non-whites (28 percent) and independents (29 percent).

While we often look at how Trump is doing worse than Romney among Hispanics, we’re really talking about the difference between Trump taking 45 percent of the vote and 46 percent — or maybe 49.5 percent or 50.5 percent. That’s because Hispanics are only about 10 percent of the electorate, and the GOP’s share of that vote is likely to be between 20 and 35 percent or so.

When talking about Catholics, though, Trump is basically adding 5 to 7 percentage points to Clinton’s overall margin. If 25 percent of the electorate is Catholic, Clinton is currently taking 14 to 15 points worth of that chunk, while Trump is taking 8 or 8.5 points. And this is a group, again, that is usually close to tied.

The reasons for Trump’s struggles among this group are open to interpretation. Perhaps Pope Francis’s criticism of Trump and Trump’s surprisingly confrontational response have turned off Catholics to Trump’s candidacy.

“A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian," the pope said in February when asked about Trump’s border wall.

As the Religion News Services’s John Gehring recently posited, it could also have something to do with Trump’s immigration policies:

Part of Catholics’ DNA is an appreciation for how Irish and other immigrants toiled and thrived in the shadow of a suspicious, fiercely anti-Catholic culture dominated by white Anglo-Saxon Protestants. ...

When Trump calls for a religious test for Muslims entering the country; questions the faith of Hillary Clinton, President Obama and Mitt Romney; and demonizes undocumented immigrants as “rapists,” it’s a reminder of the ugly nativism that Catholics once faced.

While this contemporary strain of old xenophobia is particularly felt by Latinos who increasingly are the face of the Catholic Church in the United States, many white Catholics surely take pride in family stories of grandparents and great-grandparents who were strangers in a new land. Trump has dug himself a deep hole he is unlikely to climb out of with these voters.

But whatever the cause, Trump’s struggles among Catholics remains one of the really undersold story lines of the 2016 election.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...holic-problem/

[Theodarzna]

Virtue signaling is exactly what you're doing lmao.

Well I just want to be like all the other people of this thread.

- - - Updated - - -

I heard on the day before the election for Brexit, the polls where showing a even larger % wanting to vote to remain. And a friend I have who lives in Canada, said the race for the Prime Minister polls up there had the current PM leading by a good margin. But I was not paying much attention to such about those, so this may not be true.

But I did see a interview with Nigel ( Page? ) a former leader in the UK, who said the pollsters tried to discourage people to vote by giving false poll numbers. Once again, I am not sure this is true, but no matter what, polls can be wrong. As a reminder of this, Sanders won Michigan when Clinton had a 8 point lead before they voted according to the polls.

But do not think I feel the polls are all wrong here on Clinton/Trump. When you have just about every poll showing one is leading, it is a good bet they are. But the % may be off and the race closer than the polls indicate. I pay more attention to the polls the week before the election day, after we have had all 3 debates.

My sister said the polls showed remain winning and for awhile many remain camp folk went to bed confident in their victory. Of course leave won and the salt has flowed ever since.

[NYC17]

I heard on the day before the election for Brexit, the polls where showing a even larger % wanting to vote to remain. And a friend I have who lives in Canada, said the race for the Prime Minister polls up there had the current PM leading by a good margin. But I was not paying much attention to such about those, so this may not be true.

But I did see a interview with Nigel ( Page? ) a former leader in the UK, who said the pollsters tried to discourage people to vote by giving false poll numbers. Once again, I am not sure this is true, but no matter what, polls can be wrong. As a reminder of this, Sanders won Michigan when Clinton had a 8 point lead before they voted according to the polls.

But do not think I feel the polls are all wrong here on Clinton/Trump. When you have just about every poll showing one is leading, it is a good bet they are. But the % may be off and the race closer than the polls indicate. I pay more attention to the polls the week before the election day, after we have had all 3 debates.

For the sake of argument, let's assume polling companies all have the same agenda, discouraging voters. It cuts both ways. The assumed victory could/would cause voters to stay home as they feel their vote isn't needed. That'd be a pretty stupid way to have your agenda realized.

Sigh.

[Pangean]

Well I just want to be like all the other people of this thread.

