So what? There were fewer people than expected watching the tv on a nice July summer evening. This does not mean anything. At this point the viewers not watching have made up their mind on who they are voting for. First he is all over the media with high ratings now it makes headlines that he is not. Wow. Who cares?
So now you're arguing that it doesn't matter. Fine, that's better than your previous argument that the data was false. You abandon your arguments far too quickly. Kind of like the one about 'black teenagers' last night. I recommend that you either think more deeply before posting or hang tough...one or the other.
I am arguing why you think it does matter. How does lower than expected neilson ratings affect anything at this point? I didn't say the data was false but garbage and clearly biased to use the word yuge it is a jab at Trump via media. Ratings are always lower in the summer which is why re-runs are shown. As for the black teenagers topic - I am done playing semantics over one word. You know who she was talking about and so does everyone else. It's like saying Trump didn't say he doesn't like all Mexicans just the rapists and illegals. Your middle of the road see it from both side position tends to tip over to the left abyss at times. Now is one of them.
So what? There were fewer people than expected watching the tv on a nice July summer evening. This does not mean anything. At this point the viewers not watching have made up their mind on who they are voting for. First he is all over the media with high ratings now it makes headlines that he is not. Wow. Who cares?
So now you're arguing that it doesn't matter. Fine, that's better than your previous argument that the data was false. You abandon your arguments far too quickly. Kind of like the one about 'black teenagers' last night. I recommend that you either think more deeply before posting or hang tough...one or the other.
I am arguing why you think it does matter. How does lower than expected neilson ratings affect anything at this point? I didn't say the data was false but garbage and clearly biased to use the word yuge it is a jab at Trump via media. Ratings are always lower in the summer which is why re-runs are shown. As for the black teenagers topic - I am done playing semantics over one word. You know who she was talking about and so does everyone else. It's like saying Trump didn't say he doesn't like all Mexicans just the rapists and illegals. Your middle of the road see it from both side position tends to tip over to the left abyss at times. Now is one of them. />
I was pointing out to another person that maybe there is no 'Movement'. He didn't bring anyone into the party as ratings were flat. And the 'summer' argument is silly because the comparison was against other conventions which also occurred in the summer.
And there is no evidence that she was talking only about black teenagers. That's your (or more specifically this opinion author's) own opinion.
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 41,068
What I really hope is that no matter who wins, the losing sides accept and support the winner as our president. In every other competitive realm of our lives, we teach our children to lose with grace. I'm pledging right now to support the person sworn in January, even if it's Donald Trump. I'm not saying I will run out and praise everything he does. Instead, while taking deep breaths, I will say to myself, "This too shall pass," because it will. If he wins, I will not spend the next four years of my life spewing angry, hateful, snarky words about my president or country. There is way, way too much of that in the world, and I refuse to participate in it anymore. It's why we get the candidates we do, because no normal person would subject him or herself to such crap. None of us good people would last one month in the ring if we had millions of people tweeting and posting the crap that gets written and spoken about our national candidates. I don't even know why any of them put up with it. They have to be narcissistic sociopaths to do so, because who else would take pleasure in this? I wonder what would happen if the voting public changed its ways and treated candidates (and then our winners) respectfully. Would we get better candidates? Or do we get what we deserve? Who else but a Trump or Clinton could thrive in the environment we create?
Still got two more pages of this behemoth of a thread to read, but I like this mindset. I hope I can adopt the same over time.
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 41,068
So what? There were fewer people than expected watching the tv on a nice July summer evening. This does not mean anything. At this point the viewers not watching have made up their mind on who they are voting for. First he is all over the media with high ratings now it makes headlines that he is not. Wow. Who cares?
So now you're arguing that it doesn't matter. Fine, that's better than your previous argument that the data was false. You abandon your arguments far too quickly. Kind of like the one about 'black teenagers' last night. I recommend that you either think more deeply before posting or hang tough...one or the other.
I am arguing why you think it does matter. How does lower than expected neilson ratings affect anything at this point? I didn't say the data was false but garbage and clearly biased to use the word yuge it is a jab at Trump via media. Ratings are always lower in the summer which is why re-runs are shown. As for the black teenagers topic - I am done playing semantics over one word. You know who she was talking about and so does everyone else. It's like saying Trump didn't say he doesn't like all Mexicans just the rapists and illegals. Your middle of the road see it from both side position tends to tip over to the left abyss at times. Now is one of them. />
I was pointing out to another person that maybe there is no 'Movement'. He didn't bring anyone into the party as ratings were flat. And the 'summer' argument is silly because the comparison was against other conventions which also occurred in the summer.
