Hillary: There is No "New" Donald Trump

Hillary today on the changes in Donald Trump's campaign staff:

He can hire and fire whoever he wants from his campaign. They can make him read new words from a teleprompter. But he is still the same man who insults gold star families, mocks people with disabilities and thinks he knows more about Isis than our generals. There is no new Donald Trump – this is it.

It may not be quite time to refer to his changes as re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, but he's getting there.

< El Chapo's Son: Kidnapped in Puerta Vallarta or Not? | 6 Bodies Found in Jalisco, None Believed to Be El Chapo's Son >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    Strangely (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Aug 17, 2016 at 02:18:10 PM EST
    enough these "new" people on his campaign are worse than the ones he had before. He's moved up the elf Kelly Anne Conway and hired a noted white supremacist Bannon from Breitbart.

    Trump surrogates on CNN (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by MKS on Wed Aug 17, 2016 at 02:51:56 PM EST
    today are very aggressive--talking over everyone else.  Not making sense or citing facts, just raw aggression.

    Get ready for more aggression from Trump. Let Trump be Trump.  

    Bannon and Ailes (none / 0) (#3)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 17, 2016 at 03:23:35 PM EST
    And Steve Bannon and Kellyanne Conway are just the people to plunge his campaign headlong into the surreal territory of "Baghdad Bob." Speaking for myself only, I believe that Bannon's internal coup will likely result in the near-total political marginalization of Trump and the Pravda-ization of Breitbart News. From The Daily Wire:

    "Under Bannon's Leadership, Breitbart Openly Embraced The White Supremacist Alt-Right. [...] Because Bannon's ambitions extend to Steve Bannon, he'll tell Trump he's doing a fantastic job even if he isn't. That's how Bannon Svengalis political figures and investors - by investing them in his personal genius, then hollowing them out from the inside. There's a reason Sarah Palin went from legitimate political figure to parody artist to Trump endorser, with Steve Bannon standing alongside her every step of the way. [...] [Bannon] is a vindictive, nasty figure, infamous for verbally abusing supposed friends and threatening enemies. Bannon is a smarter version of Trump: he's an aggressive self-promoter who name-drops to heighten his profile and woo bigger names, and then uses those bigger names as stepping stools to his next destination. Trump may be his final destination. Or it may not. He will attempt to ruin anyone who impedes his unending ambition, and he will use anyone bigger than he is - for example, Donald Trump - to get where he wants to go. Bannon knows that in the game of thrones, you win or die. And he certainly doesn't intend to die. He'll kill everyone else before he goes."

    Well, then, this ought to be interesting.

    This is the guy (5.00 / 3) (#7)
    by Repack Rider on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 02:09:47 AM EST
    ...who is always going to "bring in the best people."  Having done so and having ignored their advice, he uses the only business strategy he knows, which is to fire people.

    Really.  Apparently it's more  than just a show.

    And after every round of firing, he has to reset with a new group that is inferior to the most recently departed.  Not that he started with the all-star team to begin with.  We're in the third round of purges now, and I fully expect a few more in the next couple of months.

    The downward slope is so steep right now that it's hard to believe it can sustain this level of deterioration until the election.

    Meanwhile, Ryan and McConnell twist in the wind, damned by their own political cowardice no matter what happens from now on.  Indecision inevitably  becomes a decision anyway, and they have waffled too long.  They can't pull the trigger, but they can't not pull the trigger.

    This is the "Titanic" of train wrecks, but it's going to be months before it goes under for the last time.

    Some of the rats are deserting the sinking (none / 0) (#13)
    by vml68 on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 10:39:43 AM EST
    Note to Sanders supporters: (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 12:15:49 PM EST
    For Heaven's sake, please get over yourselves.

    I forgot about them in April (none / 0) (#15)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 01:10:45 PM EST
    If only the media had done the same. (none / 0) (#16)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 01:53:20 PM EST
    Clearly, there is no "us" in some of them.

    The media wins again (none / 0) (#70)
    by Lora on Sun Aug 21, 2016 at 09:53:48 AM EST
    Even now Bernie and/or his supporters are being misrepresented by the media.

