Republican Election 2016 - Donald Trump Megathread [OFFICIAL]

[Pangean]

Simple. Is there any indication that people who were not previously voting intend to vote in this election? And if there is, to which candidate do they lean overall? Is there any analysis of this available?

Do you think such scenario is even likely? If so, why? If not, why?

That's your "argument"? No sparky those are questions. Feel free to answer the questions for yourself and make assertions so that a discussion can occur. You are playing games and fairly obvious about it.

[LaserSharkDFB]

Simple. Is there any indication that people who were not previously voting intend to vote in this election? And if there is, to which candidate do they lean overall? Is there any analysis of this available?

Do you think such scenario is even likely? If so, why? If not, why?

If we're talking about people who could have voted previously, did not do so, and are now planning to vote... I couldn't find any data on that, but it seems unlikely that it would be a large enough population to make much difference, no matter who they favor. In addition, the majority of those would be in non-battleground states, which would go red or blue regardless of their vote. They would also be picked up by the polling already done, so they probably wouldn't change what we're already seeing.

[Pangean]

It's a good thing the election is so far away and the Trump folks can use all that time to come up with a policy. No hurry at all folks.

Donald Trump’s Surrogates Back Off ‘Deportation Force’ for Illegal Immigrants

A parade of surrogates for Donald J. Trump backed away on Sunday from a primary element of his immigration policy, further muddying an issue on which Mr. Trump himself sowed confusion in recent days.

Gov. Mike Pence of Indiana, Mr. Trump’s running mate on the Republican presidential ticket, would not affirm that their administration would expel the estimated 11 million immigrants who are in the country illegally, a campaign-defining stance that helped Mr. Trump vanquish opponents in the primary race.

Asked if Mr. Trump still sought a “deportation force,” which he called for last year, Mr. Pence said Mr. Trump was speaking of “a mechanism, not a policy.”

He also backed away from Mr. Trump’s opposition to automatic citizenship for children born in the United States to illegal immigrants.

On CNN’s “State of the Union,” Mr. Pence promised that Mr. Trump would lay out a detailed immigration plan in the next two weeks, though Mr. Trump has emphasized the issue for more than a year. Mr. Trump last week suggested a “softening” toward illegal immigrants, then seemed to reverse himself under fierce and immediate criticism from some conservatives.

“You see a C.E.O. at work,” Mr. Pence said. “You see someone who is engaging the American people, listening to the American people.”

The efforts of Mr. Trump’s surrogates — who argued on Sunday that nothing he had said recently was inconsistent — reflected a problem for Mr. Trump as he lags Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee, in many polls. He enters the campaign’s final stretch with immigration policies that are popular with his core supporters but not with voters at large.

Kellyanne Conway, Mr. Trump’s campaign manager, went even further than Mr. Pence, suggesting that Mr. Trump no longer favored the forced removal of illegal immigrants. “He is not talking about a deportation force, but he is talking about being fair and humane,” Ms. Conway said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”

“He has said that, if you want to be here legally, you have to apply to be here legally,” she added. The statement seemed to suggest that immigrants would be able to attain legal status without leaving the country, a position that conservatives call amnesty — and that Mr. Pence said was not an option.

Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that he agreed Mr. Trump had oversimplified immigration during the primary campaign. “But now he’s reflecting on it, and his position is going to be known,” he said.

Also appearing on “Meet the Press” was David Plouffe, President Obama’s former campaign manager, who called Mr. Trump mentally unhinged.

“You have a psychopath running for president,” he said. “I mean, he meets the clinical definition, O.K.?”

The host, Chuck Todd, rebuked Mr. Plouffe for making an unfair judgment. Conceding he was no psychologist, Mr. Plouffe cited Mr. Trump’s “grandiose notion of self-worth, pathological lying, lack of empathy and remorse.”

He predicted that Mrs. Clinton would win the election in a landslide.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/29/us...migration.html

[Cthulhu 2020]

270 pages maybe, I mean if jerking ones self off to "DAE HATE TRUMP?!" never gets old.

How much do we need to discuss how much Hillary is going to break her promise about the TPP before it gets boring?

Everyone discusses shit they concern themselves with.

Although with how low Trump's chances are, I'd say beating Hillary's dead horses might be a bit more concerning than beating Trump's dead horses.

Really though, you only ever post in this thread to tell people they're talking about Trump too much, why not just ignore this thread all together?

- - - Updated - - -

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.