As someone properly noted you aren't virtue signaling, you are vice signaling.

[Theodarzna]

Or someone who is tired of people shitting up potentially good threads.

I am just curious when kicking a dead horse becomes no longer fun for them, like, this thread is now purely a "DAE HATE TRUMP?!" heck even the Clinton thread is mostly just that as well, and is about under half the size which just goes to show there is very little about Hillary these DAE HATE TRUMP!?!?! people have to say.

[Deleted]

Well I just want to be like all the other people of this thread.

- - - Updated - - -



My sister said the polls showed remain winning and for awhile many remain camp folk went to bed confident in their victory. Of course leave won and the salt has flowed ever since.

Gloating is tacky. Don't gloat. It doesn't suggest you have an intellectual interest in the argument, it suggests you have some sort of tribal antagonism towards a specific party, that isn't persuasive.

- - - Updated - - -

For the sake of argument, let's assume polling companies all have the same agenda, discouraging voters. It cuts both ways. The assumed victory could/would cause voters to stay home as they feel their vote isn't needed. That'd be a pretty stupid way to have your agenda realized.

Sigh.

Not saying this happens, but if few people vote it is easier to control the outcome of an election with money. Yes, in some ways it will hurt your goal rather than help, but overall you benefit from having a small number of hardcore voters determine the election.

[Pangean]

The clock is ticking on Trump. His team needs to turn it around. Can they?

Trump might already be out of time
With negative perceptions hardened, his late adjustments on policy and rhetoric could sway too few people to matter.

Donald Trump and his new team think they have 73 days to turn this campaign around. They’re wrong.

The Republican nominee — three months after clinching the nomination — has begun frantically trying to reposition himself in the last week, installing a new campaign manager and controversial CEO to help him escape the straitjacket that his 14 months of incendiary comments and hard-edged policy positions have him in.

His task, GOP insiders readily concede, seems close to impossible. In an interview Wednesday night, Trump’s new campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, recognized how long it may take to improve the public’s negative perceptions of the GOP nominee, likening her turnaround project to turning a tanker.

Trump may not have that kind of time. Early voting begins in 28 days in Minnesota and in 32 other states soon after that. And already as summer inches to its end, 90 percent of Americans say they’ve decided. For all the televised daily drama this race has provided, the final outcome itself is shaping up to be less dramatic than any presidential election since 1984.

“Kellyanne is good at this, but she’s got a very damaged candidate and it’s very late in the game,” said Tony Fratto, a GOP operative in Washington and former deputy press secretary to President George W. Bush. “I think it’s too late, in fact. I don’t believe he can change. All of this is trying to trick voters into thinking there is a better Donald Trump out there. There is no better Donald Trump.”

Although Trump has been seemingly slow to realize it, the more than $2 billion in free media he rode to the GOP nomination was simultaneously hardening the broader country’s negative view of Trump just as it was endearing him to the conservative base. The cascade of Trump-created controversies following the conventions that precipitated Conway’s hiring appear to have irrevocably damaged his credibility as a plausible commander in chief and could prove to be the turning point in the general election itself.

“It was a terribly damaging period,” said Steve Schmidt, the GOP strategist who guided John McCain’s 2008 campaign. “It hit on his trust numbers, his fitness for office — and at a time when [Hillary Clinton]’s had some hard news cycles. In any normal cycle, she’s the de-facto incumbent and these stories would have her on defense; and she’s not on defense, so there’s an opportunity cost to all this.”

More than 60 percent of Americans have an unfavorable opinion of Trump, leaving Clinton, with a 54 percent unfavorable rating, as only the second most unpopular presidential candidate in history. Both candidates, in fact, have held unfavorable ratings above 50 percent since launching their respective campaigns, with Trump hovering around the 60 percent mark, only a few points above Clinton. Asked about a smell they might associate with this election, the participants in a focus group conducted by Peter Hart in Wisconsin this week gave the following responses: “sulfur,” “rotten eggs,” "garbage,” “manure” and a “skunk’s fart.”

Barring any unforeseen revelations about Clinton, the next 70 days likely aren’t going to change people’s view of either presidential contender. According to a national survey released Thursday by Quinnipiac University, 90 percent of likely voters have already made up their mind about the presidential race and are unlikely to change.

