I won't get into this now, but we are also seeing the difference between strategy and tactics. Trump has run a tactical campaign. Clinton has been playing the long game from the start. This would be an interesting subject for after the election.
For sure. This oppo dump has been ready and waiting for months. The people who backed Trump had this idea that the dems would turn every Republican into a sexist (which of course they would and have always done) so why not back the guy who could stand up to that nonsense. What those shortsighted individuals failed to realize (yet should have) is that Trump would eventually get smothered in allegations. He can't conceivably fight them all off as liars while asking the public to hear out the complaints of the Clinton victims simultaneously. His only hope, and it's a faint one at best, is that the public just tunes it all out and votes for change. The metrics still point to a change election and the Trump tactical gamble is a massive one.
What nonsense that he actually attacks women and boast about it , it's ok to admit that you might of been wrong ...Metrics what metrics his down in all the polls except the one's in Trump tower ...
Might have been wrong? I don't like Trump. He is exactly who I thought he was. Not sure what you're talking about. Also the metrics have been pointing for a "change" candidate since the early days of the election and that has never shifted. It still hasn't the question is whether people are willing to entrust Trump with that change? Hillary is not liked and her favourability numbers are piss poor. She only very rarely gets above 45% in any poll. The problem is that Trump's numbers are worse. For anybody to call this a celebratory selection of Hillary Clinton and her non-existent platform is kidding themselves. It is a depressing choice of the status quo over buffoonery.
But yet she won the nomination. She beat everyone that ran against her.
She sure did but nobody would call Bernie Sanders or Martin O Malley a strong field.
Oh yeah?
Yeah. O'Malley was for the most part considered to be a failed governor and Sanders was not even an official Democratic Party member until shortly before the primary. Sanders may have had the excitement of the left but he was never going to win and the party establishment made sure of that. That is basically what you call a thin bench and/or open field.
I'm not all that familiar with what you mean by "thin bench" (sporting term I assume) but it alludes to weakness and you can't call someone who drew (and still has) as much support as Bernie and call him a week component in politics. Plus you said "nobody" and I and others are not nobody.
It is a sporting term...as in "The Cleveland Indians have a thin bench". But as far as Sanders is concerned I can call him a "weak component in politics" because while he generated excitement it was never enough to amount to anything other then a few electoral victories. Where is he channeling all this energy too? He endorsed the complete opposite of what he apparently stood for and cashed out in the process. He will be forgotten.
Yeah, I wish he had endorsed Stein but oh well. In any case, as much as I doubt this will happen, you can't write off a candidate completely when in theory he could still become POTUS:
I won't get into this now, but we are also seeing the difference between strategy and tactics. Trump has run a tactical campaign. Clinton has been playing the long game from the start. This would be an interesting subject for after the election.
For sure. This oppo dump has been ready and waiting for months. The people who backed Trump had this idea that the dems would turn every Republican into a sexist (which of course they would and have always done) so why not back the guy who could stand up to that nonsense. What those shortsighted individuals failed to realize (yet should have) is that Trump would eventually get smothered in allegations. He can't conceivably fight them all off as liars while asking the public to hear out the complaints of the Clinton victims simultaneously. His only hope, and it's a faint one at best, is that the public just tunes it all out and votes for change. The metrics still point to a change election and the Trump tactical gamble is a massive one.
What nonsense that he actually attacks women and boast about it , it's ok to admit that you might of been wrong ...Metrics what metrics his down in all the polls except the one's in Trump tower ...
Might have been wrong? I don't like Trump. He is exactly who I thought he was. Not sure what you're talking about. Also the metrics have been pointing for a "change" candidate since the early days of the election and that has never shifted. It still hasn't the question is whether people are willing to entrust Trump with that change? Hillary is not liked and her favourability numbers are piss poor. She only very rarely gets above 45% in any poll. The problem is that Trump's numbers are worse. For anybody to call this a celebratory selection of Hillary Clinton and her non-existent platform is kidding themselves. It is a depressing choice of the status quo over buffoonery.
But yet she won the nomination. She beat everyone that ran against her.
She sure did but nobody would call Bernie Sanders or Martin O Malley a strong field.