The remain-leave polls were also 0-3 points ahead most of the time, and even dipping into being behind several times. Trump has been 6-10% behind most of the race. To which you might say... "Well even less of a reason to be concerned with him."

What's concerning about Trump is not so much the prospect that he will gain power, but that there is a huge portion of the American populace that actually agrees with him. Proto-fascist ideology is not pretty, and should be concerning.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/8...ed-by-Trumpism

[Deletedaccount1]

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

I wasn't mocking you, I genuinely think that.

[Cthulhu 2020]

I wasn't mocking you, I genuinely think that.

I tend to find those that most loudly proclaim themselves mature or adults are most often the most immature.

[Venant]

It means you can't be a douche to minorities and win elections very easily anymore.

What does that even mean though? Hillary Clinton pushed the 1994 crime bill that was designed to lock millions of minorities up in prison forever, paving the way for the modern prison industrial complex. Seems like locking somebody up forever because they got a third strike for a non violent drug offense is a pretty douchey thing to do.

[Deletedaccount1]

I tend to find those that most loudly proclaim themselves mature or adults are most often the most immature.

I tend to find those who act immature are the most immature. I'm not talking about you as much for the record, there are three or four specific people in here who are consistently terrible about making constructive posts.

[Breccia]

I'm imploring because i can easily see how responses usually go, and doing three steps of "he is an idiot/those are not facts" before getting to actual discussion gets boring after a while.

Wait, you have a problem with "those are not facts"? You have a problem with Trump critics, using as their opening rebuttal, "those are not facts"? Isn't the part where Trump says something which is flat-out provably untrue, pointing out that it is flat-out provably untrue, easily the most important thing you could say? I mean, what if Clinton got up on stage and said "the average salary of Russia is much lower than Mexico, Iran, and India" wouldn't the correct response be "actually they're all about the same"?

As several people have posted, the issue is about blatant hypocrisy. Defending a candidate who blatantly and repeatedly character assassinates, then demanding others not to character assassinate him, is not technically hypocrisy. It would be, if Trump demanded it himself. Instead, it is simply a double-standard. Allowing or admiring one's favored candidate for the highest office of government (any country, doesn't matter) who blatantly and repeatedly assassinates character, while rebuking everyday average people for doing the same, is a double standard. It proves that you don't really care about the morals or ethics of character assassination (and by proxy the candidate you're defending), and therefore, we're going to ignore your request.

Also, pointing out true things that Trump has actually done, is by definition, not character assasssination. It's only character assassination when you lie, or slander. Like Trump does.

By contrast, Trump is a hypocrite when he demands Clinton release her full detailed medical records, when he himself hasn't released his own, preferring instead a memo written in 5 minutes that contains more factual, grammatical, and medical errors than you'd expect from an actual medical practioner. Including the parts he had to walk back on a live NBC interview. For example, claiming Trump is healthier now than JFK was when he was running, despite an age gap of a generation. It's even more hypocritical when you bring up his tax records. Again. Or when you bring up Trump's concern about Clinton's mental and physical stamina, when Trump walks away from handing out boxes of Play-Doh in under 60 seconds. Or when you bring up that Clinton traveled for more days and to more countries than any other Secretary of State in the history of the US, while Trump loses interest of business deals, sells the rights to slap his name on a building or declares bankruptcy, and walks away. As a reminder, Trump has exactly as much medical training as he does legal training, also known as none. His claiming to know what Clinton's state of health is, is just as risky as his claiming to defend all 12 articles of the Constitution.

Hypocrisy
Character Assassination

These, and other correctly used words and phrases, will continue to be tossed around by people on both sides who actually know what they're talking about. You're welcome to join us anytime.

[mvaliz]

I tend to find those who act immature are the most immature. I'm not talking about you as much for the record, there are three or four specific people in here who are consistently terrible about making constructive posts.

An excellent example of yours constructively posting, are we to assume?

Hypocracy, thy name is Knadra.

On an ACTUAL constructively posting topic: Donadldumpnews.co (insert with the proper URL) just posted a bullshit headline saying FOX news kicked out Megan Kelly from FOX news for her anti-trump stance... but apparently it's not true at all. Way to go Dump for egging your supporters to mimic your splendid example by lying to the American People out of fear of anybody who doesn't think like you do.

[Deletedaccount1]

An excellent example of yours constructively posting, are we to assume?

Hypocracy, thy name is Knadra.

It's not related to the topic but it is constructive to talk about the quality of a thread or lack thereof.

- - - Updated - - -

OT:

Trump would probably be winning if he still looked and sounded like this. Even though he's still basically wrong.