"We are starting to hear the faint rumblings of a Hillary Clinton landslide as her 10-point lead is further proof that Donald Trump is in a downward spiral as the clock ticks," said Tim Malloy, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Poll. "Trump's missteps, stumbles and gaffes seem to outweigh Clinton's shaky trust status and perceived shady dealings.”

With the electoral map tipping so sharply in Clinton’s favor in the weeks following the two party conventions (her lead has widened beyond the margin of error in seven of 11 swing states), Trump’s new team is scrambling to stay afloat even with his robust campaign regimen that has him doing four times as many events as Clinton. Recent efforts to muddle the GOP nominee’s hardline positions on immigration — catnip for conservative primary voters but repellent to many general election swing voters — and to couch them in softer language are part of an eleventh-hour effort to broaden his narrow appeal beyond older, mostly white men. Trump’s direct overtures to Hispanic and African-American voters this week are being made with the same purpose.

Jeb Bush, whose more moderate immigration positions Trump blasted as “amnesty” during the GOP primary and now appears to be adopting himself, was blunt in an interview Thursday with Rita Cosby of WABC Radio, calling Trump’s new rhetoric “abhorrent.”

“I don’t know what to believe about a guy who doesn’t believe in things,” Bush said.

In New Hampshire on Thursday, Trump again sketched a grim portrait of America’s minority communities before asking African-American and Hispanic voters to support him. “What the hell do you have to lose?” he asked.

But with Trump pulling in just 1 percent of African-American voters in Pennsylvania, many political observers view the sinking candidate — and his Hail Mary attempt — as the one with little left to lose.

“Minority outreach is an example of a campaign addressing a fake issue and not a real issue, which is Donald Trump’s character,” said Drew Cline, a GOP operative in Bedford. “It’s not about policy or that people like Hillary, because they don’t. It’s that people aren’t comfortable with the idea of him having that much power.

“He could have the exact same policies that he has and be doing much better and be giving Hillary a more competitive challenge if he just came across as a reasonable person that you would trust with the levers of power. There’s no salvaging this campaign because there’s no changing Donald Trump.”

Conway’s attempted Trump makeover isn’t limited to her candidate’s rhetoric and policy positions. She’s also taking another look at a difficult electoral map.

Conway canceled several previously scheduled events this week, hinting that she and campaign CEO Steve Bannon are still trying to rework the schedule they inherited and that resources, including the candidate himself, will likely be reallocated to where they’re needed most.

Figuring out how to triage a presidential campaign when you’re bleeding in every swing state, all of which seem vital, is a difficult enough equation — and that’s without Trump spending time and resources this week in places that aren’t swing states at all. Trump sandwiched one rally in Tampa between appearances in Texas and Mississippi, both solidly red states he’s unlikely to lose. And on Friday, his campaign announced a rally to be held next Tuesday outside Seattle in Everett, Wash., home to a Boeing plant that ships planes overseas — a location that’s well suited for Trump to rail against global trade deals but makes no sense electorally.

On Saturday, Trump campaigned in Iowa, one of the few swing states where his standing has not diminished over the last month. The preponderance of white voters and the relative unity of the GOP establishment behind Trump — Gov. Terry Branstad’s son, Eric, is running the nominee’s campaign in the state and local party officials are also supportive — may offset the relative lack of a ground operation to match Clinton’s. But winning the state’s six electoral votes is no guarantee.

“There’s so many places where they’re pedaling harder than we are, improving on Obama’s machine and that could put them over the top in the end,” said David Kochel, a GOP operative in Des Moines and a former senior staffer to Jeb Bush’s presidential campaign.

Trump is struggling to capture support among the “Ankeny vote” targeted by Marco Rubio during the Iowa caucuses — that growing subset of younger, more cosmopolitan family-oriented conservatives in the Des Moines suburbs. But his shift on immigration, something aimed squarely at those voters, could threaten his standing in western Iowa, home to congressman and immigration firebrand Steve King, who said this week that any softening of Trump’s position on amnesty would amount to a “mistake.”

