Donald Trump 2019

[suddenly shaggy 929]

Just now, Chad Fuck said:

How did nobody ever take this guy down a peg?  You know he did this to someone in Jr. High who should've just laid him out.  

I guess the bullies know who not to mess with instinctively. 

I assume he squirts piss from his eyes when threatened. 

[lemonlime 5,503]

3 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

How did nobody ever take this guy down a peg?  You know he did this to someone in Jr. High who should've just laid him out.  

I guess the bullies know who not to mess with instinctively. 

I'm pretty sure I've told this story on here before.  But a number of years ago, while the whole birther thing was going on, I met trump's federal judge sister at a bar event.  She was chatting with a group of us when someone asked her about it, and she just said "Oh, that Donnie," and shook her head.

[Chad Fuck 18,096]

4 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

I'm pretty sure I've told this story on here before.  But a number of years ago, while the whole birther thing was going on, I met trump's federal judge sister at a bar event.  She was chatting with a group of us when someone asked her about it, and she just said "Oh, that Donnie," and shook her head.

The very definition of enabling behavior.  

I can see that from a family member.  I'm just surprised no one just kicked the shit out of him at some point.  It would've done the world a favor. 

 

[RPM 26,566]

41 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

so then i started thinking, who's the better candidate, newport or trump - there are a lot of similarities. 

Bobby Newport never actually wanted to hurt anyone.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

So the TV pundits seem to believe Trump exploiting the racial divide is some kind of political strategy.   I have a hard time believing Trump has any strategy other than throwing shit at the wall everyday trying to piss off as many people as possible.  

Seems to me he’s trying to exhaust the electorate/media in hopes most people tune out or give up before an impeachment or election process begins. I don’t know if Trump is doing this consciously but he might inadvertently move public opinion more in favor of impeachment in the process. 

He’s still a racist piece of shit regardless.

Edited July 29, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[deech 2,381]

10 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

So the TV pundits seem to believe Trump exploiting the racial divide is some kind of political strategy.   I have a hard time believing Trump has any strategy other than throwing shit at the wall everyday trying to piss off as many people as possible.  

Seems to me he’s trying to exhaust the electorate/media in hopes most people tune out or give up before an impeachment or election process begins. I don’t know if Trump is doing this consciously but he might inadvertently move public opinion more in favor of impeachment in the process. 

He’s still a racist piece of shit regardless.

Have you watched the Great Hack on Netflix yet?

 

[atomheartbevo 90,550]

Speaking of the birther thing, a few pages back, some pooh-poohed the idea that Trump won in part because hate for Hillary drove a lot of folks to the voting booth, and they claimed that those folks will hate whoever is the Den candidate with just as much fervor and Trump can easily win in 2020.

The only problem with that is Barrack Hussein Obama II, a Kenyan Muslim Atheist Community Organizer from Indonesia, who snuck into Hawaii (which was barely a state in 1961), not only won the White House in the past 11 years by 192 electoral votes, but won re-election by 126 votes, less than 7 years ago.

Looking at the Baby Boomers, when the Ds win, they win by triple digits.  When the Rs win, it's by single and double digits.  The olds we have now were olds 7 years ago when Obama still handily won re-election.  If anything, we've lost the WWII generation, and the generation coming up behind the Boomers  is a lot more liberal, or at least exposed to a lot more diversity.

Sure, right now Trump is on a racist rant because he can't think very far ahead, and something has him spooked in the next week or two and he liked the Fox and Friends segment, but even if this was a part of some grand strategy to turn out his base (Cummings isn't going to be on the ticket), it's also going to get plenty of folks out to vote against him, who might not have, similar to Hillary helping him.

We may not get the n-word, but he's going to ramp up his dog-whistling, because it's Infrastructure Week.

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

13 minutes ago, deech said:

Have you watched the Great Hack on Netflix yet?

 

Negative 

[deech 2,381]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Negative 

1.  Watch it because it's worthy of watching.

2.  It will help color your narrative regarding the allegations regarding Trump and the importance of race-baiting.

[lemonlime 5,503]

10 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

 

We may not get the n-word, but he's going to ramp up his dog-whistling, because it's Infrastructure Week.

 

This is exactly what he's going to do.  And he will never say the n word.  Because for as long as he doesn't say the n word, the republicans can claim plausible deniability (no matter how implausible it actually is).  See the excuses they've been making in the past few weeks, or any tahoe thread.   He'll just keep ramping up the dog whistles, and the GOP will say everyone else is imagining the blatant racism, while mocking 20-year-olds at Berkeley and "political correctness."

