home

Obama and Hillary Give Trump a One-Two Punch

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2016
Posted on Tue Jun 14, 2016 at 10:32:24 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

President Obama and Hillary Clinton unleashed powerful attacks on Donald Trump today. Maybe together they will knock him out.

Speaking 250 miles apart Tuesday, but as if reading from the same hymnal, President Barack Obama and presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton delivered simultaneous withering critiques of Donald Trump's response to the Orlando terror attack.

The seemingly coordinated salvo from the Democratic Party's two biggest heavyweights is a preview of the months to come, when Clinton will have at her disposal at least two popular presidents, the vice president, her Democratic primary opponent, and a slew of other high-profile Democrats.

As for Trump, he's on his own. His party's heavy-weights seem content to have him dangle in the wind.[More...]

Trump has been left more or less to defend himself, with few high-profile surrogates to back him up.

....In its response to Obama's evisceration Tuesday, the Republican National Committee, which Trump has leaned on to supplement his under-developed campaign, made no effort to defend its presumptive nominee. The committee's press release criticized Obama's terror strategy and linked it to Clinton without even mentioning Trump.

< Hillary Wins D.C. Primary | Another O.J. Simpson Series >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Obama and Hillary Give Trump a One-Two Punch | 91 comments (91 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Elizabeth Warren (5.00 / 5) (#4)
    by Repack Rider on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 02:32:44 AM EST
    ...seems to take particular delight in sticking pins in the Trump voodoo doll.  She is definitely working in concert with O and HRC.  She is going to be a primary instigator of Trumpian explosions.

    All he can do is call her "Pocahontas."  In a great bit of political ju-jitsu, someone registered pocahontas.com and it directs to Elizabeth Warren's donation site.

    Warren probably has a psychological dossier to work from, with bullet points listing every soft spot in the Trump psyche.  Trump is organically incapable of not responding to an insult.  Warren isn't running and has the luxury of calling him out,

    Trump and Warren face to face...  I'd buy a ticket.

    Hillarys surrogates (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 08:07:33 AM EST
    Bill, Warren, Obama and Biden (alternate being Sanders) are like the freaking four horsemen of the progressive apocalypse.

    And that's just the generals.  

    Trump has Jeff Sessions and  Rick Perry?

    Let's get this party started.

    Parent

    And, add Chris Christie (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 10:32:34 AM EST
    to the Jeff Sessions/Rick Perry team. Christie is ambassador to McDonald's being assigned to pick up burgers for Trump.

    Parent
    Oops (none / 0) (#9)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 08:13:36 AM EST
    as Perry would say.

    Parent
    I read that Warren herself (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Towanda on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 10:22:24 PM EST
    bought the domain name of pocahontas.com.

    I suspect the fine hand and humor of some of Clinton's IT team.  It turns out hilarious gif's, like the one on Clinton's website of her attempt to make the NYC subway card work, and tweets out gif's and more that make HRC's account fun to follow.  

    Parent

    Lol :D (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Nemi on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 06:21:33 PM EST
    Via Hillary Clinton on Twitter.

    Can't stop giggling. '-}

    Parent

    What? (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 08:51:31 AM EST
    Belgium is a beautiful city.

    The story now, reported in Variety and around, is that Donalds plan is to solidify his base of support and start a Glen Beck style media group.  Possibly an OWN style cable channel, and Internet channel, etc.  all he talks about recently is how much money the cable channels are making off him.  

    Now, I'm not the greatest business man evah but I'm willing to bet most of those viewers are interested in Donald, to the extent they ARE interested in Donald, because of the unbelievable fact he is running for president.   When he's no longer a threat to the highest office in the land will his ratings be as big?  Maybe.  And maybe he's right that the several million rubes he has rope a doped is all he needs to get rich.

    Either way the republicans are screwed.   He is clearly more interested in building his audience than winning the election.  One bit of evidence of that is he is now refusing to hold a fundraiser any place unless he has a massive rally also.  This is, electorally, crazy.  Of the big fundraising states possibly only one is in any way in play.

    I am really beginning to thnk, conventional wisdom be damned, he will be ousted at the convention.  That may even be the plan.   What would solidify his rubes more than that?

    Parent

    minor quibble (none / 0) (#47)
    by CST on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 01:20:39 PM EST
    Belgium is a country not a city.

    Parent
    Oops (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by CST on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 02:40:50 PM EST
    I finally saw the headline.