    From your linked article (emphasis added):

    Bowers, standing on her porch just in front of her Sanders yard sign, said she was monitoring the polls while weighing her own indecision.

    "Donald Trump is taking us so far back. I would never, ever, ever support him," she said.

    "Right now, I feel like the most important thing is to keep Trump out."

    Excuse me, what indecision, exactly....?


    "What indecision"? (none / 0) (#72)
    by Yman on Sun Aug 21, 2016 at 11:10:53 AM EST
    It's right there in the article.

    Seated across from her was Willie Demyan, a 21-year-old college graduate who characterized Clinton as embracing "more of a political strategy" that left him questioning whether she was committed to a liberal platform.

    "That's what I liked about Bernie, he might seem monotonous," he said, before Salerno completed the sentence for him: "But you knew he wasn't going to waver on it."

    Salerno nonetheless said she planned to vote for Clinton to shut Trump out of the White House, while Demyan had yet to be convinced. ...

    Sean Cutkelvin, a college student working behind the counter at the Northern Lights coffee shop, where Sanders supporters often dwell, said he was confident Clinton would pursue progressive priorities. The 21-year-old, who voted for Sanders in the Pennsylvania primary, said friends had accused him of selling out when they learned he was now supporting Clinton.

    No doubt that most of them will vote for her, but those holdouts ...


    Read carefully (none / 0) (#73)
    by Lora on Sun Aug 21, 2016 at 12:28:08 PM EST
    Bowers, standing on her porch just in front of her Sanders yard sign, said she was monitoring the polls while weighing her own indecision.

    Bowers was not indecisive. The statement about her own (Bowers) indecision is not correct.


    The post you were responding to (none / 0) (#74)
    by Yman on Sun Aug 21, 2016 at 02:29:19 PM EST
    ... was discussing Sanders supporters, not just Bower.  Whether she's made up her mind or not, she doesn't speak for all of them.  But it's interesting that you chose to believe one of her statements and assume the other is false.

    oh, (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 04:24:17 PM EST
    reading up on Bannon, a notorious racist and anti-semite. I guess he's the perfect person for Donald' campaign.

    Bannon's straight-to-dvd (none / 0) (#5)
    by jondee on Wed Aug 17, 2016 at 06:02:19 PM EST
    blockbuster on the rise of Sarah Palin and his hard-hitting docu-expose on the Occupy Movement grossed 116,000 and 40,000 respectively.

    Errol Morris he's not.

    His old boss Andrew ignited more public interest when he stood at the edge of an Occupy encampment and screamed "rape!" in a vain attempt to stir up some night stick and taser action.

    That Bloomberg link I posted up there (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by CaptHowdy on Wed Aug 17, 2016 at 07:17:28 PM EST
    Calls him the Leni Riefenstahl of the Tea Party.

    Which personally I think is a horrible insult to Leni Riefenstahl.


    Definitely. She had least had artistic sense (none / 0) (#12)
    by ruffian on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 10:14:26 AM EST
    I think Bannon's (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by KeysDan on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 02:21:22 PM EST
    job was (1) to get Manafort off the "front pages."  Changing the subject to the nutsy Brietbart guy is critical since that Russian connection was cutting too close to the bone. (2) to get the media off of where are Trump's tax returns, and (3) as bonus, to try his hand at throwing the dirtiest of dirt in a Brietbart way.

    It seems (none / 0) (#18)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 02:45:45 PM EST
    Trump's campaign is going to go all scorched earth. I have a feeling that shopping conspiracy theories is going to get tiresome and not change the minds of voters.  

    Yes, the proverbial (none / 0) (#19)
    by KeysDan on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 03:07:24 PM EST
    Heil Mary.  However, I hope I am wrong, but negative may result in positive campaign results.  And, if Secretary Clinton's polls move from +15 to +14, the media will see a dangerous slip and aid and abet Breitbart et al.

    They've been (none / 0) (#20)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 03:21:44 PM EST
    aiding and abetting Breitbart for quite a while now. That would be nothing new.

    As Brian Stelter of CNN opined (none / 0) (#8)
    by jbindc on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 07:32:47 AM EST
    This isn't about winning the presidency, this is about building a media empire afterwards - Roger Ailes, Roger Stone, and now Bannon?  