[Chad Fuck 18,096]

4 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

This is exactly what he's going to do.  And he will never say the n word.  Because for as long as he doesn't say the n word, the republicans can claim plausible deniability (no matter how implausible it actually is).  See the excuses they've been making in the past few weeks, or any tahoe thread.   He'll just keep ramping up the dog whistles, and the GOP will say everyone else is imagining the blatant racism, while mocking 20-year-olds at Berkeley and "political correctness."

100% This.

[DixonHur 11,943]

5 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

This is exactly what he's going to do.  And he will never say the n word.  Because for as long as he doesn't say the n word, the republicans can claim plausible deniability (no matter how implausible it actually is).  See the excuses they've been making in the past few weeks, or any tahoe thread.   He'll just keep ramping up the dog whistles, and the GOP will say everyone else is imagining the blatant racism, while mocking 20-year-olds at Berkeley and "political correctness."

He'd still get cover from GOP.

"Black people say ni**er all the time, but you're not calling them racist" - Trumpkin

[Chad Fuck 18,096]

4 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

He'd still get cover from GOP.

"Black people say ni**er all the time, but you're not calling them racist" - Trumpkin

That's true re the GOP giving cover, but then he wouldn't have the shield of "What me?  Whaddyd I do?"  that he so loves to revel in.

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

2 hours ago, Chad Fuck said:

Yes, I do understand the concept of time.  

At the end, you got it though, so good for you.

Do you?

[atomheartbevo 90,550]

6 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

He'd still get cover from GOP.

"Black people say ni**er all the time, but you're not calling them racist" - Trumpkin

He, and the GOP, are already behind on next year.   I don't think he would be dumb enough to say it (discounting past recordings of him saying it), and I don't think they would be dumb enough to defend it.  Everybody talks about what black turnout will be like next year, but dropping that word would drive it through the roof.  The Dems could just run TV ads of him saying it.

[henrygandorf 29,223]

1 hour ago, RPM said:

Bobby Newport never actually wanted to hurt anyone.

he was just a clueless dope whose dad was a rich piece of shit asshole who gave him everything he ever wanted while he was growing up and that's why he never learned how to be a mature, accountable, contributing member of society.

[4th&Five 41,908]

 

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

1 hour ago, Planet Houston said:

Sorry, but this implies that Trump is not actually racist himself.  That's incorrect - even if that racism is rooted in what he perceives as self-interested gains (rejecting apartment applications from minorities, for example).  

He is racist for a much simpler reason than self interested gains. He is a white male and he thinks he is the best individual to ever exist, therefore white males must be the best things to be.  

[Eskimohorn 5,677]

I'm assuming 'down there' means driving by the site in his limo and saying, 'That's horrible!"

but also saying “I now have the tallest building in lower Manhattan” and “Muslims are celebrating across the way in Jersey.”

[henrygandorf 29,223]

36 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Speaking of the birther thing, a few pages back, some pooh-poohed the idea that Trump won in part because hate for Hillary drove a lot of folks to the voting booth, and they claimed that those folks will hate whoever is the Den candidate with just as much fervor and Trump can easily win in 2020.

i theorized this months ago, but i still think there's truth to it.

because of the unusually high disapproval numbers for both candidates, you can safely break down the electorate into four primary voter blocs in 2016:

for trump / for hillary / against trump / against hillary

(i'm not claiming these are all equal blocs, obviously, but a large majority of voters fits one of these boxes)

trump won a close election from that configuration.  now, ask yourself - 4 years later, how will each bloc be voting in 2020?  has trump really earned a big enough chunk of the "against hillary" crew that he got most of in 2016?  has he been that impressive the last 3 years to people who didn't know or like him as a candidate, but just hated hillary?

this is why i firmly believe trump's strategy is to figure out who the nominee is going to be, and then spend a year trying to get his/her disapproval rating into the mid to high 50's.  it's his only chance (thanks to the electoral college).  he's got no chance to take voters from the "for hillary" or "against trump" blocs.  and i can only assume (hope hope) that his "for trump" bloc has done a fair amount of leaking.

he needs the "against hillary" contingent to be as excited to be "against bernie/kamala/biden/warren" and i just don't see that happening. 