And there is no evidence that she was talking only about black teenagers. That's your (or more specifically this opinion author's) own opinion.
The low ratings is real and not a good sign for Trump. That being said people watch in so many different ways these days that the old metrics of ratings may not capture actual penetration. What I mean by that is people get bits and peices off youtube/twitter/streaming etc. so we comparitively we don't exactly know. Still though...not yuge.
So what? There were fewer people than expected watching the tv on a nice July summer evening. This does not mean anything. At this point the viewers not watching have made up their mind on who they are voting for. First he is all over the media with high ratings now it makes headlines that he is not. Wow. Who cares?
So now you're arguing that it doesn't matter. Fine, that's better than your previous argument that the data was false. You abandon your arguments far too quickly. Kind of like the one about 'black teenagers' last night. I recommend that you either think more deeply before posting or hang tough...one or the other.
I am arguing why you think it does matter. How does lower than expected neilson ratings affect anything at this point? I didn't say the data was false but garbage and clearly biased to use the word yuge it is a jab at Trump via media. Ratings are always lower in the summer which is why re-runs are shown. As for the black teenagers topic - I am done playing semantics over one word. You know who she was talking about and so does everyone else. It's like saying Trump didn't say he doesn't like all Mexicans just the rapists and illegals. Your middle of the road see it from both side position tends to tip over to the left abyss at times. Now is one of them.
will myself to find a home, a home within myself we will find a way, we will find our place
So what? There were fewer people than expected watching the tv on a nice July summer evening. This does not mean anything. At this point the viewers not watching have made up their mind on who they are voting for. First he is all over the media with high ratings now it makes headlines that he is not. Wow. Who cares?
So now you're arguing that it doesn't matter. Fine, that's better than your previous argument that the data was false. You abandon your arguments far too quickly. Kind of like the one about 'black teenagers' last night. I recommend that you either think more deeply before posting or hang tough...one or the other.
I am arguing why you think it does matter. How does lower than expected neilson ratings affect anything at this point? I didn't say the data was false but garbage and clearly biased to use the word yuge it is a jab at Trump via media. Ratings are always lower in the summer which is why re-runs are shown. As for the black teenagers topic - I am done playing semantics over one word. You know who she was talking about and so does everyone else. It's like saying Trump didn't say he doesn't like all Mexicans just the rapists and illegals. Your middle of the road see it from both side position tends to tip over to the left abyss at times. Now is one of them. />
I was pointing out to another person that maybe there is no 'Movement'. He didn't bring anyone into the party as ratings were flat. And the 'summer' argument is silly because the comparison was against other conventions which also occurred in the summer.
And there is no evidence that she was talking only about black teenagers. That's your (or more specifically this opinion author's) own opinion.
The low ratings is real and not a good sign for Trump. That being said people watch in so many different ways these days that the old metrics of ratings may not capture actual penetration. What I mean by that is people get bits and peices off youtube/twitter/streaming etc. so we comparitively we don't exactly know. Still though...not yuge.
Many Americans watched last week’s Republican convention with horror and trepidation. Rudy Giuliani’s quadrennial temper tantrum was even more animated than during previous conventions. Ben Carson gave a speech that married his own bizarre brand of evangelical Christianity with reasoning that one might expect on a child’s playground to imply that Hillary Clinton was a worshipper of Lucifer. The candidate himself painted a frightening, if based in fantasy, picture of an America under siege by roving bands of cop-killing criminals and Isis operatives. Perhaps most disturbingly of all, the Quicken Loans Arena echoed with calls to lock Hillary Clinton up and, even more appallingly, some supporters of the Republican candidate have suggested executing her for treason. This was not Ronald Reagan’s morning in America, George W. Bush’s compassionate conservatism or even Mitt Romney’s “We built it.” Rather, this was a convention that presented a level of vitriol, hatred, intolerance and division that we have not seen in a long time.