    Sorry Howdy for confusing you with Trump

    Parent

    I loved the 'One Year of Donald Trump' (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by ruffian on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 01:48:54 PM EST
    video also.   They really do good work.

    Parent
    Yes, whoever they are (none / 0) (#49)
    by Nemi on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 02:26:48 PM EST
    they are great at what they are doing. I like how they contrast his outrageous stupidities with this happy, carefree music. Their timing is perfect too.

    She also has a great team taking care of her Twitter account. Love her answer to this tweet quoting Donald Trump:

    Trump: "You tell me: who is better for the gay community and who is better for women than Donald Trump."

    Hillary Clinton:

    Hi.

    ;-) But I still don't get what is up with him and Bernie Sanders both referring to themselves in the third person.

    Parent

    Wiki (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 02:31:54 PM EST

    The tendency to refer to oneself in the third person is often viewed by psychologists as a symptom of narcissism.



    Parent
    A near-term outcome (none / 0) (#52)
    by christinep on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 03:52:35 PM EST
    I believe that you mentioned, Howdy, that it doesn't seem so far-fetched that the Repubs could make a serious attempt to jettison D Trump at their convention in less than four weeks. The elusive unity has given way this a.m. to stories of a delegate plot to do so ... that may further explain the quiet from M McConnell.  It may also amplify McConnell's earlier statement <after Trump's fiasco involving Judge Curiel> that their presumed nominee had about two or three weeks to improve behavior, or words to that effect.  This rumored plot could be the implicit "or else" to which the Senator referred.

    The continuing saga gets stranger by the day. IF Donald Trump doesn't pull himself out of this spin soon, realistically, we may be talking about whether UTAH's  electoral votes could go to the Democrats.  In fact, early polling by the Deseret News indicated that HRC and Trump are tied. Even early polling showing that situation in Utah of all places .... Think about the situation in ARIZONA too.  There you have a conservative's conservative Senator Jeff Flake stated & re-stating his continuing public opposition to Trump as nominee; and, now another well-known conservative's widow, Susan Goldwater has publicly said that she is "appalled" by Trump's behavior, that her late husband Barry Goldwater would also be appalled, and she added that Trump is "so, so shallow." Of course, pushing hard for Trump to counter is Senator John McCain, who is up for reelection in a state where a number of state legislators have the Trump type of leanings.  Maybe we will witness a classic squeeze play with McCain caught in the middle?

    For now, the Repub mess resembles a form of water torture as they are being subjected--daily--to the drip, drip, drip, unending drips hitting their noggins.  So ... Speaker Paul Ryan is now offering that it is ok for members to "vote their conscience."  Yes, indeed! This new prisoners dilemma couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch.  

    P.S.  An EPA Assistant Administrator years ago used to talk in the Third Person.  It could be jarring when hearing it in a small conference room, etc. close-up ... oh, he quickly got the reputation of being a bit off-key (in his own world) and, after awhile, he tended to be regarded with justifiable grimaces and rolling eyes.

    Parent

    interesting you mention Utah (none / 0) (#53)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 05:32:03 PM EST
    They have announced the co-chairs of the rules committee.  The committee that, by one simple rule change - they are calling it a conscious clause that would release delegates to vote their conscious on the FIRST ballot, could give Trump the boot.

    They are a delegate from Utah, home of famously anti Trump forces, and another guy who while currently a Trump supporter is also famously a pretty much down the line "whats good for the party" guy.

    they say these two could be very bad news for Trump if the currently growing dump Trump movement gains momentum before the convention.

    smart people who were saying this was impossible a month ago are saying it is, while still perhaps unlikely, totally possible.

    and as I said, i think it might be what he wants.  he doesnt want to be president.  you are talking about a guy who has never worked a day in his life and the hardest job in the world.

    all i can say is plllleeeeeaaassssssseeeeee
    oh please
    oh please
    oh please
    oh please


    Parent

    also (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 05:39:04 PM EST
    he hates losing more than anything.  he is going to lose the general election to Hillary.  that is obvious and becoming more so by the day.

    if he can make them give him the boot he can always say he could have won.

    Parent

    I (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 06:10:17 PM EST
    would hate to be part of the Republican "thought leaders" trying to game this one out. It's pretty much pick your poison territory now.

    They only have two starkly different paths. Dump Trump and incur the wrath of a large section of their base or support Trump and endorse his soft core fascism. Probably get clobbered in either case.