[atomheartbevo 90,550]

1 minute ago, henrygandorf said:

and i can only assume (hope hope) that his "for trump" bloc has done a fair amount of leaking.

Leaking?  More like dying of old age.

I agree with your post (can't posrep right now).  Nobody fires his potential voters up like Hillary.  I'm not even sure Warren could shoot somebody in the head in a federal park, and still inspire that kind of hatred that Hillary did.

Edited July 29, 2019 by atomheartbevo

[Eskimohorn 5,677]

A real statesman. 
 
 

Guess it didnt crash as far as the two towers that their relatives crashed in? Huh?

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12,301]

6 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

i theorized this months ago, but i still think there's truth to it.

because of the unusually high disapproval numbers for both candidates, you can safely break down the electorate into four primary voter blocs in 2016:

for trump / for hillary / against trump / against hillary

(i'm not claiming these are all equal blocs, obviously, but a large majority of voters fits one of these boxes)

trump won a close election from that configuration.  now, ask yourself - 4 years later, how will each bloc be voting in 2020?  has trump really earned a big enough chunk of the "against hillary" crew that he got most of in 2016?  has he been that impressive the last 3 years to people who didn't know or like him as a candidate, but just hated hillary?

this is why i firmly believe trump's strategy is to figure out who the nominee is going to be, and then spend a year trying to get his/her disapproval rating into the mid to high 50's.  it's his only chance (thanks to the electoral college).  he's got no chance to take voters from the "for hillary" or "against trump" blocs.  and i can only assume (hope hope) that his "for trump" bloc has done a fair amount of leaking.

he needs the "against hillary" contingent to be as excited to be "against bernie/kamala/biden/warren" and i just don't see that happening. 

'against hillary' is now 'against socialism'. that's the play and it will work with a lot of people.

[Brisketexan 106,655]

6 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

he needs the "against hillary" contingent to be as excited to be "against bernie/kamala/biden/warren" and i just don't see that happening.

Huh.  It's like you don't know that the Dem nominee is going to be the America-hating socialist who lots of people are saying supports terrorists attacking America and has helped MS-13 come into our country and rape tens of thousands of women and wants to end America and turn us over to the worst types of people (you know who I mean).  Doesn't matter who the nominee actually IS -- that's who that person will be once Trump and 24 hours a day of Fox News are done with them.

And it will work.  Always bet on lies and hate.  They're the best fuel.

[henrygandorf 29,223]

6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Huh.  It's like you don't know that the Dem nominee is going to be the America-hating socialist who lots of people are saying supports terrorists attacking America and has helped MS-13 come into our country and rape tens of thousands of women and wants to end America and turn us over to the worst types of people (you know who I mean).  Doesn't matter who the nominee actually IS -- that's who that person will be once Trump and 24 hours a day of Fox News are done with them.

And it will work.  Always bet on lies and hate.  They're the best fuel.

people who buy that shit weren't "against hillary".

they were "for trump".

that's the difference.

[atomheartbevo 90,550]

4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Huh.  It's like you don't know that the Dem nominee is going to be the America-hating socialist who lots of people are saying supports terrorists attacking America and has helped MS-13 come into our country and rape tens of thousands of women and wants to end America and turn us over to the worst types of people (you know who I mean).  Doesn't matter who the nominee actually IS -- that's who that person will be once Trump and 24 hours a day of Fox News are done with them.

And it will work.  Always bet on lies and hate.  They're the best fuel.

A Muslim Kenyan Socialist Atheist Communist Community Organizer, who had a middle name of "Hussein", who was constantly attacked by Fox News with all kinds of lies and hate, says "Hi"

[retread 2,951]

'16 was a dream setup for the Rs. atomheartbevo is correct in saying that, for the Rs, no other D is more personally contemptible and dangerous than Hillary.

For a lot of voters, all Trump had to do was utter her name. 

 

[yoladu 4,187]

2 hours ago, Horn Under a Bad Sign said:

Isn't it just really nice that Trump doesn't consider himself a first responder?

He is so bored and uninterested as he repeats what his speechwriters write for him, that he can't help himself and he goes off script.

He needs to self-aggrandize, it's like heroin. He has to do it. He can't not do it.

Edited July 29, 2019 by yoladu

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3,861]

19 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

 More like dying of old age.

Every silent gen voter that died since 2016  is going to be replaced by a GEN Z that was too young to vote.   That’s kind of an encouraging way to look at it.  