“It will be interesting to see if he can hold margins he needs in western Iowa,” Kochel said. “He really has same problem here he does everywhere, which is in suburbs with more educated, moderate women.”

Indeed, even if Iowa presents fewer demographic challenges for Trump, it is still a microcosm of a changing national electorate and the Sisyphean task of recasting Trump’s narrow brand of populist nationalism into something marketable to a broader audience.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...of-time-227457

[Theodarzna]

Gloating is tacky. Don't gloat. It doesn't suggest you have an intellectual interest in the argument, it suggests you have some sort of tribal antagonism towards a specific party, that isn't persuasive.

DAE hate Trump for 270+ pages and isn't an argument, especially with the polls being entirely against Trump by many legions, why are we even still talking about him? Except that he is literally the only reason some people might even vote for Hillary.

[Pangean]

DAE hate Trump for 270+ pages and isn't an argument, especially with the polls being entirely against Trump by many legions, why are we even still talking about him? Except that he is literally the only reason some people might even vote for Hillary.

Argues we shouldn't talk about Trump because Hillary is legions (really about 4-6%) ahead in the polls and in the same thread comments about the polls in Brexit being wrong. Vice signaling apparently doesn't require logical consistency.

[LaserSharkDFB]

I can understand that feeling. When people would call you a moron if you would vote for him, pretty much summons up why many would not want to say they are.

Yeah, that is the one the anti-Trump media conveniently leaves out , but the second post, they jump all over as if that is all he said about it,
He is simply saying such tragedies are reasons why many African Americans will vote for him. They want a safer environment.

I just want to put in here that I wouldn't dream of leaving out Trump's condolences tweet, if only because it's vital to an understanding of the man.

Shalcker put the condolences first, which may or may not have been intentional, but the fact of the matter is that Trump posted the other one, where he boasted about being 'right', much earlier. He put it out several hours earlier, took it down because he misspelled a name, then tweeted a corrected version. Only then, an hour after the second tweet, did he realize 'oh yeah, I should probably act human here' and send his condolences.

So here we have someone who, when seeing news about a mother getting murdered in front of her children, has the immediate instinct to use it for his political gain. It literally says 'VOTE TRUMP'; you can't get any clearer than that. If there could be any better evidence that he doesn't care about other people apart from how they can benefit him, I don't know what it might be.

Why in the world would you continue to support someone who can't even pretend to act like a decent human being?

[Aggrophobic]

DAE hate Trump for 270+ pages and isn't an argument, especially with the polls being entirely against Trump by many legions, why are we even still talking about him? Except that he is literally the only reason some people might even vote for Hillary.

Becuase it's funny? I've said it befor but this thread is pure comedy gold. Please keep it coming!

[Deletedaccount1]

DAE hate Trump for 270+ pages and isn't an argument, especially with the polls being entirely against Trump by many legions, why are we even still talking about him? Except that he is literally the only reason some people might even vote for Hillary.

I don't mind talking about him, in fact I think it's a good topic but I really don't like political discussions when people can't keep a level head and resort to mockery.

- - - Updated - - -

Here's a solution: don't read the thread if you don't like it

I know, my genious amazes myself sometimes

Normally I would do this and I wouldn't give it a second thought but since the megathreads were opened, all the 2016 discussion on this site is basically between 10 people with the exact same views who can't help but create a circlejerk.

[Breccia]

DAE hate Trump for 270+ pages and isn't an argument

No, but most of the things posted in the last 270 pages were arguments. A lot of very specific, factually true information has been posted that shows Trump in a negative light. Others reflect his opinions, that many people here (and many Americans) find either distasteful, shameful, or outright offensive. And then there are the demonstrations of Trump being a liar, hypocrite, a flip-flopper, or both. I'm sure you've actually read this thread, so you know full well it's not just "I hate Trump" but "I hate and/or dislike Trump, and here are the reasons why".

The fact that people might vote against Trump, by voting for Clinton, doesn't change the fact that there are legitimate reasons to do that. And the number seems to increase daily.

(reads Pangean's latest links)

It does increase daily.