Oh yeah?
Yeah. O'Malley was for the most part considered to be a failed governor and Sanders was not even an official Democratic Party member until shortly before the primary. Sanders may have had the excitement of the left but he was never going to win and the party establishment made sure of that. That is basically what you call a thin bench and/or open field.
I'm not all that familiar with what you mean by "thin bench" (sporting term I assume) but it alludes to weakness and you can't call someone who drew (and still has) as much support as Bernie and call him a week component in politics. Plus you said "nobody" and I and others are not nobody.
It is a sporting term...as in "The Cleveland Indians have a thin bench". But as far as Sanders is concerned I can call him a "weak component in politics" because while he generated excitement it was never enough to amount to anything other then a few electoral victories. Where is he channeling all this energy too? He endorsed the complete opposite of what he apparently stood for and cashed out in the process. He will be forgotten.
Correction... we have a thin rotation.... the bench and pen are friggin' STACKED!
I won't get into this now, but we are also seeing the difference between strategy and tactics. Trump has run a tactical campaign. Clinton has been playing the long game from the start. This would be an interesting subject for after the election.
For sure. This oppo dump has been ready and waiting for months. The people who backed Trump had this idea that the dems would turn every Republican into a sexist (which of course they would and have always done) so why not back the guy who could stand up to that nonsense. What those shortsighted individuals failed to realize (yet should have) is that Trump would eventually get smothered in allegations. He can't conceivably fight them all off as liars while asking the public to hear out the complaints of the Clinton victims simultaneously. His only hope, and it's a faint one at best, is that the public just tunes it all out and votes for change. The metrics still point to a change election and the Trump tactical gamble is a massive one.
What nonsense that he actually attacks women and boast about it , it's ok to admit that you might of been wrong ...Metrics what metrics his down in all the polls except the one's in Trump tower ...
Might have been wrong? I don't like Trump. He is exactly who I thought he was. Not sure what you're talking about. Also the metrics have been pointing for a "change" candidate since the early days of the election and that has never shifted. It still hasn't the question is whether people are willing to entrust Trump with that change? Hillary is not liked and her favourability numbers are piss poor. She only very rarely gets above 45% in any poll. The problem is that Trump's numbers are worse. For anybody to call this a celebratory selection of Hillary Clinton and her non-existent platform is kidding themselves. It is a depressing choice of the status quo over buffoonery.
But yet she won the nomination. She beat everyone that ran against her.
She sure did but nobody would call Bernie Sanders or Martin O Malley a strong field.
Oh yeah?
Yeah. O'Malley was for the most part considered to be a failed governor and Sanders was not even an official Democratic Party member until shortly before the primary. Sanders may have had the excitement of the left but he was never going to win and the party establishment made sure of that. That is basically what you call a thin bench and/or open field.
I'm not all that familiar with what you mean by "thin bench" (sporting term I assume) but it alludes to weakness and you can't call someone who drew (and still has) as much support as Bernie and call him a week component in politics. Plus you said "nobody" and I and others are not nobody.
It is a sporting term...as in "The Cleveland Indians have a thin bench". But as far as Sanders is concerned I can call him a "weak component in politics" because while he generated excitement it was never enough to amount to anything other then a few electoral victories. Where is he channeling all this energy too? He endorsed the complete opposite of what he apparently stood for and cashed out in the process. He will be forgotten.
Yeah, I wish he had endorsed Stein but oh well. In any case, as much as I doubt this will happen, you can't write off a candidate completely when in theory he could still become POTUS:
I'm sorry, it's delusional to think that the House would hand the presidency to Sanders when the vast, vast majority have not pulled their endorsements of Trump. This is fantasy thinking.
Ok so he's good to go now you can vote for him with a clear conscience, have a great weekend..
I've posted a lot in this thread and not once will you find me saying I approve of Trump..
You don't approve ok but you have been defending him on this issue ...