[Brisketexan 106,655]

1 minute ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

Every silent gen voter that died since 2016  is going to be replaced by a GEN Z that was too young to vote.   That’s kind of an encouraging way to look at it.  

But it's not true.  Silent gen voters turned out at 80%+.  Gen Z turns out at less than 20% (okay, I didn't look them up, but the numbers are a lot like that).

Trump is appealing -- with every evil dog whistle possible -- to a group of voters who show up.  And sure, he's pissing people off -- young people and minorities.  Who don't f'n vote.  It's a GOOD STRATEGY.

That's why the counter-strategy needs to be focused on building actual enthusiasm, and getting turnout.  Without those, every other part of a strategy is pointless.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

4 hours ago, deech said:

1.  Watch it because it's worthy of watching.

2.  It will help color your narrative regarding the allegations regarding Trump and the importance of race-baiting.

Watching now.  I’ve been following and reading David Carroll on twitter/medium for years.  I consider him “expert level” in this stuff.  Here’s his medium page:

https://medium.com/@profcarroll

Like the Active Measures documentary, I don’t know how much new information I’m going to get out of the “Great Hack”.  I’ve pretty much immersed myself in this shit since 2016.  It’s still terrifying.  However,  I’m glad it’s out there to give the public a better understanding.  Also glad to see Carole Cadwalladr getting some airtime for her Brexit investigation.  The Brits didn’t have a Mueller investigation for Brexit, Carole Cadwalladr is the closest thing they have to a Mueller.

Edited July 30, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3,861]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

But it's not true.  Silent gen voters turned out at 80%+.  Gen Z turns out at less than 20% (okay, I didn't look them up, but the numbers are a lot like that).

But it is true.  Silent gen = very small.  Gen Z = very big. 

[mdmost 43,854]

You're assuming Gen Z doesn't have a fairly decent number of idiots who agree with the same pieces of shit that helped Trump get elected. I don't.

[deech 2,381]

17 minutes ago, mdmost said:

You're assuming Gen Z doesn't have a fairly decent number of idiots who agree with the same pieces of shit that helped Trump get elected. I don't.

I think it's fair to say that while the number of idiots who agree may be the same, at least most watch Fox News less than the olds.

[atomheartbevo 90,550]

4 minutes ago, deech said:

I think it's fair to say that while the number of idiots who agree may be the same, at least most watch Fox News less than the olds.

Fox News has got to have one of the oldest viewer averages of any show.

[Francisco 2.0 32,545]

5 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

Fox News has got to have one of the oldest viewer averages of any show.

They have had the oldest viewer averages for something like 20+ years now.

They keep cultivating younger audiences, some how.  And those younger audiences become part of the oldest viewer average.  

[Loch Ness Monster 3,533]

Can anyone defend Trump selling weapons to the Saudis?

Its disgusting what they've done in Yemen.

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20,842]

 

[Continental Op 3,934]

1 hour ago, FondrenRoad said:

Do you?

It's a flat circle. 

[retread 2,951]

5 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

They have had the oldest viewer averages for something like 20+ years now.

They keep cultivating younger audiences, some how.  And those younger audiences become part of the oldest viewer average.  

If you're a young R or at least sympathetic to that side, Trump's twitter rants probably reel in a fair number of young voters.

[atomheartbevo 90,550]

36 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Trump is appealing -- with every evil dog whistle possible -- to a group of voters who show up.  And sure, he's pissing people off -- young people and minorities.  Who don't f'n vote.  It's a GOOD STRATEGY.

He, his supporters, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, etc. and this strategy, couldn't keep Barrack Hussein Obama II out of the WH for two terms.

The missing ingredient for Trump and the GOP is Hillary.  It's why he continues to try and find a bogeyman that rises to her level.   And among this crop of 20 Democrats, even with Warren, Biden, and Harris, he just can't find his next Hillary.  So his strategy falls back to attacking The Squad, Cummings, and whoever else he attacks next week.

He is flailing about trying to find his 2020 Hillary.  If he had found an actual bogeyman that he felt rises to Hillary's level of hatred, we would have already seen it in action.    

[Francisco 2.0 32,545]

8 minutes ago, Loch Ness Monster said:

Can anyone defend Trump selling weapons to the Saudis?

Its disgusting what they've done in Yemen.

Shit, the Trump fan club can defend anything he's done.  I honestly don't believe there's a line that he can cross now to those folk.  

