If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.
We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.
Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.
The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.
If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.
correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.
Guy just beat Jeb Bush easily and Hillary Clinton without a ground campaign and a stripped down campaign team. I don't think he is an idiot. I don't like him as a person or president but not going to say he isn't smart.
That's on the Donald voter. Just because he won doesn't mean he's smart, for proof look to the American public electing Bush Jr, twice.
Trump and W, no comparison, if McCain elected then I could buy your argument.
I may be having a Trump voter moment here, I don't understand your point.
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 35,691
If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.
We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.
Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.
The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.
If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.
correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.
attention whores are smart like that. he is an attention whore so.......
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.
We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.
Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.
The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.
If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.
correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.
Guy just beat Jeb Bush easily and Hillary Clinton without a ground campaign and a stripped down campaign team. I don't think he is an idiot. I don't like him as a person or president but not going to say he isn't smart.
That's on the Donald voter. Just because he won doesn't mean he's smart, for proof look to the American public electing Bush Jr, twice.
Trump and W, no comparison, if McCain elected then I could buy your argument.
I may be having a Trump voter moment here, I don't understand your point.
You're comparing voting for W, who was part of a political dynasty, with 22 years of public office experience, former governor who was appointed POTUS by the SC with 271 electoral votes in 2000 and then was re-elected in a post 911 world against a sacrificial lamb John Kerry to Trump with zero political experience who amassed more than 300 electoral votes against the "Clinton's". Is that a fair comparison? Or weren't you making the comparison?
Fox News host Megyn Kelly claimed that some journalists who supported Donald Trump would pre-arrange difficult questions with the real estate mogul to preserve some appearance of neutrality.
Fox’s Howard Kurtz asked Kelly about the charge, which she laid out in her book “Settle For More,” that hosts on Fox and other networks relied on this arrangement to maintain credibility without putting any actual pressure on Trump’s campaign.
“Are you suggesting they were play-acting?” Kurtz asked.
“Yes. It was acting,” she replied, claiming that this information was “confirmed to me by more than one television executive.”
Kelly, who tangled with Trump repeatedly during the campaign, also wrote in her book that the President-elect routinely offered journalists gifts of free airfare and stays at Trump hotels in exchange for favorable coverage.
Though Kelly declined to name names, one particularly Trump-friendly Fox host apparently felt he was being called out.
In a string of tweets on Sunday, Sean Hannity said he had “no idea” who Kelly was referring to, but that he always wanted “real answers” about Trump’s policy proposals.
Hannity also claimed he “was never offered a thing” from Trump. The “Hannity” star appeared in a pro-Trump campaign video without Fox’s permission and conducted countless softball interviews with him, saying he was allowed to display blatant favoritism towards Trump since he is “not a journalist.”
Yeah....so this
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
Fox News host Megyn Kelly claimed that some journalists who supported Donald Trump would pre-arrange difficult questions with the real estate mogul to preserve some appearance of neutrality.
Fox’s Howard Kurtz asked Kelly about the charge, which she laid out in her book “Settle For More,” that hosts on Fox and other networks relied on this arrangement to maintain credibility without putting any actual pressure on Trump’s campaign.
“Are you suggesting they were play-acting?” Kurtz asked.
“Yes. It was acting,” she replied, claiming that this information was “confirmed to me by more than one television executive.”
Kelly, who tangled with Trump repeatedly during the campaign, also wrote in her book that the President-elect routinely offered journalists gifts of free airfare and stays at Trump hotels in exchange for favorable coverage.
Though Kelly declined to name names, one particularly Trump-friendly Fox host apparently felt he was being called out.
In a string of tweets on Sunday, Sean Hannity said he had “no idea” who Kelly was referring to, but that he always wanted “real answers” about Trump’s policy proposals.
Hannity also claimed he “was never offered a thing” from Trump. The “Hannity” star appeared in a pro-Trump campaign video without Fox’s permission and conducted countless softball interviews with him, saying he was allowed to display blatant favoritism towards Trump since he is “not a journalist.”
Yeah....so this
Im guessing Megyn suspected Trump would lose and the timing of her book release would increase sales. I'm not sure if trump winning helps or hurts her book sales?
If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.
We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.
Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.
The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.
If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.
correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.