    I'm thinking that many of the party elders would prefer to dump Trump to protect their legacy but I am sure that many of the up and comers  hunger for his voters and might be reluctant to chase them off. also incumbents in tight races are sweating bullets, it must really suck to be John McCain right now.

    Parent

    it is said this would have to (none / 0) (#57)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 06:31:42 PM EST
    "come from the delegates" and not from DC.  ok, but.  there is an interview with Chuckie that will be on Sunday where Paul Ryan, in a quote that is already getting a lot of replay, says in response to a question about republicans supporting Trump people should be free to "vote their conscience".

    that is a very interesting choice of words considering the rules change to allow dumping of Trump at the convention, of which he is still the head, is being called "a conscience clause"

    Parent

    Big down-ticket fears for Repubs, too (none / 0) (#58)
    by christinep on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 06:35:32 PM EST


    Parent
    I don't know (none / 0) (#59)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 06:54:55 PM EST
    what's going to happen but honestly who would they replace Donald with? Cruz? I hear there is some talk of bringing back Scott Walker.

    Parent
    anyone not (none / 0) (#60)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 07:08:07 PM EST
    a racist proto fascist would be my guess.

    that said, Ryan....

    he has said absolutely not but not long ago he said the same thing about his current job.  watching his quote i mentioned upthread i got a distinct "please dont throw me in that brier patch vibe"

    and you know what, he would be the most formidable candidate the party could run.  imo

    Parent

    I (none / 0) (#62)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 07:56:34 PM EST
    am not sure Ryan really wants it and if he he does I suspect he is playing a long game. Roll the dice this time and perhaps suffer a major loss that would end his career or wait until next cycle when he can be the young leader of the reborn Republican party.

    Romney on the other hand has nothing to lose and a loss for him could be spun as a passing of the "old guard" and his reassuring, respectable demeanor will help calm the non crazed long time Republicans who are in sheer panic.

    But, as they say the plot thickens and this cycle has been one heck of a roller coaster already so who really knows.

    Parent

    Most (none / 0) (#74)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 08:09:15 AM EST
    formidable is relative I guess. Just shows what poor choices they would have to pick from.

    Parent
    Good Question (none / 0) (#61)
    by Repack Rider on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 07:54:43 PM EST
    who would they replace Donald with?

    If it waits until the convention, whoever it is will have to gear up a campaign in a couple of months, to deal with a campaign that has been in place for eight years.

    If somebody takes The Donald's place in the general, he or she will almost certainly lose big.   Thirteen million Trump voters will refuse to vote for the new candidate, which suggests an even BIGGER loss than with The Donald!  It would make a return in four years an improbability.

    They have to protect their flank, the down ticket, especially the Senate, so somebody has to REPRESENT.  Minor hitch: taking the nomination now would be falling on one's sword for the party.  It would mean giving up some safe elected position to lose big.  It might even end the grift for the lucky candidate.

    Can't think of anyone who wants that.  Default mode is Hillary runs unopposed and the Democrats run the table.

    More popcorn.

    Parent

    Joe has a point (none / 0) (#63)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 08:07:45 PM EST
    about Romney.  he seems eager to fall on his sword to stop Donald.

    Parent
    That's (none / 0) (#64)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 08:13:56 PM EST
    why I keep circling back to Romney, he has nothing to lose, he might go down hard but there are worse ways to leave the ring than fighting for the honor of your party.

    That four month sprint to the end might even be enticing to Romney, I got the impression that his decision not to run was based partly on his unwillingness to go through the 18 month time sucking ordeal, a four month gig as a white knight would be a piece of cake.

    Parent

    heh (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 08:31:37 PM EST
    leave the ring

    seen this?

    Parent

    omg.... (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by desertswine on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 10:11:00 PM EST
    no... please

    Parent
    Good points. (none / 0) (#67)
    by christinep on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 10:17:21 PM EST
    Do you also get the feeling that Romney might want to redeem himself ... in the sense of being viewed as the person who would do good rather than being recalled as the man disparaging the 47%?

    Still hanging out there with a number of delegates, inside strategies, and a disciplined far-right plan is the never-going-away Ted Cruz ... where does that go?

    Parent

    I (none / 0) (#70)
    by FlJoe on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 07:33:28 AM EST
    don't think it will be about redeeming himself but redeeming the party, at least that will be the narrative, the truth being he is one of the last "sane" Republicans that they can trot out.