    That seems (none / 0) (#9)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 07:35:34 AM EST
    to be the "new" theory.

    How's my twitter bug friend been doing lately? I've been avoiding it because twitter is a bigger time sucker than blogs.


    Oh, great. (5.00 / 3) (#33)
    by oculus on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 06:55:39 PM EST
    Now you tell me!

    I'm off and on. &#128513; (none / 0) (#11)
    by jbindc on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 07:45:08 AM EST
    Let's also not forget (none / 0) (#10)
    by jbindc on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 07:44:41 AM EST
    His son-in-law is also in media.

    Sarah Kendzior, who writes some very good stuff for Foriegn Policy tweeted this:

    If Trump launches news network, will be in decimated media economy rife with layoffs. He will hire familiar faces to mainstream extremism.

    I agree.  This is all being done right under the media's nose.


    And no "them" in some of you (none / 0) (#21)
    by jondee on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 03:23:52 PM EST

    Jondee, (none / 0) (#22)
    by NYShooter on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 04:22:45 PM EST
    Do yourself a favor and read up on (PNAC,) "The Project for the New American Century."

    You'll get a good idea about where our foreign policy direction is heading.


    I should refresh my memory.. (none / 0) (#24)
    by jondee on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 04:53:31 PM EST
    but I do remember something in there about a "Pearl Harbor-like event" being required to get the recalcitrant, benighted populace fully on board for a full-speed-ahead assertion of American hegemony in the 21st century..

    The PNAC types always make (none / 0) (#25)
    by jondee on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 04:59:04 PM EST
    me think of Orson Welles on the ferris wheel in The Third Man: "just look at those insects down there scurrying around.."

    PNAC Doctraine states (none / 0) (#26)
    by NYShooter on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 05:44:54 PM EST
    that it is America's duty, obligation, and destiny to dominate the world as the only Superpower remaining on the globe.......using it's military might, as will probably be necessary. The Middle-East is only the beginning of the domino theory for earth's exploitation. Iraq was the first domino as per their plan.

    Things are getting very interesting in the M.E. now. The U.S. wants to align itself with the Sunni led countries, such as Saudi Arabia, while Russia has just concluded a pact with Shia-led Iran to go with its partnership in Syria.

    Hillary, as she's stated many times, wants to implement a no-fly zone in Syria, which President Obama has wisely rejected.

    A buffoon con artist or possible WW3? Has there been any discussion at all in our vaunted Media about all this?

    Ha, Ha, I was just joking.

    Great choices, don't forget to vote.


    You forgot Henry Kissinger (none / 0) (#27)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 06:00:34 PM EST
    You always want to toss in Henry Kissinger

    Why not toss in Kissinger? (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by jondee on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 07:07:46 PM EST
    six months have gone by and he's due for a new coat of teflon.

    You almost can't detect scent of carrion any more.


    As for myself, the Manafort thing is (none / 0) (#28)
    by christinep on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 06:06:50 PM EST
    the tip of the iceberg. It all reminds me of water & plumbing:  The off-shore shell companies to launder $$$$$/rubles, the plumbing arrangement of wads of money in vaults & whatever from Ukraine to Manafort to ?, and the fluidity of millions <as reported by the AP> from the pro-Russian Ukraine sector to DC lobbying firms via Manafort (sans foreign lobbyist registration, natch.)  

    With Trump sniffing around Russia these past years for a "deal," I wonder who'll get taken to the cleaners?  I wonder who is the patsy?

    No sadness on this end:  The wash & clean & exposure of the would-be Russian arrangement via Trump-Manafort (and spokespeople Boris and Katrina) is obvious and timely exposed.

    Go Hillary!


    HI c (none / 0) (#30)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 06:23:02 PM EST
    Where u been

    Reading about what's happened and what's coming the last couple of days really makes me want to unplug for the next three months.  Or take a looooong nap.  Or something.

    You think it has been bad?  A month from now we are going to look back on August as the days of wine and roses.  Seriously.  It's about to get really really bad.  