Guy just beat Jeb Bush easily and Hillary Clinton without a ground campaign and a stripped down campaign team. I don't think he is an idiot. I don't like him as a person or president but not going to say he isn't smart.
That's on the Donald voter. Just because he won doesn't mean he's smart, for proof look to the American public electing Bush Jr, twice.
Trump and W, no comparison, if McCain elected then I could buy your argument.
I may be having a Trump voter moment here, I don't understand your point.
You're comparing voting for W, who was part of a political dynasty, with 22 years of public office experience, former governor who was appointed POTUS by the SC with 271 electoral votes in 2000 and then was re-elected in a post 911 world against a sacrificial lamb John Kerry to Trump with zero political experience who amassed more than 300 electoral votes against the "Clinton's". Is that a fair comparison? Or weren't you making the comparison?
Since we were talking about electing dummies I thought my point was clear. Bush Jr = not smart, elected twice. Trump = not smart, elected once...so far. There is no correlation between intelligence and being elected president, Bush Jr proved that.
Never underestimate an electorate that could elect Bush Jr.
If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.
We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.
Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.
The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.
If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.
correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.
Guy just beat Jeb Bush easily and Hillary Clinton without a ground campaign and a stripped down campaign team. I don't think he is an idiot. I don't like him as a person or president but not going to say he isn't smart.
That's on the Donald voter. Just because he won doesn't mean he's smart, for proof look to the American public electing Bush Jr, twice.
Trump and W, no comparison, if McCain elected then I could buy your argument.
I may be having a Trump voter moment here, I don't understand your point.
You're comparing voting for W, who was part of a political dynasty, with 22 years of public office experience, former governor who was appointed POTUS by the SC with 271 electoral votes in 2000 and then was re-elected in a post 911 world against a sacrificial lamb John Kerry to Trump with zero political experience who amassed more than 300 electoral votes against the "Clinton's". Is that a fair comparison? Or weren't you making the comparison?
Since we were talking about electing dummies I thought my point was clear. Bush Jr = not smart, elected twice. Trump = not smart, elected once...so far. There is no correlation between intelligence and being elected president, Bush Jr proved that.
Never underestimate an electorate that could elect Bush Jr.
What about other presidents elected, smart or dummies?
This is the kind of shit that I am afraid of. Why isn't the "liberal" media lighting itself on fire over this?
Over the weekend, there were a flurry of stories about how Donald Trump and his family are already using the presidency to leverage his overseas businesses as well as his new DC hotel. Well, now there's more. This time in Argentina.
Here's the background.
For a number of years, Trump and his Argentine partners have been trying to build a major office building in Buenos Aires. The project has been held up by a series of complications tied to financing, importation of building materials and various permitting requirements.
According to a report out of Argentina, when Argentine President Mauricio Macri called President-Elect Trump to congratulate him on his election, Trump asked Macri to deal with the permitting issues that are currently holding up the project.
This comes from one of Argentina's most prominent journalists, Jorge Lanata, in a recent TV appearance. Lanata is quoted here in La Nacion, one of Argentina's most prestigious dailies. Said Lanata: “Macri called him. This still hasn’t emerged but Trump asked for them to authorize a building he’s constructing in Buenos Aires, it wasn’t just a geopolitical chat."
(For Spanish speakers, here's the original Spanish we've translated: "Macri llo llamó. Todavía no se contó pero Trump le pidió que autorizaran un edificio que él está construyendo en Buenos Aires, no fue solo una charla geo política.")
Separately, Trump's business partner on the project, Felipe Yaryura, was there on election night at the Trump celebration in New York City.
Why aren't we hearing about this in the American press?
Well, remember, no one knew anything about the visit from Trump's Indian business partners until it appeared in the Indian press either. It seems like this is likely happening on many fronts. It's just being hidden from the American press. We only hear about it when it bubbles to the surface in the countries where Trump is pushing his business deals.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
Questions, who do you think had more autonomy and control over his campaign, W or Trump? What about campaign staff expertise and experience, who had more, W or Trump?
Anybody keeping up with this thread knows what you've been saying. I'm not looking back for any of the posts where you essentially speak to the collective intelligence of a US public that opted for Trump as a fresh face that would serve them better than Hillary (or any other part of the establishment).