It was very difficult to watch that convention and conclude that in the likely event of a Clinton victory in November, the people in that arena and the millions of Americans they represent, will accept defeat easily. Americans have always been proud of our ability to accept political defeat and move to fight another day. There is, however, real reason to think that will not happen this time if Clinton wins. The people in that room do not see the coming election as a hard fought campaign between two loyal Americans, but as a battle between a crooked, dishonest, criminal who should not be allowed to live freely, let alone serve as President of the United States, and a heroic figure who is the only person able to save the country. This is a dynamic that threatens the very core of our democracy.
Simply put, people who call for their opponents to be arrested or killed, while imbuing their own candidate with messianic powers, do not accept political defeat easily. Moreover, the alleged more mature voices within the Republican Party who have stood by and said nothing while this all occurred are clearly unwilling or unable to moderate what could charitably be described as the angry, unhinged mob formerly known as the Republican base.
It has been evident for many months now, and was made more apparent last week in Cleveland, that a Trump presidency would damage the already weak social fabric of American democracy. His enthusiasm for divisive and hateful rhetoric, tenuous understanding of key principles of American democracy such as, for example, the First Amendment, and deep-seeded megalomania are all reason that a Trump presidency would threaten our democracy and what is left of our national cohesion. However, it is now increasingly likely that a Trump defeat, even by a resounding margin, would not be met with acceptance from Trump and his supporters.
The possibility that Trump would encourage his supporters not to accept this defeat, perhaps by claiming that the vote was rigged or that undocumented workers voted in droves in key southwestern states, must be gravely considered at this point. This conclusion is not simply the product of progressive paranoia, but it is a reaction to what we have seen and heard from Trump and his supporters for the last year, but even more so during the last week.
Speculating about what a candidate might do if he loses is a strange exercise, and one that should have no place in a consolidated and stable democracy, if flawed, democracy like ours. However, it is something that based on the behavior of Trump and his supporters, must be considered. Throughout this long campaign we have seen Trump encourage and even advocate violent behavior, stand by while his Democratic opponent is accused of treason and murder, and evince little understanding of democratic processes or mores. The question of what this man will do if, as is still likely, he loses on November 8th, cannot be ignored given this context.
Trump, should he be defeated, could easily eschew the traditional gracious concession, mobilize his supporters to demonstrate their dissatisfaction with the outcome and their disbelief in his Democratic vanquisher’s victory. Ultimately, however, it would be very difficult for him to stop Clinton from becoming President. Trump controls no security forces, has little institutional support and has few concrete resources other than his Twitter account, but he clearly has the enthusiastic support of enough people to create problems in the immediate aftermath of his possible defeat. Those people could easily protest for a few weeks and continue a lower level campaign of failing to recognize Clinton’s presidency for years.
It should also be remembered that Trump a man with a loyal following of angry citizens with an extraordinarily exaggerated sense of their own victimhood and suffering, and that he has the temperament of an acutely narcissistic middle school student. He also has built a presidential campaign heavily around overreacting, often viciously and with prejudice towards almost all, to every real, or more frequently, imagined, insult or slight he has experienced. This is not the temperament of somebody who will accept an electoral defeat move on and urge his followers to do the same. In a very real way, while seeing this man elected President of the United States should, and does, strike fear in the hearts of millions, even his defeat could create enduring problems for American democracy.
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.- Hemingway
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 41,068
^^^ interesting, gimme, but I think when Trump losses he will go back to whatever other hobbies he has, probably doing more dumb TV shows. What is more concerning to me is, what will his fanatic followers do?
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
As I said clearly, I think there are some parallels between Hitler's tactics and Trump's tactics, and I have told you why and posted articles explaining the specific reasons why thes specific parallels are apt. These parallels are actually fact, not opinion. I am not sure if those saying it's a crazy comparison are saying that because they can't distinguish between "there are parallels between these few things that Hitler did and these few things that Trump's now doing", and "Hitler and Trump are the same." Is that the problem? That you folks don't understand that difference, and you think anyone who makes a comparison is just flat out saying that Trump is just like Hitler?