[Anevers]

I tend to find those that most loudly proclaim themselves mature or adults are most often the most immature.

That is some nice C.S. Lewis referencing there.

[Bollocks]

It's not related to the topic but it is constructive to talk about the quality of a thread or lack thereof.

- - - Updated - - -

OT:

Trump would probably be winning if he still looked and sounded like this. Even though he's still basically wrong.

I mean yes, generally younger candidates appeal more to the general audience and his critiques towards hillary would have more power. Though I digress on the tone of his speech. Trump appeals to the frustrations of the general public and I don't see how the voice presented in the video would do that.

[mvaliz]

I mean yes, generally younger candidates appeal more to the general audience and his critiques towards hillary would have more power. Though I digress on the tone of his speech. Trump appeals to the frustrations of the general public and I don't see how the voice presented in the video would do that.

Yeah, the Dump in that video is pretty much the same Dump we have now... only then he talks a bit faster and appears a slight bit more coherent. You still have him here waffling "We buy japanese cars, we get all this trash from Japan - but I LOVE japan, don't get me wrong, the Japanese are great" blah blah blah....

Ultimately though it's still the same ephemiral vauge nonsense he repeats from whatever his news sources are, minus the hatemongering towards minorities.

[Pangean]

Yeah, the Dump in that video is pretty much the same Dump we have now... only then he talks a bit faster and appears a slight bit more coherent. You still have him here waffling "We buy japanese cars, we get all this trash from Japan - but I LOVE japan, don't get me wrong, the Japanese are great" blah blah blah....

Ultimately though it's still the same ephemiral vauge nonsense he repeats from whatever his news sources are, minus the hatemongering towards minorities.

1988 was not a very good year for Trump and in fact was the start of some of the episodes that demonstrate how bad his decision making was/is and his fundamental dishonesty.

"But his response to his surging celebrity was a series of manic, ill-advised ventures. He cheated on his wife, the mother of his first three children. In business, he was acquisitive to the point of recklessness. He bought and sold chunks of stocks of companies he talked about taking over. He glitzed up his gaudy yacht, the yacht the banks would seize less than three years later. He used hundreds of millions of dollars of borrowed money to pay high prices for a hotel and an airline—and his lenders would take them, too. And he tussled for months with game-show magnate Merv Griffin for ownership of his third casino in Atlantic City, the most expensive, gargantuan one yet, the Trump Taj Mahal, which led quickly to the first of his four corporate bankruptcy filings.

The man who now says he would be a good president because of his ability to make good deals made bad deals; 1988 was the year in which the candidate whose pitch is success sowed the seeds of many of his signature failures."

Read the rest at: http://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...ind-213721?o=0

Its a great insight into the disaster who is now the GOP candidate for president.

[Deleted]

President Trump is going to be so great for this country! He will build the wall, deport MILLIONS of illegal immigrants, bring back manufacturing jobs, and make this country so much more secure by supporting the police and banning immigration of those seeking to do this country harm.

Trump 2016! Representing REAL Americans and Making America Great Again.

[lockedout]

Yeah, the Dump in that video is pretty much the same Dump we have now... only then he talks a bit faster and appears a slight bit more coherent. You still have him here waffling "We buy japanese cars, we get all this trash from Japan - but I LOVE japan, don't get me wrong, the Japanese are great" blah blah blah....

Ultimately though it's still the same ephemiral vauge nonsense he repeats from whatever his news sources are, minus the hatemongering towards minorities.

What hate mongering exactly are you referring to?

[Pangean]

President Trump is going to be so great for this country! He will build the wall, deport MILLIONS of illegal immigrants, bring back manufacturing jobs, and make this country so much more secure by supporting the police and banning immigration of those seeking to do this country harm.

Trump 2016! Representing REAL Americans and Making America Great Again.

Since the proud bigot won't define what a REAL American is I went and found the test that John Stewart came up with for the 2008 election. While dated it should be helpful for those who are concerned that a bigot's definition of a REAL American may not include them.

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/8azg7c...real-american-

[Cthulhu 2020]

Since the proud bigot won't define what a REAL American is I went and found the test that John Stewart came up with for the 2008 election. While dated it should be helpful for those who are concerned that a bigot's definition of a REAL American may not contain them.

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/8azg7c...real-american-

Ransath actually hates America and the constitution. I saw him say it with my own two eyes.

[Deleted]

Ransath actually hates America and the constitution. I saw him say it with my own two eyes.

LOL - na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na na.....Batman! Quotes or it didn't happen.