I'm pretty sure nothing has been lost on anyone within the respective parties' think tanks: empty promises, outright lies, and deceitful tactics can be usefully employed to sway votes and win an election. If the aforementioned can get a narcissistic, deceitful, orange sexual predator a presidency... they'll work for anyone.
I accept your apology.
You mean you've accepted the can of whoop ass I opened on you?
I don't see how your mistatement of facts followed by a refusal to provide evidence of said facts is a can of whoop ass. So again...apology accepted.
Lol
You want me to dig through this thread to spit out to you what you have made abundantly clear?
No.
You keep gushing over Trump and how the people voted for change (he'll make everyone's wildest dreams come true... or America great again... or something like that) and I'll keep pointing out that Trump is an orange con man sex offender who's selection clearly defined the lack of values and/or intelligence across a nation.
So again... a beat down. You're not here for the hunting are you?
Yes...please dig...you will never see me "gushing over Trump" as you describe it. I'll help you out if you are too lazy though. I was never a Trump fan...said it on here 1000 times. What I said repeatedly is that there were two terrible candidates...one terrible candidate offered change while the other terrible candidate offered more of them same. I added to this that the metrics were saying this was a "change" election and all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him. What happened is that in the final couple of weeks the large number of undecideds who had a low opinion of Trump decided that even with all his faults he was acceptable. That is hardly calling him a saviour or someone who would "make everyone's wildest dreams come true". AlL I ever said is that in a choice between two terrible people Trump has more potential upside. Hardly a ringing endorsement. So please go dig...show me where I said anything else. Come on...I need a beat down as nobody on here has ever been able to deliver.
Anybody keeping up with this thread knows what you've been saying. I'm not looking back for any of the posts where you essentially speak to the collective intelligence of a US public that opted for Trump as a fresh face that would serve them better than Hillary (or any other part of the establishment).
I'm pretty sure nothing has been lost on anyone within the respective parties' think tanks: empty promises, outright lies, and deceitful tactics can be usefully employed to sway votes and win an election. If the aforementioned can get a narcissistic, deceitful, orange sexual predator a presidency... they'll work for anyone.
I accept your apology.
You mean you've accepted the can of whoop ass I opened on you?
I don't see how your mistatement of facts followed by a refusal to provide evidence of said facts is a can of whoop ass. So again...apology accepted.
Lol
You want me to dig through this thread to spit out to you what you have made abundantly clear?
No.
You keep gushing over Trump and how the people voted for change (he'll make everyone's wildest dreams come true... or America great again... or something like that) and I'll keep pointing out that Trump is an orange con man sex offender who's selection clearly defined the lack of values and/or intelligence across a nation.
So again... a beat down. You're not here for the hunting are you?
Yes...please dig...you will never see me "gushing over Trump" as you describe it. I'll help you out if you are too lazy though. I was never a Trump fan...said it on here 1000 times. What I said repeatedly is that there were two terrible candidates...one terrible candidate offered change while the other terrible candidate offered more of them same. I added to this that the metrics were saying this was a "change" election and all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him. What happened is that in the final couple of weeks the large number of undecideds who had a low opinion of Trump decided that even with all his faults he was acceptable. That is hardly calling him a saviour or someone who would "make everyone's wildest dreams come true". AlL I ever said is that in a choice between two terrible people Trump has more potential upside. Hardly a ringing endorsement. So please go dig...show me where I said anything else. Come on...I need a beat down as nobody on here has ever been able to deliver.
Fair enough with regards to your personal position on Trump. Thanks for the clarification.
If you recall... we began to differ when you took exception top the fact that I essentially called Trump supporters (for lack of better terms at the moment) stupid or lacking in values.
When you say, "... all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him"... this supports what I am saying because at no point in this election did he ever prove he was an acceptable alternative in my mind. He proved beyond a doubt that he was completely inappropriate to maintain such a position and for people to vote for him anyways says much about that voter base.
Anybody keeping up with this thread knows what you've been saying. I'm not looking back for any of the posts where you essentially speak to the collective intelligence of a US public that opted for Trump as a fresh face that would serve them better than Hillary (or any other part of the establishment).
I'm pretty sure nothing has been lost on anyone within the respective parties' think tanks: empty promises, outright lies, and deceitful tactics can be usefully employed to sway votes and win an election. If the aforementioned can get a narcissistic, deceitful, orange sexual predator a presidency... they'll work for anyone.
I accept your apology.