So you concede that Trump is not "just like Hitler". That's a good start. "Parallels" though...hmmm...I still don't like it. It's a little too cute by half. I mean what is the point of even mentioning the "parallels" to Hitler unless you are trying to insinuate that an election of Trump will lead him to behave like Hitler? You either think he is going to become an expansionist genocidal dictator or you don't? Seriously because if you don't then who cares? For 8 years George W Bush was Hitler. People made movies about what the world be like if he was assassinated. It was quite disgusting then and almost amazing now how the media celebrates how outspoken he was in defending the Islamic faith as a whole. Trump though...well now there are real "parallels" to the rise of Hitler. He ain't Hitler yet but boy we better all just be careful. He's hateful! He's whipping his crowd into a frenzy! His supporters are going to come for us all! Over and over I read about politicians running on fear but it might be time to look in the mirror and ask yourself who really is running on fear. Trump is speaking to problems that are actually happening, whether you like it or not, and his opponents are speaking to the future Reich that will descend upon us all! This will be the Clinton campaign platform in a nutshell. Ignore the world because here comes Parallel Hitler. Now that campaign might in fact work again who knows. If it fails however all those who pushed it will have done a horrible disservice to the state of public discourse and will leave a country that might in fact become ungovernable. What rational person who believes there are parallels between Trump and Hitler could stand idly by while he builds the Reich? This is a serious problem that many of you are not considering. Last year that widely discussed question of "If you could go back in time and kill baby Hitler would you do it?" went viral and about 40% said yes. Hell if I was polled I would probably say yes myself but the dilemma that creates you see is if some radlib, convinced by research, that the next Hitler is upon us, well, what stops him or her from taking matters into his/her own hands? It would be for the good of the country after all! This is not ok. It can't be ok. This is the road that "parallels" leads us down and like I said...I don't like it.
Oh well, sorry you don't like it. Sometimes the truth hurts.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
What I really hope is that no matter who wins, the losing sides accept and support the winner as our president. In every other competitive realm of our lives, we teach our children to lose with grace. I'm pledging right now to support the person sworn in January, even if it's Donald Trump. I'm not saying I will run out and praise everything he does. Instead, while taking deep breaths, I will say to myself, "This too shall pass," because it will. If he wins, I will not spend the next four years of my life spewing angry, hateful, snarky words about my president or country. There is way, way too much of that in the world, and I refuse to participate in it anymore. It's why we get the candidates we do, because no normal person would subject him or herself to such crap. None of us good people would last one month in the ring if we had millions of people tweeting and posting the crap that gets written and spoken about our national candidates. I don't even know why any of them put up with it. They have to be narcissistic sociopaths to do so, because who else would take pleasure in this? I wonder what would happen if the voting public changed its ways and treated candidates (and then our winners) respectfully. Would we get better candidates? Or do we get what we deserve? Who else but a Trump or Clinton could thrive in the environment we create?
dreams their is no making sense of these radlibs. forget it. radical liberals swallow their radical pride? fat chance. these radicals are driving me further right by the minute. im embarrassed to associate myself with the radlibs and their despicable hate.
Are you kidding? Because what dreams is saying is exactly the opposite of what conservatives have done since Obama has been elected. I happen to agree with this premise. You respect the office. You respect the vote. If Trump is elected, that makes him your/our president whether you voted for him or not.
agree, the conservatives the past 8 years have been beyond despicable. and the radicals the same under bush. you rads seem to have a hard time with reading comprehension. I AM NOT A FUCKING CONSERVATIVE.
So what do you consider yourself? A moderate?
a Patriot.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,561
Wow ratings far below the '08 RNC and flat from '12. Never seen a candidate so obsessed with tv ratings like Trump is so this must be killing him.
Wow ratings far below the '08 RNC and flat from '12. Never seen a candidate so obsessed with tv ratings like Trump is so this must be killing him.
SAD!
I think this was inevitable and predictable and doesn't really say much of anything. People watch the conventions to see who wins, to see if there will be an upset, whatever. This year neither convention has that draw. All either convention is this year is a four day pep rally for the nominee, which is boring.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
^^^ interesting, gimme, but I think when Trump losses he will go back to whatever other hobbies he has, probably doing more dumb TV shows. What is more concerning to me is, what will his fanatic followers do?
Same as they always have....call Rush and blame all of their woes on President Obama amd Hillary Clinton. And then get a suitcase of bud lite and sit back and watch sean hannity and/or bill o'reilly blame President Obama and Hillary Clinton for everything bad that has ever happened.
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,561
Wow ratings far below the '08 RNC and flat from '12. Never seen a candidate so obsessed with tv ratings like Trump is so this must be killing him.
SAD!