The only possibility is if he full on started referring to SEC country as full of toothless stupid ass slapdicks...and that might not even be enough.

[Francisco 2.0 32,545]

1 minute ago, atomheartbevo said:

 

He is flailing about trying to find his 2020 Hillary.  If he had found an actual bogeyman that he felt rises to Hillary's level of hatred, we would have already seen it in action.    

Oh, he will.  I don't know who that person will be, but a year from now, that person will be the anti-Christ.

[atomheartbevo 90,550]

10 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

They have had the oldest viewer averages for something like 20+ years now.

They keep cultivating younger audiences, some how.  And those younger audiences become part of the oldest viewer average.  

To be fair, the Baby Boomers were a really large generation - we've had almost 30 years of them as Presidents/candidates.  And out of the Boomers, the Republican Presidents were only able to win 3 times, and two were double-digits, and one by single digits in the electoral college.  Meanwhile, the Dem Boomer Presidents all won handily by triple-digits.

[atomheartbevo 90,550]

6 minutes ago, retread said:

If you're a young R or at least sympathetic to that side, Trump's twitter rants probably reel in a fair number of young voters.

Young Rs hate their crazy grandpa or uncle ranting in all caps on the internet just as much as the Indies and Ds.

[Francisco 2.0 32,545]

Just now, atomheartbevo said:

Young Rs hate their crazy grandpa or uncle ranting in all caps on the internet just as much as the Indies and Ds.

I get that, but Young R's generally don't switch teams.  They just become older disillusioned R's bitching about something that absolutely has no effect on their lives, but by God, they are going to vote to try to keep it from happening.

 

[JimmyJames 12,271]

54 minutes ago, mdmost said:

You're assuming Gen Z doesn't have a fairly decent number of idiots who agree with the same pieces of shit that helped Trump get elected. I don't.

Every generation will always have its share of idiots. The difference is the youngs have less idiots than the olds. This election will be the first one in a very long time that the baby boomers, who have a much larger share of idiots than any other generation in American history, do not have a majority. They are essentially tied with the millenials. 

This election will be both the first, and the last, election that Generation X is actually the swing vote. In the future the millenials will have the majority and will decide it. 

As a card carrying member of Generation X, I do not expect us to fuck this one up. 

Edited July 30, 2019 by JimmyJames

[atomheartbevo 90,550]

1 minute ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Oh, he will.  I don't know who that person will be, but a year from now, that person will be the anti-Christ.

It will be too late.  He needed to have his Hillary by now, and somehow, insert conspiracy theory here, get him or her through the Democrat primaries.

Will he refine his attack for whoever wins the nomination?  Sure, but he runs the risk of somebody that won't be nearly as scary as Hillary, and that could even do him harm in the polls with the debates and on the campaign trail.  And unfortunately for Trump, he's not very original and can't think on his feet, and has the tendency to assume that what won before, will win again.  Whoever is his challenger will know his weaknesses from 2016, plus all of the additional stuff (the Cohen stuff/coverups, the rape accusations, the Epstein stuff, etc.).

And nobody in the 2020 field of Ds is as much of a bogeyman now as Hillary was to his base in 2015-2016.

[conVINCEd 21,477]

8 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

I get that, but Young R's generally don't switch teams.  They just become older disillusioned R's bitching about something that absolutely has no effect on their lives, but by God, they are going to vote to try to keep it from happening.

 

There are plenty of people on this board who were young R’s that started changing teams around the time the R’s completely sold out to the religious right and completely changed teams in the last 5 years.

[atomheartbevo 90,550]

6 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

I get that, but Young R's generally don't switch teams.  They just become older disillusioned R's bitching about something that absolutely has no effect on their lives, but by God, they are going to vote to try to keep it from happening.

I was one of those Young Rs.  I maybe a man now, but I volunteered on W's gubernatorial and Presidential campaigns when I was young.  Things like Iraq disillusioned a lot of us, among many other things, and then we had Obama, who wasn't the bogeyman that he was made out to be.  And now we have Trump, who is living up to the stereotype of being an older Republican who gives no shits about the younger generations, both Rs and Ds.

I'm sure some younger Rs will vote for him, but if you took away his office and the current letter next to his name, and just left him with his tweets, he's exactly the kind of person that the younger crowd, Rs and Ds, would mock for saying stupid shit on twitter.