You mean you've accepted the can of whoop ass I opened on you?
I don't see how your mistatement of facts followed by a refusal to provide evidence of said facts is a can of whoop ass. So again...apology accepted.
Lol
You want me to dig through this thread to spit out to you what you have made abundantly clear?
No.
You keep gushing over Trump and how the people voted for change (he'll make everyone's wildest dreams come true... or America great again... or something like that) and I'll keep pointing out that Trump is an orange con man sex offender who's selection clearly defined the lack of values and/or intelligence across a nation.
So again... a beat down. You're not here for the hunting are you?
Yes...please dig...you will never see me "gushing over Trump" as you describe it. I'll help you out if you are too lazy though. I was never a Trump fan...said it on here 1000 times. What I said repeatedly is that there were two terrible candidates...one terrible candidate offered change while the other terrible candidate offered more of them same. I added to this that the metrics were saying this was a "change" election and all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him. What happened is that in the final couple of weeks the large number of undecideds who had a low opinion of Trump decided that even with all his faults he was acceptable. That is hardly calling him a saviour or someone who would "make everyone's wildest dreams come true". AlL I ever said is that in a choice between two terrible people Trump has more potential upside. Hardly a ringing endorsement. So please go dig...show me where I said anything else. Come on...I need a beat down as nobody on here has ever been able to deliver.
Fair enough with regards to your personal position on Trump. Thanks for the clarification.
If you recall... we began to differ when you took exception top the fact that I essentially called Trump supporters (for lack of better terms at the moment) stupid or lacking in values.
When you say, "... all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him"... this supports what I am saying because at no point in this election did he ever prove he was an acceptable alternative in my mind. He proved beyond a doubt that he was completely inappropriate to maintain such a position and for people to vote for him anyways says much about that voter base.
Ahhhh....so I guess the beat down has been called off. Ok. Now in terms of your point I do take exception to how you describe his supporters (if you can call them that because many of his voters did not think highly of him) because they did a calculation compared to the other candidate. Some people on here have failed to come to grips with how terrible and corrupt of a candidate Hillary Clinton was. There are voters who felt they would be sacrificing values in voting for her. My argument is and always has been there is no point in trying to argue which candidate is more terrible as it is pretty much irrelevant in a "change" electorate. The voters are not stupid or lacking in values by selecting one candidate over the other...they are simply making a calculation as to whether they want "change" or more of the same. Voters new which way a Clinton administration would go and they didn't like it. They may not have had an affinity for Trump but they felt he at least gave them the possibility of something different. Don't demean that choice.
If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.
We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.
Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.
The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.
If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.
correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.
Guy just beat Jeb Bush easily and Hillary Clinton without a ground campaign and a stripped down campaign team. I don't think he is an idiot. I don't like him as a person or president but not going to say he isn't smart.
That's on the Donald voter. Just because he won doesn't mean he's smart, for proof look to the American public electing Bush Jr, twice.
History repeats. Just wasn't expecting it so soon.
If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.
We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.
Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.
The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.
If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.
correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.
Guy just beat Jeb Bush easily and Hillary Clinton without a ground campaign and a stripped down campaign team. I don't think he is an idiot. I don't like him as a person or president but not going to say he isn't smart.
That's on the Donald voter. Just because he won doesn't mean he's smart, for proof look to the American public electing Bush Jr, twice.
History repeats. Just wasn't expecting it so soon.
I have zero idea if Trump will be an effective President but his campaign strategy warts and all was nothing short of genius. If you want to beat the man then don't underestimate the man.
They do. And he will. And America will be great. Got it
The jury is still out on America being great. My personal feeling is that it is too far gone. At least now you have the opportunity to take a couple of bold swings.
If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.
We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.
Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.
The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.
If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.
correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.
Guy just beat Jeb Bush easily and Hillary Clinton without a ground campaign and a stripped down campaign team. I don't think he is an idiot. I don't like him as a person or president but not going to say he isn't smart.
That's on the Donald voter. Just because he won doesn't mean he's smart, for proof look to the American public electing Bush Jr, twice.
History repeats. Just wasn't expecting it so soon.
I have zero idea if Trump will be an effective President but his campaign strategy warts and all was nothing short of genius. If you want to beat the man then don't underestimate the man.
it wasn't genius. it was normal. clinton's was terrible. she sat on her laurels hoping the media's polls were right.