I think this was inevitable and predictable and doesn't really say much of anything. People watch the conventions to see who wins, to see if there will be an upset, whatever. This year neither convention has that draw. All either convention is is a four day pep rally for the nominee, which is boring.
I agree it doesn't mean much...however Trump is the only candidate, probably ever, who touts ratings for things he's in as some type of level of success. So it's just naturally funny to see ratings for his biggest moment be much less than what was hoped for.
So Elizabeth Warren said that she thinks the Democratic party and Americans in general are really underestimating Trump's ability to win this election. I think of Warren as someone who really knows what she's talking about.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Wow ratings far below the '08 RNC and flat from '12. Never seen a candidate so obsessed with tv ratings like Trump is so this must be killing him.
SAD!
I think this was inevitable and predictable and doesn't really say much of anything. People watch the conventions to see who wins, to see if there will be an upset, whatever. This year neither convention has that draw. All either convention is is a four day pep rally for the nominee, which is boring.
I agree it doesn't mean much...however Trump is the only candidate, probably ever, who touts ratings for things he's in as some type of level of success. So it's just naturally funny to see ratings for his biggest moment be much less than what was hoped for.
His speech was 74 minutes long. No better way to get people to turn the channel than to give a 74 minute long televized speech, and you're right, he may be disappointed. He is probably drunk from his new found percieved power and thought that everyone would be fucking riveted when he got up on stage and blabbled on and on and on about basically nothing for well over an hour, lol.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Wow ratings far below the '08 RNC and flat from '12. Never seen a candidate so obsessed with tv ratings like Trump is so this must be killing him.
SAD!
I think this was inevitable and predictable and doesn't really say much of anything. People watch the conventions to see who wins, to see if there will be an upset, whatever. This year neither convention has that draw. All either convention is this year is a four day pep rally for the nominee, which is boring.
There hasn't been a convention in my lifetime where there was even a chance of an upset. Nobody watches to see who will win.
Wow ratings far below the '08 RNC and flat from '12. Never seen a candidate so obsessed with tv ratings like Trump is so this must be killing him.
SAD!
I think this was inevitable and predictable and doesn't really say much of anything. People watch the conventions to see who wins, to see if there will be an upset, whatever. This year neither convention has that draw. All either convention is this year is a four day pep rally for the nominee, which is boring.
There hasn't been a convention in my lifetime where there was even a chance of an upset. Nobody watches to see who will win.
I know plenty of people still had hopes for Hillary in 2008 (founded hopes or not). But what I really mean is there is a sense of competition. There is more than one nominee there usually. When there is only one nominee even showing up there is no draw, no drama, not even the illusion of competition.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Anyone disagree with any of the points? And please spare the rhetoric of credible news source and Michael Moore is an idiot stuff. Why are these pointed reasons wrong?
Wow ratings far below the '08 RNC and flat from '12. Never seen a candidate so obsessed with tv ratings like Trump is so this must be killing him.
SAD!
I think this was inevitable and predictable and doesn't really say much of anything. People watch the conventions to see who wins, to see if there will be an upset, whatever. This year neither convention has that draw. All either convention is this year is a four day pep rally for the nominee, which is boring.
There hasn't been a convention in my lifetime where there was even a chance of an upset. Nobody watches to see who will win.
I know plenty of people still had hopes for Hillary in 2008 (founded hopes or not). But what I really mean is there is a sense of competition. There is more than one nominee there usually. When there is only one nominee even showing up there is no draw, no drama, not even the illusion of competition.
Huh? I'm sorry, you really just don't know what you're talking about here.
All the nominees are usually there, yes. The loser is always invited to speak. Sanders, who will be there this week, will follow the tradition. Why are you writing as if he won't be? Past presidents, spouses, children. This year is absolutely no different than any other year.
Now, it was incredibly unusual for Kasich and Rubio and the Bushes and the Romneys to not be there in Cleveland. That's why the damn thing was a dud, in my view. They had to fill so much air time since the traditional speakers didn't come, and none of their chosen speakers were even remotely inspiring. The so-called Cruz delegate controversy wasn't even that interesting.
I think people didn't watched because they are so turned off by this election. They're sick to death of both the Donald and the Hillary. I predict this will be the lowest voter turn out in history. People are done. We cannot continue to have four-year campaign cycles in this country. I mean, Cruz is already reportedly getting his machine in place for 2020. It's ridiculous. If the convention is anti-climactic, it's because they've all been fucking running for president since 2012.