    This is from a POLITICO story about why the right will never accept Hillary-

    Oddly enough, perhaps the closest historical analogy to what has happened on the right is to what occurred on the extreme left decades ago. Much like the most militantly revolutionary radicals of the late 1960s and early 70s, Trump's most ardent supporters are convinced that they are battling an irredeemably corrupt system, which must be combated "by any means necessary." If the only way they can lose (as Trump said of Pennsylvania) is to be cheated out of their victory, the normal reconciliation between victor and vanquished does not apply.
    Thus, if Hillary Clinton wins, the era of de-legitimizing Obama will likely segue seamlessly into the era of NeverHillary. Not only is she a Clinton--and thus the logical heir to the de-legitimization campaign that Gingrich and Co. heaped on her husband 20 years ago--but the new Clinton administration will be in the eyes of the right little more than Obama's third term. As Roger Stone promised: "We will not stand for it."

    it is a depressing read

    But I found very little to disagree with.
    Trump doesn't plan to win.  If he ever did.  He plans to create, along with Bannon and Ailes, a new political movement/party.  IMO this is terrible news for the republicans but maybe even worse fir the country.  I think it's a game to him.  I think he believes in nothing except money and power. He has about 20 million followers.  Not enough to win an election but plenty to make life pretty miserable for the rest of us.


    Not suprised to (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 06:45:55 PM EST
    hear that but apparently there will be two parties and the old Dixiecrats will finally have their own party half a century later. Perhaps Hillary can get something done with the other part of the GOP but I think she knows this and that is one of the reasons why she has been very active in raising money for down ticket races. She also has no delusions that the GOP will be nice to her or want to work with her unlike Obama. So she won't waste much time trying to get them to go along with some policy initiative.

    The interesting thing is (5.00 / 2) (#32)
    by CaptHowdy on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 06:54:35 PM EST
    I think there are many republicans who are not only ready to join the government but could be willing to work with a president Clinton.  Recently none other than the right wing nut case congressman Steve King (calves like cantaloupes) told a state fair audience Hillary was a person they could work with.  

    This is what most terrifies the Bannons of the world.  A functioning government.   Especially one led by Hillary Clinton.  They will do everything they can to stop it.  If we are lucky Trumps campaign will be such a disaster the actual grip on power may be weakened and Trump and Bannon will be relegated to the fringes where they will thrive in a less destructive way.


    Yeah (none / 0) (#36)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 08:42:41 PM EST
    I was shocked when I heard about Kings saying that. Actually I think there are a lot of Republicans who will look as this as a chance to rebrand their party away from the tea party. Let's all hope the Bannons of the world are relegated to the fringes and powerless. The GOP right now is a sick party even if you can consider it a political party. It either has to die or figure out a way to excise the cancer.

    'Been to Santa Fe, 'been to the mountains, and (5.00 / 2) (#35)
    by christinep on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 07:13:21 PM EST
    'been gearing up for the all-out nasty to come, Capt.  OTOH, I'm pleasantly surprised by the turn of events that have led to the present poll/trend situation; but, for the same reason, it is easy to see all-out desperation/all-or-nothing push from Trump/Bannon/Manafort-in-waiting.

    The Colorado forecast looks good (almost too good for someone like myself who looks for what-can-go-wrong when it looks so good ... as T. Kaine reminds "I always consider myself the underdog until hearing finally that I won."  So, before leaving on the summer mountain circuit (and encountering people almost everywhere who wanted to talk politics in August), we helped with voter registration, etc., a key component here for August and early September before canvassing.  I must say, tho, that with the Trump campaign playing-footsy with Putin and with his whines about "rigged" election antics, that natural Rocky Mtn High has been challenged.

    I think it will be okay ... more than okay ... but, since I'm superstitious, it is best to quiet my optimism a bit.  

    When it comes to Trump, I find the rumors/speculation about a further TV network-like endeavor quite believable. (BTW, in reading about the Putin-Ukraine-Manafort connection, I noticed that Manafort has been a party to or involved in the acquisition of a large cable outlet via RT Russia. Fascinating.)


    Name me a national level (none / 0) (#37)
    by coast on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 08:55:18 PM EST
    politician who isn't just interested in money and power.  It's no coincidence that the majority of the members in congress are multi-millionaires.

    But I agree it's just going to get worse.

    I have switched to listening exclusively to podcast to control what I have to hear - as little of this political nonsense as possible hopefully.