If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.
We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.
Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.
The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.
If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.
correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.
Guy just beat Jeb Bush easily and Hillary Clinton without a ground campaign and a stripped down campaign team. I don't think he is an idiot. I don't like him as a person or president but not going to say he isn't smart.
That's on the Donald voter. Just because he won doesn't mean he's smart, for proof look to the American public electing Bush Jr, twice.
History repeats. Just wasn't expecting it so soon.
I have zero idea if Trump will be an effective President but his campaign strategy warts and all was nothing short of genius. If you want to beat the man then don't underestimate the man.
it wasn't genius. it was normal. clinton's was terrible. she sat on her laurels hoping the media's polls were right.
Anybody keeping up with this thread knows what you've been saying. I'm not looking back for any of the posts where you essentially speak to the collective intelligence of a US public that opted for Trump as a fresh face that would serve them better than Hillary (or any other part of the establishment).
I'm pretty sure nothing has been lost on anyone within the respective parties' think tanks: empty promises, outright lies, and deceitful tactics can be usefully employed to sway votes and win an election. If the aforementioned can get a narcissistic, deceitful, orange sexual predator a presidency... they'll work for anyone.
I accept your apology.
You mean you've accepted the can of whoop ass I opened on you?
I don't see how your mistatement of facts followed by a refusal to provide evidence of said facts is a can of whoop ass. So again...apology accepted.
Lol
You want me to dig through this thread to spit out to you what you have made abundantly clear?
No.
You keep gushing over Trump and how the people voted for change (he'll make everyone's wildest dreams come true... or America great again... or something like that) and I'll keep pointing out that Trump is an orange con man sex offender who's selection clearly defined the lack of values and/or intelligence across a nation.
So again... a beat down. You're not here for the hunting are you?
Yes...please dig...you will never see me "gushing over Trump" as you describe it. I'll help you out if you are too lazy though. I was never a Trump fan...said it on here 1000 times. What I said repeatedly is that there were two terrible candidates...one terrible candidate offered change while the other terrible candidate offered more of them same. I added to this that the metrics were saying this was a "change" election and all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him. What happened is that in the final couple of weeks the large number of undecideds who had a low opinion of Trump decided that even with all his faults he was acceptable. That is hardly calling him a saviour or someone who would "make everyone's wildest dreams come true". AlL I ever said is that in a choice between two terrible people Trump has more potential upside. Hardly a ringing endorsement. So please go dig...show me where I said anything else. Come on...I need a beat down as nobody on here has ever been able to deliver.
Fair enough with regards to your personal position on Trump. Thanks for the clarification.
If you recall... we began to differ when you took exception top the fact that I essentially called Trump supporters (for lack of better terms at the moment) stupid or lacking in values.
When you say, "... all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him"... this supports what I am saying because at no point in this election did he ever prove he was an acceptable alternative in my mind. He proved beyond a doubt that he was completely inappropriate to maintain such a position and for people to vote for him anyways says much about that voter base.
Some people on here have failed to come to grips with how terrible and corrupt of a candidate Hillary Clinton was. There are voters who felt they would be sacrificing values in voting for her. My argument is and always has been there is no point in trying to argue which candidate is more terrible as it is pretty much irrelevant in a "change" electorate. The voters are not stupid or lacking in values by selecting one candidate over the other...they are simply making a calculation as to whether they want "change" or more of the same. Voters new which way a Clinton administration would go and they didn't like it. They may not have had an affinity for Trump but they felt he at least gave them the possibility of something different. Don't demean that choice.
Anybody keeping up with this thread knows what you've been saying. I'm not looking back for any of the posts where you essentially speak to the collective intelligence of a US public that opted for Trump as a fresh face that would serve them better than Hillary (or any other part of the establishment).
I'm pretty sure nothing has been lost on anyone within the respective parties' think tanks: empty promises, outright lies, and deceitful tactics can be usefully employed to sway votes and win an election. If the aforementioned can get a narcissistic, deceitful, orange sexual predator a presidency... they'll work for anyone.
I accept your apology.
You mean you've accepted the can of whoop ass I opened on you?
I don't see how your mistatement of facts followed by a refusal to provide evidence of said facts is a can of whoop ass. So again...apology accepted.