    I seriously doubt Cruz has a chance, he was the most loathed person by the establishment before Trump came along. Cruz just does not have enough allies to pull off this monumental political power grab.

    I serious doubt that the powers that be will launch this coup and leave it up to chance and chaos of a convention fight, IMO they will not pull the trigger without already having their chosen one and a reasonable path to pulling it off, trying and failing might be the worst case scenario for the GOP.

    Parent

    agreed (none / 0) (#73)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 07:48:13 AM EST
    trying and failing would be the worst possible outcome.   I also agree about Cruz.   otoh there is Kasich.  he was at least a candidate.  and i get the feeling he might be willing to give up his office for a run.  he would also be a formidable candidate.  more than Mitt IMO.

    i think we might know where its going next week.  if Donald keeps twisting their tails he must want it to happen.  

    Parent

    I was thinking (none / 0) (#75)
    by FlJoe on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 08:29:28 AM EST
    that Kasich would be a reasonable choice,  though I don't see him as particularly formidable candidate, I think Romney's name recognition, fund raising prowess and proven experience on the nation wide stage gives him a leg up, especially in the bizarre situation that this coup will engender.

    I am assuming that if and when a replacement is named,that person will be in one heck of a political crossfire between the Democrats and the Donald, Romney seems to be the best suited to withstand it, Kasich has a good resume, but his low key "nice guy" persona might not be as good as Romney's "steely resolve" in this situation.

    Parent

    I can't (none / 0) (#77)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 08:43:16 AM EST
    imagine Kasich would want to be the nominee at this point. It would have to be someone like Cruz who has a God complex and an extremely safe seat or Romney who is never going to be running for anything again. Anybody who would take the nomination from Trump has to know that this would be the end of the line for them.

    Parent
    Cruz (none / 0) (#76)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 08:37:24 AM EST
    probably doesn't have enough allies but I do believe he is behind this whole "conscience clause" stuff simply because it seems to be his delegates that are bringing it up. The fact that his delegates are now talking about trying to get rid of Trump besides the elite makes me think he has been working behind the scenes. I don't know I guess the elite could decide they would rather go down with Cruz than with Trump. It certainly would take away any power Cruz has in the senate and would lessen the hold the white evangelicals have on the party for Cruz to be the losing candidate.

    Parent
    All true (none / 0) (#78)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 08:49:48 AM EST
    He was second.  And he definitely has the ambition to do it.  And has shown he is not really that interested in the work of politics anyway.

    It might come down to the party thinking if we are going to do this we might as well have a small chance of winning.  They would not with Ted.

    But you are correct. Several of his delegates are at the core of this effort.  One was On the Hayes show last night.

    Parent

    Coming (none / 0) (#79)
    by FlJoe on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 09:28:42 AM EST
    in second is rather meaningless in this context. The unbinding of the delegates is essentially declaring the entire primary/caucus results as null and void. While Cruz might have a decent chance of holding on to many or even most of his delegates I do not think he can expand his support enough to win a convention floor fight.

     I could almost see him bargaining for the VP slot or some other reward, I see him and others trading cooperation now for better track position in 2020.

    Parent

    The permutations grow log rhythmically (none / 0) (#80)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 09:54:14 AM EST
    We might as well e reading chicken entrails.  But,  I could see a logical argument for giving it to Ted.   It would allow them the tiny fig leaf of trying to honor the voters.  Also if they do this and don't give it to Ted you could have a second revolt on your hands from his delegates.  And since everyone pretty much knows they will get slaughtered if they do this, why not give it to Ted.

    They get rid of Ted, they have a candidate they can at least give lip service to supporting and, well, they get rid of Ted.

    Parent

    Definitely (none / 0) (#81)
    by FlJoe on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 10:53:17 AM EST
    wheels within wheels spinning madly and erratically. I just do not think that there is much consideration about a tiny fig leaf when the whole forest is aflame.

    I suppose there may be some validity to your Cruz as a sacrificial lamb,  but I don't think the GOP would like to be labeled as the party of Cruz much more then being labeled the party of Trump.Going from the fascist/racist standard bearer to the theocrat/tea party absolutist is not exactly worth the effort.IMO.

    I think the dumptrump movement is as much about the future branding of the party as it is about staving off electoral armageddon.