[Pangean]

So we have had the usual suspects say the polls aren't telling the truth becasue Trump supporters are afraid to tell people that they are voting Trump. In fact some have gone as far as to say people will be mean to them if they tell they are voting Trump. Here's an article that talks to the issue and of course demonstrates it's bullshit.

No, online polls don’t show a hidden Donald Trump vote waiting to appear on Election Day

I come here not to praise polling rumors, but to bury them.

In an interview on British television this week, Donald Trump's campaign manager Kellyanne Conway said that Trump "performs consistently better in online polling where a human being is not talking to another human being about what he or she may do in the elections." That's why Trump is trailing in the polls, she argues: His voters are wary of telling pollsters that they support the guy. I already debunked this, but sometimes you have to put a very fine point on such things. So, let's.

1. "Online polls" here does not refer to stupid Twitter surveys or anyone-can-click-a-button polls at media websites.

Polling is a science that uses statistical analysis to gauge sentiment across a broad population by taking a small, representative sample from that population and asking specific questions. The analogy I like to use is having tests done at the doctor: She doesn't need to remove all of the blood from your body to figure out why you're sick. She just needs a small vial of it.

Conway is, by trade, a pollster. So when she says "online polls," she doesn't mean something like the poll below, which I put on Twitter.

My poll is obviously ridiculous, but no more ridiculous than any other poll that allows anyone from anywhere to vote as much as they want or to get all their friends to vote, too. As I write, Elvis Presley's ghost is outperforming Trump by a wide margin, but I don't think that's what an actual election would show. People could be voting in my poll from literally anywhere, for any reason. I'm supposed to think the results mean something? These online "polls" are like if you went to the doctor to figure out why you were sick and he used two pints of your blood, a gallon of his own, 10 drops from Vladimir Putin and also two Coronas.

Conway means scientifically weighted polls that are conducted using an online mechanism under rigorous circumstances, as opposed to traditional phone polling, in which a pollster calls various voters and asks them a battery of questions. It's those online polls — like those from YouGov, SurveyMonkey or Ipsos — that Conway suggests show Trump doing better, the theory being that having a real person ask if you like Trump is more unnerving than pressing a button indicating your support on an iPad. This is called the "Bradley effect," after Tom Bradley, who ran for governor in California in 1982. Polls showed him winning, but he lost, a change blamed on his being black. The idea was that people told pollsters they supported him so they wouldn't appear to be bigoted, but then didn't actually vote for him.

There's just one problem ...

2. Donald Trump is not performing better in online polls.

I pulled data on online polls (the real kind) and live-caller polls since the convention and going back several months. In the former case, the numbers showed that Trump was doing better on average in live-caller polls than online ones both during and after the conventions.



Over the longer time period, the trend was similar: Trump did better in live-caller polling.



This uses data from Huffington Post Pollster, so feel free to run the numbers yourself. In fact, here's what they show as I write: Trump's average in live-caller polling is 40.8 percent. In online polling? 40.6 percent.



Are there some online polls where Trump does better? Sure. But on average, he doesn't.

3. Since when are Trump fans bashful?

I'm not going to point out that Trump's supporters have at no point appeared to be timid wallflowers, because that doesn't need to be pointed out. But he led consistently in primary polling for months and ran close with Hillary Clinton for a long time. If the idea is that people are worried about expressing public support for Trump because he said contentious things, he said those things on literally the first day of his campaign. If you're worried about people who don't like Trump viewing you negatively for backing him, why is that something that just emerged?

Trump's electoral problem has always been that he brought a base of support into the general election and hasn't been able to expand it outward. The recent shift in polls after the conventions does reflect softer support from Republican voters, and it is the case that even big chunks of his own party see Trump as biased against women and minorities.

But is it more likely that hundreds of individuals independently felt nervous about telling a pollster in an anonymous survey that they were supporting Trump? Or is it more likely that Trump actually saw his support dip after a Democratic convention that hit Trump hard and a Republican convention that Gallup found turned off more voters than attracted them? Especially given the lack of difference between online and live polling, it's safe to assume the latter.

Conway's job, at its heart, isn't to be truthful. It's to win the campaign. And to win the campaign, she needs people to believe it's winnable. And that means explaining away Trump's bad poll numbers.