    One can only hold one's hand out in an offer of friendship for so long. At this point, if they still can't get over themselves, fck 'em.

    Theirs is not the only legitimate point of view here, you know. Hillary Clinton's campaign is trying to put together a winning coalition of voters in November, and just pardon us all to Hell if the list of invitees is not subject to the exclusive approval of an angry handful of left-wing Mona Lisas who show up once every four years to seek a political messiah.

    And if they think that their threats of political self-mutilation is a sure-fired pathway toward getting themselves recognized and heard in the arena, then they seriously have some fckn screws loose. Holding one's own self hostage only works in the movies.



    Offer of friendship (none / 0) (#71)
    by Lora on Sun Aug 21, 2016 at 09:59:23 AM EST
    ...is a sellout, and they know it.  However, despite what the media wants you to believe, the majority of Bernie supporters will support Hillary over Trump.  They may be angry, but they are not stupid.

    Looks like both sides (none / 0) (#38)
    by makana44 on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 09:02:25 PM EST
    have provocateurs that know how to "hit beneath the belt."


    Hah! A naked Trump statue. (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Aug 18, 2016 at 09:09:32 PM EST
    "NYC Parks stands firmly against any unpermitted erection in city parks, no matter how small."

    Somebody at the Parks Dept. put some real thought into that official double entendre.



    If it lasts (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by KeysDan on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 01:54:02 PM EST
    for more than four hours, call ...the Parks Department.

    I didn't see the title in the link (none / 0) (#40)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 08:08:39 AM EST
    It is

    The Emperor Has No Balls


    Explains the new and improved (none / 0) (#49)
    by KeysDan on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 01:51:34 PM EST
    Trump campaign.  You just know how hard it must be to keep Trump from sending a Carlos Danger-type photo out to prove that there is something more than a cocktail shrimp in that area. Manafort was probably weakening in his ability to do so, hence the need for a change for a stronger manager.

    Photos can be doctored (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 03:06:26 PM EST
    He really needs to do it live.

    Please no Howdy! (none / 0) (#66)
    by fishcamp on Sat Aug 20, 2016 at 12:11:22 PM EST
    We eat a lot of shrimp down here and I don't want Trumps shrimpy image in my mind.

    such tiny hands (none / 0) (#43)
    by ruffian on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 10:26:57 AM EST
    Manafort (none / 0) (#41)
    by FlJoe on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 09:25:18 AM EST
    out The question remains, does he go to work for CNN or back to the Russian Oligarchs, or both?

    Gates (none / 0) (#42)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 09:52:49 AM EST
    Is also out.  His deputy.

    I heard this (none / 0) (#58)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 09:45:45 PM EST
    But it might not be so

    I'm almost worried that the only thing that (none / 0) (#44)
    by ruffian on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 10:29:48 AM EST
    can make Donald Trump change is Hillary saying that he can't. That is a real challenge, throwing down the glove.

    the 'regrets, I have a few' speech may have been in response to that. But it won't last.

    Well (none / 0) (#45)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 10:45:19 AM EST
    his first ad is out and I tell you it would make Mussolini proud.

    i assume you meant this as (none / 0) (#57)
    by linea on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 09:43:28 PM EST
    hyperbole: an extravagant statement or figure of speech not intended to be taken literally. cuz the advert feels pretty generic soccer mom.

    You must (none / 0) (#60)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 20, 2016 at 05:57:35 AM EST
    have seen a different ad. The one i saw was all about rounding people up.

    The media is doing their damnedest (none / 0) (#46)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 10:55:11 AM EST
    To assist him.  I must have heard or read 200 times in the last 24 hours "he told supporters he would never lie to them!"

    Without mentioning the speech was nothing but a string f lies including the very next words out f his mouth which were "I am funding my own campaign"

    I expect the polls to tighten.  The media wants them to and they to often get what they want.


    Starting to think it has to be seen (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 11:12:38 AM EST
    As a kind of performance art.