True..but not defending Trump necessarily. I think it's more being against the media coverage of it all. I have to purposely miss the first 5-10 minutes of national nightly news or I'm going to see A)Trump say something stupid or B.. media digging up any dirt they can on the guy. I can't watch CNN anymore..its non-stop piling on..accusations shouldn't be headlines..prove it or move on. How about pushing on issues and let him bury himself. The other stuff can be worked out.... out of the headlines until we have actual charges against the guy. As far as Zervos, I do not believe her..watch the video of her reading that story with Allred beside her..its just stinks of prepared garbage to me.She had to read it line for line and I don't think it was because of shame..it was because she is lying..if she proves me wrong, Ill write her a letter of sincere apology..
I just think it's hilarious and sad that with 16 candidates in the primary, the GOP selected the only one who could lose to Clinton, and did so in record numbers. It shows how zany and pathetic the GOP base has become.
I just think it's hilarious and sad that with 16 candidates in the primary, the GOP selected the only one who could lose to Clinton, and did so in record numbers. It shows how zany and pathetic the GOP base has become.
I posted this in the Podesta email thread but im also posting here, since there are pages dedicated to this very thing....no words to describe this back in May
I read it. I am not sure it was particularly insightful. I can't imagine there was anything there you didn't know. The message every parent in rural America should know is... Make sure your kids go to college. Period.
^^^ That sounds a little like perhaps unless you have a college education you are Trump material....I could be wrong though. Plenty of people enter great fields with little or no education. Just ask the illegal immigrants.
^^^ That sounds a little like perhaps unless you have a college education you are Trump material....I could be wrong though. Plenty of people enter great fields with little or no education. Just ask the illegal immigrants.
Look at the job numbers since the recession. Only 80k new jobs have been created for those without an education. Over 5 mm for those with one.
^^^ I am not about to blame Trump for jobs that are lost while he is not POTUS.
You're kind of missing the point.
And you must be in a very long boring meeting. What point?
Watching my Tribe handle BS's Blue Jays....at least for the moment.
The point is, these jobs are not coming back. Trade wars do not bring jobs back. Tariffs do not either, not in the long term. If you're young enough, get a real trade or education. Or get your kids a better life than you.
The failure of Nafta was that there was no money in it to re-educate the population. We can't make the same mistake with TPP.
Comments
http://www.inquisitr.com/3527032/could-just-thousands-in-wyoming-or-vermont-hold-the-key-to-a-surprise-bernie-sanders-presidency/
http://heavy.com/news/2016/10/donald-trump-sexual-assault-accusation-acuser-accusation-the-apprentice-contestant-summer-zervos/
Gloria Allred strikes again..not buying this one...sorry folks..call me what ya want...
Hampton 2016
Hampton 2016
Hampton 2016
How about pushing on issues and let him bury himself. The other stuff can be worked out.... out of the headlines until we have actual charges against the guy. As far as Zervos, I do not believe her..watch the video of her reading that story with Allred beside her..its just stinks of prepared garbage to me.She had to read it line for line and I don't think it was because of shame..it was because she is lying..if she proves me wrong, Ill write her a letter of sincere apology..
Hampton 2016
Even the perceived hint of any support whatsoever by anyone for Trump will not be condoned.
Hampton 2016
It shows how zany and pathetic the GOP base has become.
Brits are trying to effect the outcome of US elections
But because it's about Hillary it's a no go.
http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/ottawa-butcher-faces-backlash-after-body-shaming-hillary-clinton-1.3114212
All you tiny hand mockers know it.
The dust ball corner readers that are waiting to pounce know it too.
edit - this article contains offensive material to Hillary supporters.
Played like a fiddle.
http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/
Check your hatred and read it.
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/12803
That sounds a little like perhaps unless you have a college education you are Trump material....I could be wrong though.
Plenty of people enter great fields with little or no education.
Just ask the illegal immigrants.
I am not about to blame Trump for jobs that are lost while he is not POTUS.
The point is, these jobs are not coming back. Trade wars do not bring jobs back. Tariffs do not either, not in the long term. If you're young enough, get a real trade or education. Or get your kids a better life than you.
The failure of Nafta was that there was no money in it to re-educate the population. We can't make the same mistake with TPP.
Many real tradesmen/women are not "educated"
It is as if they know what the working men/women want to make it in this world.