Republican Election 2016 - Donald Trump Megathread [OFFICIAL]

[LilSaihah]

That's the Trump effect. I said something due to Trump, that I never thought I would. I'd rather have Bush be president. No mater who it will be next time, at least it's not Trump.

Which Bush?

[stomination]

When did they do that exactly? In Iraq? lol

Was Iraq the only time we had soldiers wearing uniforms deployed? Do you think they only do their job during war or overseas?

[callipygoustp]

I'm really going to miss Obama.

I'd happily vote for him again.

[Ryme]

Just found this.

[stomination]

Just found this.

I just find it amazing how long it took people to find this stuff.

[stomination]

Ditto... I would love to meet him as well, but all of his appearances get sold out pretty fast.

And I agree, as people have said, his supporters will remain... Trump is scary, but his supporters are scarier... not because they are "evil", but because the anger and vitriol he has injected into the political sphere, and most of these people bought it lock, stock, and barrel.

When you can say something like "I can kill someone and still not lose votes from people that support me", there is something rotten in the state of Denmark.

The real problem is there is anger and vitriol coming from both sides. Lots of name calling and shaming from supporters which is pretty evident on just this one website.

[Ausr]

I'm really going to miss Obama.

Same here. You might not like some things he's done but damn, brought a great dignity to the position after Bush and he just knows how to work a crowd.

[Slybak]

I just find it amazing how long it took people to find this stuff.

He even prevented his own campaign from doing self-opposition research, which is absurdly amateurish. Campaigns, for the sake of basic preparedness, always hire PIs to dig through the candidate's past to get an idea of what the opponent could dig up on them. Lewandowski wanted to do it and was refused. Manafort wanted to do it and was refused.

So its not exactly a surprise that Kellyanne Conway, his latest campaign manager, can get up on TV and say "I have no idea what's out there." Because she probably doesn't.

[Justank]

http://money.cnn.com/2014/12/19/news...-bailouts-end/

The U.S. government essentially closed the books on TARP with a $15.3 billion profit.

Fucking Bush!

- - - Updated - - -



A lot of vets left the Military under Bill Clinton, I am sure they care about that more than Trump spitting on Khan. Then there is Benghazi. You may say those 2 things don't matter but I bet most military people disagree.

Active duty here, with what is nothing more than my personal opinion of course. Far more troubling than anything I've seen on Benghazi, far more troubling than the likelihood of Clinton starting up more crap in the Middle East, is Trump's attitude towards our allies and towards nuclear weapons. That he can in the same breath talk about how tough he's going to be on China and then talk about pulling forces out of our bases in Japan and Korea over his belief that we're getting a 'bad deal' is absurd to me. It shows he has no idea what's going on in the region. And that's not even getting into NATO.

Probably a bit late to respond to you, but I wanted to offer up my viewpoint.

[AndaliteBandit]

That's the Trump effect. I said something due to Trump, that I never thought I would. I'd rather have Bush be president. No mater who it will be next time, at least it's not Trump.

If McCain had given it another go with a competent running mate this time, I honestly don't think Hillary would have stood a chance.

[callipygoustp]

If McCain had given it another go with a competent running mate this time, I honestly don't think Hillary would have stood a chance.

Yeah, i don't know what the fuck he was thinking. I like McCain, have for a long time, but choosing Palin..... yeah, no.

[LilSaihah]

I have not seen anyone at Hillary rallies.

ftfy :^)

If McCain had given it another go with a competent running mate this time, I honestly don't think Hillary would have stood a chance.

Isn't it popular opinion around here- and probably in the US in general- that literally anyone who wasn't Trump would have a seriously strong chance of winning against Hillary?

The only reason I'm not ready to toss out Trump's chances of winning is just because we might see another serious health episode like on 9/11, another major terrorist attack caused by immigrants, or any other number of events. Both campaigns appear to be running on fumes.

[Deleted]

I have not seen anyone being kicked, hit, sucker punched, or spit on at Hillary rallies.

I agree that there is vitriol coming from both sides, but there is also some false equivalency going on.

We saw one old fart punch a guy for starting trouble at a trump rally yet on the other side there's been riots,assaults and an attempted assassination.

[AndaliteBandit]

Yeah, i don't know what the fuck he was thinking. I like McCain, have for a long time, but choosing Palin..... yeah, no.

The Republican party has a major problem with attracting votes from women, so he was probably going off of the advice of his party leaders or his campaign advisors.

But it just kinda demonstrates even further how out of touch Republicans are with women if they thought Palin could fix that.

I have not seen anyone being kicked, hit, sucker punched, or spit on at Hillary rallies.

This happened at a Trump rally. This swastika/zionist banner ended up getting left on the press table after Trump was ranting about a globalist banking conspiracy controlling the media.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2...ta-tsr-sot.cnn

- - - Updated - - -

Isn't it popular opinion around here- and probably in the US in general- that literally anyone who wasn't Trump would have a seriously strong chance of winning against Hillary?