    Take that "I will never lie to you" thing.  His supporters are stupid.  But they are not that stupid. I think it telling that the very next thing, the campaign lie, is so obvious.   Everyone knows he has been frantically, and not very successfully, fundraising.  They get it.    He gives a speech - to an all white audience - about how much he loves and worries about people of color.  This is the day after he hires the most famous racist in the country to his campaign.   They get it.  He makes this ridiculous vague "apology" with a smirk.  They get it.  

    They speak the same language and Donald is communicating with them on mulitple levels.  The verbal one meant to reassure the freaked out surburbanites and the other one where he teams up with the darling of the white supremacist alt right.

    And the media are the useful idiots.


    Yes - really he is perfect for rightie talk radio (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by ruffian on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 03:05:29 PM EST
    or TV. It is basically the same schtick Rush has been doing forever.

    I'm sure that will be the next step in his so-called career.


    CNN (5.00 / 3) (#48)
    by FlJoe on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 11:18:04 AM EST
    Is becoming almost unwatchable with their constant Hillary bashing.

    Kidnapped!!!! (none / 0) (#53)
    by TrevorBolder on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 04:53:30 PM EST
    That was NOT Donald Trump in North Carolina last night. The Trump kids have kidnapped the Real Donald, have him duct taped inside Trump Tower, and have inserted a imposter for the duration of the campaign.

    Also......Is Roger Ailes now behind the scenes for The Donald? I have read that Trump's speech seemed reminiscent of the Tricky Dick 1968 campaign, which Ailes was also a part of.

    Trump, reading from prepared remarks Thursday night, acknowledged that he sometimes says "the wrong thing" in an astonishing act of contrition that signaled Trump's willingness to break from his characteristic brashness and bare-knuckles style that carried him to victory in the Republican primaries.
    "Sometimes, in the heat of debate and speaking on a multitude of issues, you don't choose the right words or you say the wrong thing. I have done that. And believe it or not, I regret it. And I do regret it, particularly where it may have caused personal pain. Too much is at stake for us to be consumed with these issues," Trump told supporters here.

    it's too late (none / 0) (#56)
    by linea on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 09:34:33 PM EST
    isnt it? trump should have pivoted at the convention. now it's just too late. 528 crunches the numbers per state and it wouldnt be possible at this late stage to flip the needed states. i dunno if the debates make a difference. when are they?

    Google is your friend (5.00 / 2) (#59)
    by CoralGables on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 10:03:07 PM EST
    So is the caps key when you start a sentence.

    This is a Presidential campaign (none / 0) (#62)
    by TrevorBolder on Sat Aug 20, 2016 at 06:13:10 AM EST
    Unlike any other we have seen before.

    Clinton has a sizable lead and most likely only a outside event, something unexpected, could move this election from its current path. But neither candidate is garnering positive support from a majority of voters, it is a election of the lesser of 2 evils

    A majority of voters continue to hold unfavorable impressions of both current nominees; Clinton's negative feelings were held by slightly less voters (59 percent) than Trump (64 percent). These results are according to the latest from the NBC News|SurveyMonkey Weekly Election Tracking Poll conducted online from August 8 through August 14, 2016 among registered voters.

    Though Clinton's lead over Trump remains significant following the convention, a closer look at voter attitudes reveals that many still harbor negative feelings about both candidates. When asked to select all the qualities that describe each candidate including options for honesty, values and temperament, majorities of voters chose "none of the above" to describe both candidates

    Voters & "negative feelings" (none / 0) (#67)
    by christinep on Sat Aug 20, 2016 at 04:33:37 PM EST
    Occasionally, I've checked the "unfavorable" measurements for a range of nationally-known candidates.  A point to note: Most nationally-known leaders have rather high unfavorable ratings these days ... perhaps, a reflection of the overall cynicism so prevalent during the 21st century to date ... who knows whether it was the Iraq War with the promotion leading to it or the economic tanking in the first years following the 2007 crash or the growing wage issues ensuing from that reality or the economic "haves/have nots" disparity or some combination of the foregoing.

    Staring with www.pollster.com, it is striking to see what appears to be high negatives for almost anyone who has been in the public eye for awhile.  In context, HRC doesn't fare too badly ... certainly nowhere near as unfavorable as Trump (and, take a look at would-be survivor Paul Ryan.)  