Lol
You want me to dig through this thread to spit out to you what you have made abundantly clear?
No.
You keep gushing over Trump and how the people voted for change (he'll make everyone's wildest dreams come true... or America great again... or something like that) and I'll keep pointing out that Trump is an orange con man sex offender who's selection clearly defined the lack of values and/or intelligence across a nation.
So again... a beat down. You're not here for the hunting are you?
Yes...please dig...you will never see me "gushing over Trump" as you describe it. I'll help you out if you are too lazy though. I was never a Trump fan...said it on here 1000 times. What I said repeatedly is that there were two terrible candidates...one terrible candidate offered change while the other terrible candidate offered more of them same. I added to this that the metrics were saying this was a "change" election and all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him. What happened is that in the final couple of weeks the large number of undecideds who had a low opinion of Trump decided that even with all his faults he was acceptable. That is hardly calling him a saviour or someone who would "make everyone's wildest dreams come true". AlL I ever said is that in a choice between two terrible people Trump has more potential upside. Hardly a ringing endorsement. So please go dig...show me where I said anything else. Come on...I need a beat down as nobody on here has ever been able to deliver.
Fair enough with regards to your personal position on Trump. Thanks for the clarification.
If you recall... we began to differ when you took exception top the fact that I essentially called Trump supporters (for lack of better terms at the moment) stupid or lacking in values.
When you say, "... all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him"... this supports what I am saying because at no point in this election did he ever prove he was an acceptable alternative in my mind. He proved beyond a doubt that he was completely inappropriate to maintain such a position and for people to vote for him anyways says much about that voter base.
Ahhhh....so I guess the beat down has been called off. Ok. Now in terms of your point I do take exception to how you describe his supporters (if you can call them that because many of his voters did not think highly of him) because they did a calculation compared to the other candidate. Some people on here have failed to come to grips with how terrible and corrupt of a candidate Hillary Clinton was. There are voters who felt they would be sacrificing values in voting for her. My argument is and always has been there is no point in trying to argue which candidate is more terrible as it is pretty much irrelevant in a "change" electorate. The voters are not stupid or lacking in values by selecting one candidate over the other...they are simply making a calculation as to whether they want "change" or more of the same. Voters new which way a Clinton administration would go and they didn't like it. They may not have had an affinity for Trump but they felt he at least gave them the possibility of something different. Don't demean that choice.
Possibility of something different? Lol.
That's for sure: a con man sex offender with promises that had no substance.
If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.
We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.
Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.
The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.
If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.
correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.
Guy just beat Jeb Bush easily and Hillary Clinton without a ground campaign and a stripped down campaign team. I don't think he is an idiot. I don't like him as a person or president but not going to say he isn't smart.
That's on the Donald voter. Just because he won doesn't mean he's smart, for proof look to the American public electing Bush Jr, twice.
History repeats. Just wasn't expecting it so soon.
I have zero idea if Trump will be an effective President but his campaign strategy warts and all was nothing short of genius. If you want to beat the man then don't underestimate the man.
it wasn't genius. it was normal. clinton's was terrible. she sat on her laurels hoping the media's polls were right.
I wouldn't call it genius but it wasn't normal either. He took his campaign to the gutter in ways we had never seen a nominee do before. He spoke directly to the masses via Twitter in a way we had never seen before. He rejected political norms such as releasing his taxes in a way we had never seen before.
Comments
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Is that a fair comparison? Or weren't you making the comparison?
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
Im guessing Megyn suspected Trump would lose and the timing of her book release would increase sales. I'm not sure if trump winning helps or hurts her book sales?
Never underestimate an electorate that could elect Bush Jr.
Obama
Clinton
Bush Sr
Reagan
Carter
This is the kind of shit that I am afraid of. Why isn't the "liberal" media lighting itself on fire over this?
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Chicago; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
If you recall... we began to differ when you took exception top the fact that I essentially called Trump supporters (for lack of better terms at the moment) stupid or lacking in values.
When you say, "... all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him"... this supports what I am saying because at no point in this election did he ever prove he was an acceptable alternative in my mind. He proved beyond a doubt that he was completely inappropriate to maintain such a position and for people to vote for him anyways says much about that voter base.
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
That's for sure: a con man sex offender with promises that had no substance.
Again... take exception all you want. I'm right.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
www.headstonesband.com