Anyone disagree with any of the points? And please spare the rhetoric of credible news source and Michael Moore is an idiot stuff. Why are these pointed reasons wrong?
Yeah, they are all based on his feelings, not empirical data. Let's start with the fact that women are much more reliable as voters than men. So if you have to get 7 out of 10 that are ALIVE, let alone registered, then that's a tough climb to start.
Second, his first point says ""All he has to do is win those four states." Wow. That's fucking deep right there. I mean what a political genius to pull this one out. So how does he win those states? What does his ground game look like? How deeply is he staffed for the phones and the pavement campaign?
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 41,068
Anyone disagree with any of the points? And please spare the rhetoric of credible news source and Michael Moore is an idiot stuff. Why are these pointed reasons wrong?
I predict there's about the same likelihood of seeing some "Michael Moore is an idiot" stuff here as there is we'll see some more photos from your Trump collection.
As you can guess, I don't think MM is an idiot but I think he's forgetting that a) women vote and b) not everyone in America is an angry white dude and c) when push comes to shove, when it comes down to it if Trump looks like he has any chance at all many of us who would like to vote third party will vote against Trump and Moore is a pretty smart guy so I'm guessing that is his motivation for these statements anyway. And why not? What rational human being would really want to chance having a blow hard like Trump in office? No way.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Not surprised ratings are down. People would rather follow comedic jokes about it on Twitter. The only way I'd watch either convention is for the Rifftrax guys to cover it. The special editions of Bill Maher and the Jon Stewart appearance on Colbert were the best ways to keep up.
Comments
Ratings are always lower in the summer which is why re-runs are shown.
As for the black teenagers topic - I am done playing semantics over one word. You know who she was talking about and so does everyone else.
It's like saying Trump didn't say he doesn't like all Mexicans just the rapists and illegals.
Your middle of the road see it from both side position tends to tip over to the left abyss at times.
Now is one of them.
off to the beach, i like to get there by noon.
And there is no evidence that she was talking only about black teenagers. That's your (or more specifically this opinion author's) own opinion.
now if you'll excuse me, i have to put on my SPF.
we will find a way, we will find our place
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
THE BLOG
But What If Trump Loses
07/23/2016 09:05 am 09:05:24 | Updated 1 hour ago
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lincoln-mitchell/but-what-if-trump-loses_b_11153432.html
Many Americans watched last week’s Republican convention with horror and trepidation. Rudy Giuliani’s quadrennial temper tantrum was even more animated than during previous conventions. Ben Carson gave a speech that married his own bizarre brand of evangelical Christianity with reasoning that one might expect on a child’s playground to imply that Hillary Clinton was a worshipper of Lucifer. The candidate himself painted a frightening, if based in fantasy, picture of an America under siege by roving bands of cop-killing criminals and Isis operatives. Perhaps most disturbingly of all, the Quicken Loans Arena echoed with calls to lock Hillary Clinton up and, even more appallingly, some supporters of the Republican candidate have suggested executing her for treason. This was not Ronald Reagan’s morning in America, George W. Bush’s compassionate conservatism or even Mitt Romney’s “We built it.” Rather, this was a convention that presented a level of vitriol, hatred, intolerance and division that we have not seen in a long time.
It was very difficult to watch that convention and conclude that in the likely event of a Clinton victory in November, the people in that arena and the millions of Americans they represent, will accept defeat easily. Americans have always been proud of our ability to accept political defeat and move to fight another day. There is, however, real reason to think that will not happen this time if Clinton wins. The people in that room do not see the coming election as a hard fought campaign between two loyal Americans, but as a battle between a crooked, dishonest, criminal who should not be allowed to live freely, let alone serve as President of the United States, and a heroic figure who is the only person able to save the country. This is a dynamic that threatens the very core of our democracy.
Simply put, people who call for their opponents to be arrested or killed, while imbuing their own candidate with messianic powers, do not accept political defeat easily. Moreover, the alleged more mature voices within the Republican Party who have stood by and said nothing while this all occurred are clearly unwilling or unable to moderate what could charitably be described as the angry, unhinged mob formerly known as the Republican base.