    So much of narrating an election has to do with who pushes the narrative, doesn't it?  So much has to do with repetition of emphasis as well, imo.  For about a year, we have been pummeled with media's conclusions about HRC's  unfavorable ratings ... yet, looking at how she has thrived/endured/withstood all campaign challenges in the primary and, so far, in the general race, it could be that another equally strong narrative might be at play.  That determinative characteristic--as in ultimate general election decisions in years past--has to do with perceived ability to lead together with the personality & fitness to do so.  I suspect that many voters are looking beyond the stale popularity contest which the media has attempted to force-feed.  

     Meanwhile, we can all repeat in rote-like fashion--as voters do every several years--how sadly unpopular our two major party candidates are (and how much "baggage" they have, and how "flawed" candidates are.)  C'est la vie, non?


    25 years of wingnut smears (none / 0) (#68)
    by Yman on Sat Aug 20, 2016 at 09:54:51 PM EST
    ... and a heated primary tend to have a negative effect.



    I'm not alone (none / 0) (#76)
    by TrevorBolder on Sun Aug 21, 2016 at 04:22:24 PM EST

    Fifty-seven percent of Americans are dissatisfied with the choice between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, according to the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll earlier this month.

    Now, together with ABC News' partners at SSRS survey research firm, we asked in an online poll of randomly chosen respondents if they are considering voting for a third-party candidate: 35 percent said yes.

    No one said you were (none / 0) (#77)
    by Yman on Sun Aug 21, 2016 at 07:41:12 PM EST
    90+% of Republicans hate the Clintons and they've managed to convince a chunk of the clueless "independents" with 25 years of faux "scandals".  Yet your guy managed to top her negatives in just a year with his own words.



    Rubio? (none / 0) (#78)
    by TrevorBolder on Sun Aug 21, 2016 at 07:47:19 PM EST
    Did Rubio get the nomination?

    So you're voting for Rubio (none / 0) (#79)
    by Yman on Sun Aug 21, 2016 at 08:02:59 PM EST
    ... in the GE?



    Obviously not (none / 0) (#80)
    by TrevorBolder on Sun Aug 21, 2016 at 08:08:36 PM EST
    But that was my guy.

    Perhaps McMullen, the one interview I saw of him he came across very well, someone I could vote for.


    Oh, Rubio ... (none / 0) (#81)
    by Yman on Sun Aug 21, 2016 at 08:52:55 PM EST
    ... was your guy.  I see the problem, now.  I was speaking in the present tense, while you were responding in the past tense.

    Yup (none / 0) (#83)
    by TrevorBolder on Mon Aug 22, 2016 at 05:28:11 AM EST
    I was for the one guy I thought would actually be able to govern, he has shown he was willing to compromise , which unfortunately, precipitated his demise.
    His sponsoring of the Gang of Eight took political courage, and also proved his undoing.
    But the Gang of Eight legislation is most likely where we will end up with any new immigration laws, or something close to it

    That's great (none / 0) (#85)
    by Yman on Mon Aug 22, 2016 at 05:59:37 PM EST
    So just to clarify ... you were suggesting that Trump is not your current candidate, without actually saying it.  You're not going to vote for him?

    No (none / 0) (#86)
    by TrevorBolder on Mon Aug 22, 2016 at 06:30:16 PM EST
    I stated that early on, before he was the official candidate.
    And it was more because of his tone and style rather than his "extreme" positions.
    I laughed when everyone screamed, he will deport 11 million people. Back then , I was fully confident that would never happen, and , he is changing his tune.
    The Muslim ban, another Trump utterance that he is now backing away from.
    The wall, well, there would be a wall in high trafficked spots, and the use of drones and cameras in others , with a Border Patrol presence to enforce it.
    It wasn't his positions, those I figured he would change after the primary, it was his demeaning and insulting nature, reminded me of people I detested my entire life, bullies, and there was no way he would get my vote.
    And now, unless they a doppelganger campaigning, he is trying to transform into a kinder gentler Trump.
    No, I will stick with McMullen, he sounded rather impressive, knew the issues, in the short interview I saw of him

    Interesting idea (none / 0) (#87)
    by Yman on Mon Aug 22, 2016 at 06:34:28 PM EST
    Claiming to support a candidate that has absolutely zero chance of affecting the race, let alone winning.  Although, if you're going to try that, you should probably learn how his name is spelled.