    Remember it's no longer about the voters, the media or even the delegates anymore, it's going to be raw insider political power, right in the wheelhouse of the establishment.

     It's reasonable to assume that, the delegates from say, WI, could be heavily influenced by Walker as his own personal bargaining chips, paying out political favors as rewards that Cruz definitely could not.

    Fortunately for us political junkies/trainwreck fans who foresaw a dry spell up to the convention, the supply seems to be never ending and the stuff is Primo.

    Parent

    True and true (none / 0) (#84)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 11:12:25 AM EST
    But I would not underestimate the organizing skills of the Cruzers.  They proved to be very good at that during the primary.

    And honestly I don't think most republicans have much of a problem with Cruz politics.  Or Donalds for that matter.  As Mitch put it he just needs to get on script and stop saying what he thinks.

    Parent

    I (none / 0) (#88)
    by FlJoe on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 11:54:59 AM EST
    do respect Cruz's skills, I think his campaign for the most part was well run, he did prove to be good at delegate sniping, but that was mostly against the rank amateurism of Trump's camp. He will be playing in the big leagues now. I won't rule him out but I consider him a dark horse at the moment. I think the odds are more favorable for him as VP choice.

    Parent
    Behind-the-scenes? (none / 0) (#85)
    by christinep on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 11:15:23 AM EST
    In whatever manner, there is an air of orchestration behind-the-scenes.  Or attempted orchestration.  All of a sudden there are talking-point like Repub mumbo-jumbo about "conscience." How spontaneous ... ha!  Romney has been referring to conscience for weeks (since he started talking about what his grandchildren would think, etc.) Paul Ryan said yesterday that everyone should feel free to vote their conscience (as Howdy noticed above, a timely coincidence with developments in Utah and the Rules Committee.) The various party officials who have explicitly or implicitly withdrawn support are using the terms, language of conscience.  Meanwhile, silence has engulfed Senator McConnell ....

    While McConnell is seeming to demur, Mr. Morality/Mr. Morality Troops organizer, Ted Cruz is reported to be working the delegate back-channels.  I very much agree with those who observe that Cruz doesn't have the numbers; and, I very much agree that the old-time party leaders aren't about to let everything be spontaneous or whatever during convention week.  Certainly, they can't allow an open melee (if they can help it.)  So, yes, that would lead to a strong role for Ted Cruz as they move toward a usurpation plan.  

    This morning--notice the caution--it seems to me that Cruz could garner the VP designation spot if he wanted.  Whether he'll go for the top again ... that, to me, depends on what deal the various interests can strike.  We know this: They have less than 29 days to have some behind-the-scenes agreement if they are serious about any attempt.

    Parent

    The problem (none / 0) (#87)
    by KeysDan on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 11:47:45 AM EST
    with this dump-trump strategy is akin to the problem of finding blood in a turnip.  Hard to find Republicans with a conscience.  Never-the-less, the strategy has much going for it: diverts both trump and the dump-trumpers and sets back their efforts in the general campaign.

      The upside for trump is the huuge interest to be generated in the Republican Convention and the free media coverage--I still believe the dump-trump movement is fanciful...too little, too late, despite buyers remorse by those who should have known better. It is difficult to know just what it is that these Republicans do not like about Donald--I think they believe he is correct, just not politically correct.

    Parent

    This is the (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 12:05:51 PM EST
    Vanity Fair thing on his plans for a post election media empire.

    It explains a lot.

    Parent

    I (5.00 / 2) (#90)
    by FlJoe on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 12:18:22 PM EST
    think if you replace 'conscience' with 'save your skin' you could find plenty of takers.

    Parent
    I think I have it (none / 0) (#91)
    by Repack Rider on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 10:55:57 PM EST
    It is difficult to know just what it is that these Republicans do not like about Donald--

    What, other than losing them the election HUUUGE?  Making them apologize daily for the latest atrocity from their candidate, and every day set the bar a notch lower for what they will accept?

    How would YOU like to apologize for Trump every day for half a year?

    Burning question for me is who will get ON the Titanic as First Mate after the lifeboats have left, going down with the ship in the VP spot?

    Parent

    Bob Dole used to do that... (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by desertswine on Fri Jun 17, 2016 at 06:09:38 PM EST
    "I'm Bob Dole.  Bob Dole is tired.  Bob Dole is going home now."  It has a name, it's called illeism. Here's a list of some famous illeists (George is getting angry).