Almost anyone, probably.

Except Christie, but maybe I'm being optimistic.

[alexw]

I just find it amazing how long it took people to find this stuff.

It didn't take that long really. The general election campaign has only been going on for a few months. Or did you mean why it wasn't found before then? That's because the republicans didn't dig because the party of regressives voters liked all the sexist, racist, xenophobic crap he was coming out with. Remember when he used sexist insults against Carly Fiorina and Megan Kelley? Those didn't make his polling numbers go down, they actually went up. So why would Cruz/Rubino/etc dig into Trumps past regarding how he treats women, if whatever they revealed would most likely make him more popular among the regressive party's voters?

[Gray_Matter]

Isn't it popular opinion around here- and probably in the US in general- that literally anyone who wasn't Trump would have a seriously strong chance of winning against Hillary?

I would say, yes and no. Part of the reason why Clinton's unfavorables are so high is because she has been a target for a while. If she wasn't expected to run for President, do you think the GOP would have gone after her with such gusto? Benghazi, emails? Those wouldn't have surfaced if she wasn't running. In the same way the Dems would have gone after whomever was the candidate on the GOP side. Also, if they accusations are are true and Russia is behind the DNC and other hacks because they like Trump then it's unlikely that the DNC or the others would have been hacked if Trump wasn't in the race. You might even find that the RNC was the one that was hacked instead. Thirdly, any other candidate wouldn't be perfect in Clinton's place. Yes, even Bernie. The RNC claws would have been out in a big way for him and you might even find that the donors would have stuck with Trump regardless of the baggage he brings simply because they feel that Bernie is too left. So maybe Clinton would fair better than someone like Bernie.

It's difficult to say what would happen with different candidates on either side.

[LilSaihah]

So why would Cruz/Rubino/etc dig into Trumps past regarding how he treats women, if whatever they revealed would most likely make him more popular among the regressive party's voters?

The reason that attacks on Megyn Kelly worked is because she's an element of the MSM and trust in the MSM is extremely low, including single-digits for CNN.

And the MSM did trot out a few women early in the election cycle, including the primaries, to try to create this smear. It didn't work- the very same women that they quoted came out and said "no, this is a blatant misreading".

I would say, yes and no. Part of the reason why Clinton's unfavorables are so high is because she has been a target for a while. If she wasn't expected to run for President, do you think the GOP would have gone after her with such gusto? Benghazi, emails?

I dunno if that's really a fair assessment. She was expected to run for President because reasons, and those reasons also made her a target. I think the email scandal at least has some merit to it. I don't think there's a causative relationship between her likelihood of presidential candidacy and the 'witch hunt'.

[alexw]

The reason that attacks on Megyn Kelly worked is because she's an element of the MSM and trust in the MSM is extremely low, including single-digits for CNN.

And the MSM did trot out a few women early in the election cycle, including the primaries, to try to create this smear. It didn't work- the very same women that they quoted came out and said "no, this is a blatant misreading".
.

Smears - lol. Don't you mean factual reports of how Trump treats women, and how he has sexually assaulted them in the past? I take it from your post that you are a delusional republican/right-winger?

And no the attacks on Megyn Kelly did not work because she is part of the media. She is part of Fox news. That darling of the right that is HIGHLY trusted by conservatives. It worked because it was a sexist, misogynistic attack, and that is what the regressive voters of the party of regressives wanted to hear. Just like how a similar attack on Carly Fiorina also drove the regressives into a frenzy of approval. Like it or not the regressives wanted someone like this that would say all the things that modern day society frowns upon. Hell they even have phrases to describe it "telling it like it is" and "sticking it to the PC culture". Even now they are sticking with Trump and many of them are doing so because they see nothing wrong with what Trump has done, but then that's regressives for you.

[Deleted]

I'm really going to miss Obama.

Obama is a very classy President; I hope he'll be like Carter and continue doing good work after leaving office.

I'm also going to miss Michelle:



I confess I never paid her any attention until her stunning Convention speech. The above shows that was not a fluke or something manufactured for her by speechwriters. I particularly like the way she attacks Trump head on without ever mentioning his name; a clever tactic.

[Theinquisition]

Active duty here, with what is nothing more than my personal opinion of course. Far more troubling than anything I've seen on Benghazi, far more troubling than the likelihood of Clinton starting up more crap in the Middle East, is Trump's attitude towards our allies and towards nuclear weapons. That he can in the same breath talk about how tough he's going to be on China and then talk about pulling forces out of our bases in Japan and Korea over his belief that we're getting a 'bad deal' is absurd to me. It shows he has no idea what's going on in the region. And that's not even getting into NATO.

Probably a bit late to respond to you, but I wanted to offer up my viewpoint.

Agreed, as a vet both candidates scare me