    Ha (none / 0) (#88)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Aug 22, 2016 at 06:37:32 PM EST
    I totally missed that.  It lost me at "there should be a wall"

    Why? (none / 0) (#89)
    by TrevorBolder on Mon Aug 22, 2016 at 07:17:20 PM EST
    I think if its on the ballot I can figure it out.

    Well, it might be more convincing (none / 0) (#90)
    by Yman on Mon Aug 22, 2016 at 08:42:28 PM EST
    ... if you could at least spell the name right.  But probably not.

    But maybe if you live in one of the few states where he's on the ballot, that'll help.  I think he's up to six, now.


    Trumps first anti Hillary ad (none / 0) (#54)
    by CaptHowdy on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 09:06:31 PM EST
    Gives an on screen credit to the Center for Immigration Studies.  
    If you have not seen it you can see it and read about it at RIGHT WING WATCH

    and HUFFPO

    The current anti-immigrant movement centers around three groups -- the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) and NumbersUSA that all grew out of the vision of one activist who, like Trump, has unapologetically depicted America as a country of and for white people. While even some on the right are horrified by Trump's racism, these groups have long enjoyed a friendly reception on Capitol Hill as they have helped to sink any meaningful attempt at immigration reform. In fact, when it comes to policy, these groups are in many ways more extreme than Trump. NumbersUSA, which gives grades to candidates based on their immigration views, even docked Trump's grade over the summer, not because of his offensive remarks about immigrants but because he had put forward a muddled plan for a "merit-based system" for some undocumented immigrants.

    A new report from People For the American Way explores the history and the influence of these three groups at the center of the opposition to immigration reform.

    John Tanton, the founder of all three groups, made his view of America clear when he wrote in 1993, "I have come to the point of view that for European-American society and culture to persist, it requires an European-American majority and a clear one at that." At other times, he worried about a "Latin onslaught" on the United States and of immigrants "defecating and creating garbage and looking for jobs."

    Rachel just did a great segment on this.   You should watch it online.

    of course BRIETBART is running interference

    Here's the Maddow segment (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 20, 2016 at 09:03:59 AM EST
    i feel (none / 0) (#55)
    by linea on Fri Aug 19, 2016 at 09:27:24 PM EST
    it's over-the-top to accuse trump of racism.

    seems to ba a rather a banal campaign advert. really who would take exception to "terrorists and dangerous criminals kept out" ?


    "I feel" it's completely justified (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by Yman on Sat Aug 20, 2016 at 10:00:50 PM EST
    The reasons for my opinion are well documented.

    When the Republican Speaker of the House denounces your comments as "the textbook definition of racism", you have a serious problem.


    Well (none / 0) (#61)
    by Ga6thDem on Sat Aug 20, 2016 at 06:04:30 AM EST
    the problem is Trump thinks the Khans who lost their son in Iraq are terrorists with zero evidence.

    I personally thought the ad was stupid. However it probably terrified POC.


    He Does? (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by RickyJim on Sat Aug 20, 2016 at 11:27:09 AM EST
    I don't think he has said that.  You are doing the same thing you are accusing him of doing.

    Yes (none / 0) (#75)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Aug 21, 2016 at 02:44:18 PM EST
    Trump has said that the Khans are basically terrorists.

    Plan "B" (none / 0) (#64)
    by CaptHowdy on Sat Aug 20, 2016 at 10:39:13 AM EST

    Republicans, worried about preserving their House and Senate majorities in the face of fierce headwinds, are accelerating their plans to distance themselves from Donald Trump - and may soon concede, if only implicitly, his defeat.
    Party strategists are mapping out blueprints for down-ballot candidates, in TV ads and on the campaign trail, to present themselves as checks on a Hillary Clinton presidency. It's an approach that would essentially admit a Trump loss. In interviews, nearly one dozen Republican operatives said they had begun poll-testing the idea - which one labeled a "break glass in case of emergency" strategy - to gauge how the public would react to it.

    site violator (none / 0) (#84)
    by fishcamp on Mon Aug 22, 2016 at 07:34:00 AM EST