    Parent
    Heh (none / 0) (#68)
    by Nemi on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 06:50:52 AM EST
    hard to tell him and Elmo apart:

    Elmo  is tired. Elmo is going home now. ... Elmo wants pizza. ;)

    On Illeism and Narcissism:

    Still, it's pretty unusual for the average person to use illeism. Most often when a person does so it's because they're being either defensive about or protecting a particular image. That's why some think that folks who talk about themselves in the third person might actually be revealing their narcissism. For narcissists, of course, it's always about image.

    Just because someone is concerned about their social image, however, doesn't make them a narcissist. People of genuine honor often guard their reputations with considerable passion. They may have worked very hard to forge their character and their public image as well, so they hate to see that image tarnished in any way. [...] But sometimes people who talk about themselves in the third person can in fact be displaying an air of haughtiness and grandeur. It's their way of asserting that their very name or identity is important, inherently carrying significant social weight, and should command your respect.

    Wonder why illeism -- at least that's how it appears -- is mostly a male thing?

    Parent

    Narcissus (none / 0) (#69)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 07:16:39 AM EST
    Was a male I believe

    Parent
    And 'Illeas'? (none / 0) (#71)
    by Nemi on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 07:37:16 AM EST
    How about reading a comment before you reply.

    Parent
    how about taking (none / 0) (#72)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 07:42:43 AM EST
    a deep breath

    Parent
    How about (none / 0) (#82)
    by Nemi on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 10:53:57 AM EST
    being less condescending.

    How about not 'squandering' one of our precious, collective 200 comments -- before the thread flattens and the reply-function becomes inactive -- to tell me (mansplain?) something I, and I'm sure everybody else here, of course are aware of, that Narcissus is male. So what? Doesn't mean every narcissist is, and have absolutely nothing to do with my comment and my wondering if illeism is a 'male thing'.

    How about not making superfluos replies to my comments.

    How about not making replies to my comments at all, if you don't expect nor can accept that I react to them.

    And if you can't handle rejoinders, how about you just refrain from making replies all together?

    Parent

    I don't know what your problem is (none / 0) (#83)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 11:07:37 AM EST
    But it seems serious.  My Narcissus comment was just and observation.  And a true one relative to the question.  

    But you git yer wish.  I will not respond to you in the future.

    Noooo problem.

    Parent

    Sounds like (none / 0) (#42)
    by Nemi on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 06:52:52 AM EST
    a good one to follow. I'll give it a try. :)

    Actually I'm not 'on' Twitter myself and so far the only tweeter I've kept 'following' regularly -- because I learn a lot from him and his followers -- is Al Giardano, Bernie Sanders's 'presumptive' 2018-challenger, and less frequently Armando.

    Btw would you -- or anyone? -- know how to 'follow' the videos put up by Hillary Clinton's campaign? They've made some really nice, funny ones like this one with totally adorable 9 year old Noah. I love their style, but only see their videos when I catch someone else linking to them. Wouldn't mind being able to 'follow' them all.

    Parent

    @HillaryClinton (none / 0) (#43)
    by oculus on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 10:52:57 AM EST


    Parent
    Thanks (none / 0) (#44)
    by Nemi on Thu Jun 16, 2016 at 11:39:55 AM EST
    but I was thinking more of a place where they were all compiled and kind of 'stored'. I remember having seen some great ones, several similar to the one I linked to, but have no idea how to find them again. For example one mocking the republican contenders at an early debate, edited to make them come across as being totally obsessed with Hillary Clinton to the point where her name was all anyone ever uttered. Repeatedly.

    ... Hmmm, meanwhile I think I may have actually found the place. Seek, and ye shall find, right. ;)

    Parent

    I have to say (none / 0) (#5)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 06:43:32 AM EST
    it does drive Trump crazy. I also have to say whenever Trump responds with Pocahontas it makes me explode with laughter.

    Parent
    Chilling account of (5.00 / 3) (#33)
    by Nemi on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 04:07:20 PM EST
    A Trump Rally in Greensboro "Anger in here is palpable". In which a sane man live tweets insanity.

    Greensboro.. (5.00 / 3) (#34)
    by jondee on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 04:29:49 PM EST
    where, in 1979 not 1879, a bunch of Klansmen and Nazis showed up at anti-Klan demonstration and gunned down half a dozen people and were completely exonerated by an all white jury.