But we don't have to believe it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...-election-day/

[Ghostpanther]

I just want to put in here that I wouldn't dream of leaving out Trump's condolences tweet, if only because it's vital to an understanding of the man.

Shalcker put the condolences first, which may or may not have been intentional, but the fact of the matter is that Trump posted the other one, where he boasted about being 'right', much earlier. He put it out several hours earlier, took it down because he misspelled a name, then tweeted a corrected version. Only then, an hour after the second tweet, did he realize 'oh yeah, I should probably act human here' and send his condolences.

So here we have someone who, when seeing news about a mother getting murdered in front of her children, has the immediate instinct to use it for his political gain. It literally says 'VOTE TRUMP'; you can't get any clearer than that. If there could be any better evidence that he doesn't care about other people apart from how they can benefit him, I don't know what it might be.

Why in the world would you continue to support someone who can't even pretend to act like a decent human being?

Well, since you only have one post, maybe you ask that question for which I have explained many times in this thread. But to answer it and to summon it all up in a simple, short statement, " Because he is a better choice than Hillary is ". Of course many disagree with this as we can see in this thread and this Nov. I am at least grateful I can still make my own choice who to vote for.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't mind talking about him, in fact I think it's a good topic but I really don't like political discussions when people can't keep a level head and resort to mockery.

- - - Updated - - -

Very true and one of the main reasons I have put some on ignore. When they resort to insults, they no longer hold any interest for me on discussing any thing.

[Theodarzna]

No, but most of the things posted in the last 270 pages were arguments. A lot of very specific, factually true information has been posted that shows Trump in a negative light. Others reflect his opinions, that many people here (and many Americans) find either distasteful, shameful, or outright offensive. And then there are the demonstrations of Trump being a liar, hypocrite, a flip-flopper, or both. I'm sure you've actually read this thread, so you know full well it's not just "I hate Trump" but "I hate and/or dislike Trump, and here are the reasons why".

The fact that people might vote against Trump, by voting for Clinton, doesn't change the fact that there are legitimate reasons to do that. And the number seems to increase daily.

(reads Pangean's latest links)

It does increase daily.

At this point the reasons are like the difference between a fever of 120 and 200, either fever killed you awhile ago so what is the difference?

[LaserSharkDFB]

Well, since you only have one post, maybe you ask that question for which I have explained many times in this thread. But to answer it and to summon it all up in a simple, short statement, " Because he is a better choice than Hillary is ". Of course many disagree with this as we can see in this thread and this Nov. I am at least grateful I can still make my own choice who to vote for.

In fact I've been reading this thread for several weeks now, and your explanation remains unconvincing. If you wanted to debate why Clinton is the inferior candidate, you would keep to the Democrat thread. But you're here, engaged in Trumpsplaining. You complain that the 'anti-Trump' media isn't covering the condolences tweet, when (1) they are, and (2) it's irrelevant to the fact that he went for the 'told you so' first. Twice, in fact. I'll go and make a bunch of crap posts if you don't like looking at my low post count, but that won't change the fact that what Trump did is objectively disrespectful and the media is right to focus on something like that coming from a presidential candidate.

Also, Trump clearly doesn't have any idea about how to reduce crime. O'Reilly nearly begged him to give a hint, and he kept talking about talking to someone high in the Chicago police department who had a plan; as I'm sure you know, the Chicago PD has denied that this ever happened.

[mvaliz]

I don't mind talking about him, in fact I think it's a good topic but I really don't like political discussions when people can't keep a level head and resort to mockery.

[COLOR="#417394"]- - - Updated - - -

Says the persin who, not a few days ago, mocked everybody on the thread exclaiming you werethe only "adult" in here.

[BrerBear]

I am just curious when kicking a dead horse becomes no longer fun for them, like, this thread is now purely a "DAE HATE TRUMP?!" heck even the Clinton thread is mostly just that as well, and is about under half the size which just goes to show there is very little about Hillary these DAE HATE TRUMP!?!?! people have to say.

The horse won't be dead until November. We have an obligation to keep kicking.

[NYC17]

The horse won't be dead until November. We have an obligation to keep kicking.

Trump is more of a parasite than a horse anyway