It has been evident for many months now, and was made more apparent last week in Cleveland, that a Trump presidency would damage the already weak social fabric of American democracy. His enthusiasm for divisive and hateful rhetoric, tenuous understanding of key principles of American democracy such as, for example, the First Amendment, and deep-seeded megalomania are all reason that a Trump presidency would threaten our democracy and what is left of our national cohesion. However, it is now increasingly likely that a Trump defeat, even by a resounding margin, would not be met with acceptance from Trump and his supporters.
The possibility that Trump would encourage his supporters not to accept this defeat, perhaps by claiming that the vote was rigged or that undocumented workers voted in droves in key southwestern states, must be gravely considered at this point. This conclusion is not simply the product of progressive paranoia, but it is a reaction to what we have seen and heard from Trump and his supporters for the last year, but even more so during the last week.
Speculating about what a candidate might do if he loses is a strange exercise, and one that should have no place in a consolidated and stable democracy, if flawed, democracy like ours. However, it is something that based on the behavior of Trump and his supporters, must be considered. Throughout this long campaign we have seen Trump encourage and even advocate violent behavior, stand by while his Democratic opponent is accused of treason and murder, and evince little understanding of democratic processes or mores. The question of what this man will do if, as is still likely, he loses on November 8th, cannot be ignored given this context.
Trump, should he be defeated, could easily eschew the traditional gracious concession, mobilize his supporters to demonstrate their dissatisfaction with the outcome and their disbelief in his Democratic vanquisher’s victory. Ultimately, however, it would be very difficult for him to stop Clinton from becoming President. Trump controls no security forces, has little institutional support and has few concrete resources other than his Twitter account, but he clearly has the enthusiastic support of enough people to create problems in the immediate aftermath of his possible defeat. Those people could easily protest for a few weeks and continue a lower level campaign of failing to recognize Clinton’s presidency for years.
It should also be remembered that Trump a man with a loyal following of angry citizens with an extraordinarily exaggerated sense of their own victimhood and suffering, and that he has the temperament of an acutely narcissistic middle school student. He also has built a presidential campaign heavily around overreacting, often viciously and with prejudice towards almost all, to every real, or more frequently, imagined, insult or slight he has experienced. This is not the temperament of somebody who will accept an electoral defeat move on and urge his followers to do the same. In a very real way, while seeing this man elected President of the United States should, and does, strike fear in the hearts of millions, even his defeat could create enduring problems for American democracy.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
SAD!
And then get a suitcase of bud lite and sit back and watch sean hannity and/or bill o'reilly blame President Obama and Hillary Clinton for everything bad that has ever happened.
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/michael-moores-5-reasons-why-trump-will-win
Anyone disagree with any of the points? And please spare the rhetoric of credible news source and Michael Moore is an idiot stuff.
Why are these pointed reasons wrong?
All the nominees are usually there, yes. The loser is always invited to speak. Sanders, who will be there this week, will follow the tradition. Why are you writing as if he won't be? Past presidents, spouses, children. This year is absolutely no different than any other year.
Now, it was incredibly unusual for Kasich and Rubio and the Bushes and the Romneys to not be there in Cleveland. That's why the damn thing was a dud, in my view. They had to fill so much air time since the traditional speakers didn't come, and none of their chosen speakers were even remotely inspiring. The so-called Cruz delegate controversy wasn't even that interesting.
I think people didn't watched because they are so turned off by this election. They're sick to death of both the Donald and the Hillary. I predict this will be the lowest voter turn out in history. People are done. We cannot continue to have four-year campaign cycles in this country. I mean, Cruz is already reportedly getting his machine in place for 2020. It's ridiculous. If the convention is anti-climactic, it's because they've all been fucking running for president since 2012.
Second, his first point says ""All he has to do is win those four states." Wow. That's fucking deep right there. I mean what a political genius to pull this one out. So how does he win those states? What does his ground game look like? How deeply is he staffed for the phones and the pavement campaign?
As you can guess, I don't think MM is an idiot but I think he's forgetting that a) women vote and b) not everyone in America is an angry white dude and c) when push comes to shove, when it comes down to it if Trump looks like he has any chance at all many of us who would like to vote third party will vote against Trump and Moore is a pretty smart guy so I'm guessing that is his motivation for these statements anyway. And why not? What rational human being would really want to chance having a blow hard like Trump in office? No way.
I work late hours so I couldn't watch anyways.