    Parent
    Best tweet (none / 0) (#35)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 05:08:21 PM EST
    of the lot: there are members of Trump's coalition who've been waiting for years for an excuse to let their hate out.

    Parent
    Terrible (none / 0) (#86)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jun 18, 2016 at 11:21:26 AM EST


    Parent
    Bloomberg Poll out this evening (none / 0) (#1)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 01:01:27 AM EST
    has Clinton at +12 over Trump (polling ran thru Monday). Over the next week we'll see if this is an outlier.

    Not so far in advance of election day (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by oculus on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 01:07:11 AM EST
    as to be all but meaningless?

    Parent
    If there was no election news this past weekend (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 01:17:55 AM EST
    I would say yes. But Sunday and Monday was Trump at his best (which is also his worst) so I find this one interesting since the polls before this last weekend had Clinton avg at +4.5

    Parent
    Yes - useful in before and after comparison (none / 0) (#6)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 06:47:15 AM EST
    week to week, not necessarily indicative of final result.

    Parent
    I thnk Trumps numbers will (none / 0) (#8)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 08:09:03 AM EST
    Shrink back to the hard 33.

    Parent
    And before the Orlando masscare (none / 0) (#37)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 09:07:04 PM EST


    Parent
    Yes, but the current polls (5.00 / 3) (#19)
    by KeysDan on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 11:35:43 AM EST
    are important for the Clinton campaign's momentum.  And, for Trump to respond by becoming more and more outrageous, deploying all the tactics that worked for him in the Republican primaries, but are likely to fall on much less receptive ears with sane people.

    Parent
    Was it push polling? (none / 0) (#13)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 10:44:45 AM EST
    Was Gary Johnson in that poll?

    Parent
    I don't know about push polling. (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 01:50:15 PM EST
    But Gary Johnson was included and polls at 9%.

    Parent
    Presumptive. I'm getting sick and tired (none / 0) (#11)
    by fishcamp on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 10:34:22 AM EST
    of that word.  So they both have the right numbers to become. their party's  candidates, but they still have to vote, twice I think, but when?  Is it before, during, or after their respective conventions?  Obviously I'm very weak in this type of knowledge.  I would guess most fishing guides are.  Help.

    lol, good for you having better things (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 10:59:37 AM EST
    to fill your brain with. There will be an official vote by the delegates at the conventions. Based on the delegates awarded via the primaries and caucuses, it is 'presumed' that both Trump and HRC will win that vote on the first ballot at their respective conventions. If either one of them comes up short of a majority on the first ballot, their pledged delegates are free to leave them and vote for someone else on the subsequent ballots, however many it takes till someone gets a majority of delegates.

    At that point the one with the majority of delegates is the actual nominee -  no longer 'presumptive'.

    I think that is it in a nutshell.

    Parent

    I thought only a percentage of the (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 11:09:36 AM EST
    Pledged delegates could vote for whoever they wanted in the second round after the first vote? That may be a Democratic convention thang too that I'm remembering

    Parent
    Yeah, there are rooolz... (5.00 / 1) (#17)
    by ruffian on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 11:12:18 AM EST
    Just trying to give a general sense there. I doubt fishcamp is going to follow every nuance during the conventions...probably some night fishing going on!

    Parent
    Traditionally, the Democratic delegates (none / 0) (#30)
    by christinep on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 12:49:41 PM EST
    participate in the roll call of states on Wednesday of convention week.

    Going back to the discussion up-thread about potential momentum, etc. from such as Bloomberg poll showing HRC well-positioned overall, the other side of the coin for Repubs nearing their convention one month from now is the pickle that Mr. Presumptive Repub Nominee poses.  For him; and, for them.  When could the pressure grow so intense for the already anxious Repub officials that they might reconsider the march they may well be on with explosive, deadbeat Donald? Two weeks out from the convention? One week and counting? Lastly, what if the lack of unity combined with increasing fear about their own political wherewithal reach an apex during the convention?  That, my friends, is when a phrase my Dad and his generation used could describe the scene: "Katie, bar the door!"  

    The summer polls could be quite effective this summer...depending, of course.

    Parent

    I hope for all that (none / 0) (#31)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 01:33:47 PM EST


    Parent
    The royal they (none / 0) (#12)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 10:43:54 AM EST
    At CNN say that Gary Johnson is running at 9%, and that number likely to increase.

    Even a stopped clock..... (none / 0) (#18)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 11:23:58 AM EST


    Parent
    If Johnson only peels off (none / 0) (#20)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 11:53:21 AM EST
    9% of the vote, that's hell for Trump to attempt to make up for.

    Parent
    I say (none / 0) (#21)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 11:55:55 AM EST
    It will be more than 9

    Parent
    If Trump remains the nominee (none / 0) (#22)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 11:56:36 AM EST
    I think almost anything could happen at this point.

    Parent
    He's on right now (none / 0) (#24)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 12:03:00 PM EST
    Is he going to double down on restricting some guns sales? I dunno cuz I just got rained out of signal.

    Parent
    Tracy (none / 0) (#26)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 12:16:09 PM EST
    Digital cable is SUCH a wonderful thing

    Parent
    Raspberries :) (none / 0) (#28)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 12:31:03 PM EST


    Parent
    I got it back (none / 0) (#25)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 12:09:29 PM EST
    He says Obama and now Hillary just let all these people in and we don't know who the hell they are. Josh on summer break starts laughing and says, "A New Yorker afraid because he doesn't know who in the hell all these people are."

    I'm not funny

    I can't even compete with teenagers

    Parent

    Apparently, the Orlando shooter's parents (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by Towanda on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 10:26:48 PM EST
    immigrated a year or two before he was born here.

    That would mean that it was Reagan who "let them in."  If Trump attacks Saint Ronnie, that finally could seal the Donald's doom with Republicans.

    Parent

    My gun family members are paranoid (none / 0) (#23)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 12:00:37 PM EST
    But I figured they were all going to vote Johnson anyway. Conservative gun people in general though seem very paranoid about their guns being taken away. I don't think the Duck can unsay what he said bout guns where they are concerned.

    Parent
    how odd (none / 0) (#36)
    by linea on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 08:48:26 PM EST
    i dont understand how anyone can vote libertarian. utopianists are silly. it's like, "somolia would be an awesome idylic country if everyone had a paperback copy of ayn rand's the fountainhead in their back pocket... and if everybody followed all the libertarian rules."

    also, i very much wanted to reply to your post on the previous open thread on "big eyes" but the thread was locked. i just wanted to say that it seems to be the current advice that lower liner makes your eyes look smaller.

    Parent

    Yes, IMO lower liner does (none / 0) (#41)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 10:45:45 PM EST
    They do kind of amazing makeup now. And I'm interested in it artistically. If you were a makeup munster in the 80's it's interesting. Makeup has made big leaps. I shudder thinking about how much babysitting I'd have to do to come up with the bucks and wear the possibilities now.

    To do the big eyes you start with a primer makeup base in the shape of a raccoon mask around the eyes in very light bright heavy coverage base. And then outline the eye very thickly. Thicker than anything I've ever worn, a line of at least a quarter inch and you don't necessarily follow the water line on your lower eye. It's fascinating in a way, but too much when ALL the trump girls are at it. They remind me of mean girls teenagers in look.

    My newly Libertarian family live on the remains of my family's ranch on the Colorado plains. The drought caused most of them to seek new employment. The cattle herds were starving so had to be sold. They tell me that the land seems to be healing now, grass is coming back. It takes years to build herds though. I don't know if they will return to ranching. But they live a very rural lifestyle with this heavy focus on guns. This is the new generation though. The households of the generation before had a simple pistol, a 22, a 30-06 with a scope for deer and elk hunting, and a shotgun for birds. That was all that was needed, guns were passed down, not really collected, certainly not over focused on. This is the new NRA brainwashed generation.

    Parent

    Lindsey Graham is going after Trump (none / 0) (#14)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 10:52:35 AM EST
    Says the people of Iraq and Afghanistan like him, trust him, want to partner with him (Graham), he's been to Iraq and Afghanistan 37 times...and he owns an AR-15. Donald Trump is dangerous, he has unnerved Lindsey. What is Lindsey Graham up to right now?

    Less than 1% in the polls :) (5.00 / 3) (#27)
    by CoralGables on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 12:22:26 PM EST


    Parent
    I see you're on summer break too (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 12:32:38 PM EST


    Parent
    I have been to Jackson Madison (none / 0) (#38)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Jun 15, 2016 at 09:10:01 PM EST
    Hospital about 30 times.

    Where do I get my MD degree???


    Parent

    Obama and Hillary Give Trump a One-Two Punch | 91 comments (91 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment