The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

Why Trump is going to lose in 2020. Options
Chazlee
Posted: Monday, October 15, 2018 9:51:57 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/24/2016
Posts: 443
Neurons: 4,214
Despite the desire that his most fanatical supporters have to see Trump reelected in 2020, the likelihood that will happen is, well, not so likely. While there are many, many excellent reasons why he shouldn’t be put back in office for a 2nd term, the main reason he will not is that many mainstream Republicans do not like or respect him. Thus, while they may publicly say nothing against Trump, privately they will not be able to give support to a man who has lied to them, embarrassed them, and who clearly puts his own self-interests ahead of the country.

Mainstream Republicans have watched the man who leads their party alienate and anger our closest allies, while embracing Putin and Kim Jong-Un. He foolishly believes that by inviting Kanye West to a meeting with him, he has proven himself a person whom black people admire and respect, even though it is clear that West’s love for Trump have made him a person other African Americans continuously ridicule, when they are not questioning his sanity.

Women in particular harbor a deep dislike for Trump, and many of them are turning their back on the GOP, in large part due to Trump’s total lack of respect for them. In Trump’s very limited world-view, woman have always and will always be seen as those he can use to further his political and business desires, and those he sexually desires. I believe that women are going to be the ones who ultimately will make sure that Trump is not reelected. Either they will vote for another candidate, or they will simply choose to not vote. Since Trump is not an intelligent man, he does not realize how much he needs women to put him in office for a 2nd term. If he were a more mentally astute person, he would spend his next few years trying to fix the problems women have with him. Yet, Trump is not such a person, and, thus, he will continue in his role as the most misogynistic political leader modern American has ever seen.

While some more militant Republicans gleefully showed support for Trump, since he was the one who orchestrated the disastrous plan to separate parents who illegally entered the USA from their American born children, many more rational Republicans did not agree with his decision, and they voiced their displeasure with what they were reading about and watching on television.

Then we have the Bob Woodward’s recent book, which revealed how members of Trump’s staff hid documents from him, because they simply did not trust this man. Why would anyone think that these same people would then then turn around and vote for Trump for a 2nd term?

Well, Trump is not going to win in 2020. This is not merely wishful thinking. It is a fact, which will show itself to be true when the day arrives. I am not saying another Republican will not win. However, Trump will not win because many Republicans who helped put him in office the first time will not give him a second opportunity to be the president. It is that simple.

Peace.


“I regret that the press treats me so badly.” Donald Trump.
dennis j
Posted: Monday, October 15, 2018 10:20:43 AM

Rank: Member

Joined: 1/2/2014
Posts: 41
Neurons: 2,065,565
Location: Chicago, Illinois, United States
I pray your head does not implode when President Trump is reelected.
Chazlee
Posted: Monday, October 15, 2018 10:32:11 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/24/2016
Posts: 443
Neurons: 4,214
dennis j wrote:
I pray your head does not implode when President Trump is reelected.


Do you know if he plans to continue making money through the sale of those Chinese made red hats when he runs again? Does he plan to change the slogan on them if they are sold in the USA? Do you fear his tariffs will cause the price on them to rise?

“I regret that the press treats me so badly.” Donald Trump.
redgriffin
Posted: Monday, October 15, 2018 11:37:58 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/3/2010
Posts: 662
Neurons: 160,127
Location: Portland, Oregon, United States
dennis j wrote:
I pray your head does not implode when President Trump is reelected.

I only wish that I was as sure of the other result as you are of yours.
BobShilling
Posted: Monday, October 15, 2018 1:49:54 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/1/2018
Posts: 1,171
Neurons: 6,367
Location: Beroun, Stredocesky, Czech Republic
Chazlee wrote:
Thus, while they may publicly say nothing against Trump, privately they will not be able to give support to a man who has lied to them, embarrassed them, and who clearly puts his own self-interests ahead of the country.

If they think supporting Trump will gain them votes, they'll support him.

Quote:
Mainstream Republicans have watched the man who leads their party alienate and anger our closest allies

Many of them don't give a damn about America's closest allies. They feel that these allies have been sponging off the USA for years.

Quote:
Women in particular harbor a deep dislike for Trump, and many of them are turning their back on the GOP,

That's true of many women (a lot of whom were not Republican anyway). There are still a lot of ordinary women who do support him. I don't understand this, but my lack of understanding does not affect things.

Quote:
Since Trump is not an intelligent man

For an unintelligent man, he has done pretty well at confounding some of his supposedly more intelligent opponents.

Quote:
he does not realize how much he needs women to put him in office for a 2nd term.

He seems to have realised what he needed to do to get into office the first time.

Quote:
many more rational Republicans did not agree with his decision, and they voiced their displeasure with what they were reading about and watching on television.

Not a great many overall.

Quote:
Why would anyone think that these same people would then then turn around and vote for Trump for a 2nd term?

Well, for starters they would be out of a job if he lost.

Quote:
Well, Trump is not going to win in in 2020. This is not merely wishful thinking.

I fear it is. We'll see what happens in the midterms. I fear that he is going to do a lot better than many of his opponents believe/hope. hope I'm wrong, but I'm not placing any bets.
Chazlee
Posted: Monday, October 15, 2018 8:23:34 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/24/2016
Posts: 443
Neurons: 4,214
BobShilling wrote:
Chazlee wrote:
Thus, while they may publicly say nothing against Trump, privately they will not be able to give support to a man who has lied to them, embarrassed them, and who clearly puts his own self-interests ahead of the country.

If they think supporting Trump will gain them votes, they'll support him.

I was not referring to elected officials. My post was about Republicans in general. Thus, those folks have have no votes to gain.

Quote:
Mainstream Republicans have watched the man who leads their party alienate and anger our closest allies

Many of them don't give a damn about America's closest allies. They feel that these allies have been sponging off the USA for years.

You are mistaking the way Trump, and some of his most fanatical supporters feel/believe, with many more moderate Republicans. While I can understand why you have made such a mistake, it is a mistake nonetheless.

Quote:
Women in particular harbor a deep dislike for Trump, and many of them are turning their back on the GOP,

That's true of many women (a lot of whom were not Republican anyway). There are still a lot of ordinary women who do support him. I don't understand this, but my lack of understanding does not affect things.

In my post, I was not referring to non-Republican women not voting for Trump. I was writing about women who are Republicans. Their disgust with Trump since being in office will result in them either not voting for him, or not voting at all. Trump has done nothing since being in office to win over Republican women voters, and he has actually continued to alienate many women in the GOP. Thus, that will prove to be a costly error for him.

Quote:
Since Trump is not an intelligent man

For an unintelligent man, he has done pretty well at confounding some of his supposedly more intelligent opponents.

His being elected had nothing to do with intelligence. Among other factors, Trump got elected by appealing to that portion of the American public who liked his fiery rhetoric, and those people who liked the idea that an "outsider" i.e., (not a politician), could and would do a better job than the political "insiders" would do for them. Trump has always been a con-artist. He is good at reading people, even large groups of people, and saying things people want to hear. He is far more "slick" a person than Bill Clinton ever was or ever will be. If you want to label Trump as intelligent because he fooled a lot of people, then that is your choice. (It does seem as if he is intelligent enough to fool a self-described "leftwing Trump-loathing Brit" into believing he actually has a chance to be reelected into office for a 2nd time).

Quote:
he does not realize how much he needs women to put him in office for a 2nd term.

He seems to have realised what he needed to do to get into office the first time.

I was writing about Trump's difficulty getting into office for a 2nd term. We all know what happened the first time. In 2020, things will be much more difficult for him, and women are going to play a big part in his not being reelected.

Quote:
many more rational Republicans did not agree with his decision, and they voiced their displeasure with what they were reading about and watching on television.

Not a great many overall.

Well, I didn't count the number of people who spoke out against Trump on that issue, but since you seem to have that number and you know there were not a "great many overall," how about sharing it with others? Trump got attacked from all sides for his decision to separate parents and children from each other, and this decision is going to cost him Republican voters in 2020.

Quote:
Why would anyone think that these same people would then then turn around and vote for Trump for a 2nd term?

Well, for starters they would be out of a job if he lost.

They will have a job if they cast a vote for another Republican who wins the election. They can simply work for another person. I think you are underestimating how much people who work for Trump personally do not like or trust the man. Their actions of hiding things from him is the best indication of what they really think about him.

Quote:
Well, Trump is not going to win in in 2020. This is not merely wishful thinking.

I fear it is. We'll see what happens in the midterms. I fear that he is going to do a lot better than many of his opponents believe/hope. hope I'm wrong, but I'm not placing any bets.

Don't let your fears stop you from placing your bets. Go ahead and put your money down. Bet against Trump winning in 2020, and then sit back and collect your windfall.
Peace.



“I regret that the press treats me so badly.” Donald Trump.
Andrew Schultz
Posted: Monday, October 15, 2018 10:17:31 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/7/2015
Posts: 432
Neurons: 5,321,004
Location: Chicago, Illinois, United States
Hmm. I'm more concerned about the 2018 midterms.

The Senate looks bad for Democrats, but the House looks very good. If the Democrats take the house, we will have a lot of hearings we should have had with the R's in charge. Lots of people are going to be subpoenaed. It should be fun, provided of course the Democrats close the deal.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2018-midterm-election-forecast/house/

100th person on TFD to 1 million neurons.
Hope123
Posted: Monday, October 15, 2018 10:43:58 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,773
Neurons: 50,270
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
I hope you are right about the House midterms, Andrew, and Chazlee is right about 2020. A good GOP leader could beat him and so could a good Democrat leader. But where are they for either party? Without baggage?

For the midterms at least three GOP states/governors have purged thousands of voters and one governor has held several thousand voter records (or whatever they call them) on his desk. There are lawsuits (the courts have been changed recently by Trump favouring Republicans) but will they be in time? Some updating is always necessary but these large numbers? Is this legal or cheating? Are people of colour mostly the targets?

https://www.economist.com/united-states/2018/08/09/many-states-are-purging-voters-from-the-rolls

https://www.aclu.org/news/federal-court-blocks-indiana-voter-purge-crosscheck-law

Apparently people don't know that all they need is a piece of ID with the exact same name match (no difference in intials etc) as their voter card.

Proggy (miss him) was always talking about gerrymandering by the Republicans in their favour too.

There's a lot to overcome.

Depends if the economy starts to tank too.

Voter apathy is the problem.

Question added - why aren't people enrolled to vote when they do their income tax?

::::

As I wrote about the courts favouring one party or another, it made me cringe. Justice is always supposed to be blind.

"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
Romany
Posted: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 7:01:08 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 15,496
Neurons: 48,745
Location: Brighton, England, United Kingdom

I agree with Chazlee in thinking that it will be women who ensure Trump's collapse...tit-for-tat!

I've been listening to all the women who are coming forward to stand in the elections next month: they're thoughtful, serious,determined and - most important of all - they are young! They live in the real world and not in the insanely out-of-touch fantasies of a bunch of corrup old men.

Even if it were not Trump himself at the helm, American women still have it really tough: they are just not regarded as "serious" people by those in power. The culture of the "Battle of the Sexes" still exists in the USA alone of all the other developed countries. And as the world about us becomes more transparent through technology, so many of them have now realised this that they would have battled for changes anyway, I believe.

I've watched every debate, discussion, interview I could get hold of, with inspirational women, groups, organisations and movements. Times have changed, the world moves on and so many women are determined to break the stranglehold of the dirty and corrup old guys who privately (and some even publicly!) still consider women as either second-class or "uppity".

The only way America could be "great" is if they change what is supposed to be their ruling ethos of "All men are created equal" to "All people are created equal" ....so that the just-over-half of the population (the majority!) who are female are no longer looked on as dismissable, or as people who "...you can grab by the pussy" just because disgusting old men snigger and giggle "I can't help myself!"

Ursus Minor
Posted: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 12:17:05 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/13/2016
Posts: 614
Neurons: 2,566
Location: Inozemtsevo, Stavropol'skiy, Russia
I remember before November 2016 Chazlee voluminously explained why Trump was going to lose the 2016 election.
Drag0nspeaker
Posted: Tuesday, October 16, 2018 11:11:01 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/12/2011
Posts: 32,945
Neurons: 204,246
Location: Livingston, Scotland, United Kingdom
Yes, Ursus Minor, and the same could sneak up on the American people again.

Hope123 wrote:
A good GOP leader could beat him and so could a good Democrat leader. But where are they for either party? Without baggage?


If the Republicans somehow end up with an alternative who can be smeared out of the running, leaving Trump as the candidate - and the Democrats come up with a candidate who is disliked as much as the last one, there will be a mass 'no-show' (or many voters opting for independents) at election time.
If both major candidates are disliked by many people, the voters will vote against them, or not vote at.
But, in any State, a vote of 32% Democrat Candidate, 32% Independents and 36% for Trump will leave him as the winner.

Though 'liking' should not be the basis for voting, it does seem to work that way.
He could be the president with 35% of the votes overall.

Instead of just mocking him, the Democrats need to find a GOOD candidate - which in this era means 'charismatic', 'able to work the crowd' - a Madison Avenue personality.
Hopefully, they will also be sensible and have the good of the country at heart.


Wyrd bið ful aræd - bull!
BobShilling
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 12:54:00 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/1/2018
Posts: 1,171
Neurons: 6,367
Location: Beroun, Stredocesky, Czech Republic
Ursus Minor wrote:
I remember before November 2016 Chazlee voluminously explained why Trump was going to lose the 2016 election.

Quite a lot of us knew then knew then that he didn't have a chance of winning.

Oops!

It seems, unfortunately, that the situation hasn't changed much for some.
BobShilling
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 12:57:22 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/1/2018
Posts: 1,171
Neurons: 6,367
Location: Beroun, Stredocesky, Czech Republic
Drag0nspeaker wrote:

Instead of just mocking him, the Democrats need to find a GOOD candidate - which in this era means 'charismatic', 'able to work the crowd' - a Madison Avenue personality.

Applause Applause Applause

Quote:
Hopefully, they will also be sensible and have the good of the country at heart.

Dream on.
Andrew Schultz
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 1:28:16 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/7/2015
Posts: 432
Neurons: 5,321,004
Location: Chicago, Illinois, United States
I'm concerned his approval hasn't gone below 40%. But it's never gone terribly far above.

There are so many things to consider between now and 2020. I don't know if it's in anyone's interest to jump out too soon, because so much gets washed away in the news cycles, and they may be remembered as trying to chase after glory when there is so much to do.

I will say this, though. If Democrats take 250 in the House, I think a lot of Republicans will wake up, rediscover their missing consciences and suddenly stop excusing Trump's behavior or do more than just hint he really could be a bit more presidential.

And that said, I'll speculate anyway.

My current pick for the Democratic candidate, if I had to, would be Amy Klobuchar. She is the senator who questioned Brett Kavanaugh about his drinking at his confirmation hearing, and when he tried to turn the question around, she told him to stick to it. She is tough and experienced, and perhaps a "back to sanity" ticket would work. If she is not the best crowd worker, well, the right VP could balance that. Kamala Harris has been impressive, too, and she has more charisma. One other interesting possibility is Doug Jones, the junior senator from Alabama. I'm impressed with how he frames things. A lot of people think Kristen Gillibrand of New York could be the candidate, but she may be seen as too much of a politician. She's changed her views and votes to be more liberal since she moved up to the Senate from the House, where she represented a conservative area of New York. She's good at politics, but she might suffer the John Kerry treatment.

I would gladly bet even money there is going to be a woman on the Democrats' 2020 ticket, even though Joe Biden is leading in the too-early polls. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2018/10/16/democratic-candidates-poll-2020/1656532002/

I can't see him keeping that lead as others get name recognition. I think he is too old. Bernie Sanders has 13%, which is lower than I expected. But I hope Sanders rallies youths and people who haven't voted before to do so. I think that is a good place for him. And I think the president will be someone people sort of know and figure they'll be ready some day but not now. Sort of like Obama in 2008. I still remember thinking it might be tough for him to follow, say, 8 years of Hillary Clinton.

One odd candidate I've read about is Beto O'Rourke. He promised to serve his full term, but IF he loses to Ted Cruz, he'd be free to run for President. I'm impressed how he's gotten Texans to get out and vote, and if he can do the same for America, he will be valuable, whether or not he is on the ticket. Democrats need people who will get out the vote and stump for the rights of people to vote.

I'd like to throw out a few more links to 538. https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/our-third-ish-2020-democratic-primary-draft-got-weird/ describes the futility of trying to see who is in the lead, or why. Also, https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/whos-behaving-like-a-2020-presidential-candidate/ checks off on who has tried to set the most groundwork for a 2020 run. You may notice Jeff Flake and John Kasich, who are Republicans, have 4 of 7 check marks, indicating Trump is open to being primaried ... which could take focus from the main campaign even if he does win.

Anyway. That's probably too much speculation. But the Democrats have a lot of good choices. Quite bluntly I'm glad nobody's been showboating or trying to be the clear leader. (Michael Avenatti doesn't count. He won't. He can't. If he does, I give up.)

100th person on TFD to 1 million neurons.
progpen
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 2:22:52 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/2/2015
Posts: 2,046
Neurons: 369,910
Location: March, England, United Kingdom
I don't see the 2020 election providing any reasonable change to the status quo. The Democratic Party leadership has not yet learned how to work with the progressive wing of their own party and still spend most of their resources trying to win over Republicans and thus moving further from their historic base. The Republicans will not give up on the money makers, so unless or until those money makers stop bringing in millions there will be no change. Gerrymandering has done its damage and will continue to do so until it is eradicated. Of course gerrymandering has been used by both of the big 2 political parties, but the Republicans have used it more often and to more of an advantage.

2020 will be a continuation of the same. IMHO

And voting rights are still being systematically wiped out.

Nolite te bastardes carborundorum
Hope123
Posted: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 7:50:15 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,773
Neurons: 50,270
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Thanks Andrew and Proggy,

I think Avenatti has the right idea, though. Dems need someone who is a real fighter - but classy while doing it if that is possible. It is hard to fight a street fighter con without getting down and dirty yourself. (Although I'm sure they could avoid such nasty name calling as "Pocohontas" and "horseface".) Someone who can beat Trump campaigning but then knows enough to change to governing mode would be ideal.

I like the young Kennedy - Joe is it? But I guess he is too young and inexperienced. He has been a senator and he has been taught politics from birth. This admin shows that experience is necessary if chaos is to be avoided, although T's supporters think he got a lot of what they wanted done in spite of it.

Beto O'Rourke has a lot of support on Twitter but someone was begging for more support for him saying Cruz was ahead. The video I saw of him was impressive.

Bernie has to unite his supporters with the middle or he'll split the vote again. He and Biden are rather old. Do you really think the US is ready for a woman president?

As for info I have learned about the US govt on the forum and the voter purging and smear campaigns, I am so disappointed to have the United States of America fall off the pedestal where I had placed it, not believing the opinions of others even before Trump.

What about the Republican candidate. Does the incumbent automatically get the nomination again?

Just as an aside - getting up there myself I find it hard to understand how these politicians find the stamina and interest to keep going that long after 65. The presidency - to be done correctly and taken seriously - is a young person's job. Michelle said Obama was often working into the wee hours of the morning. Most regular folks want to retire even earlier than 65 and enjoy some leisure time.

"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
Chazlee
Posted: Thursday, October 18, 2018 8:47:21 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/24/2016
Posts: 443
Neurons: 4,214
BobShilling wrote:
Ursus Minor wrote:
I remember before November 2016 Chazlee voluminously explained why Trump was going to lose the 2016 election.



Quite a lot of us knew then knew then that he didn't have a chance of winning.

Oops!

It seems, unfortunately, that the situation hasn't changed much for some.


"Unfortunately," there are people who seem willing to give up and believe that Trump actually has a good chance, or any chance, to win in 2020. He doesn't. Not at all. He has done an awful job as president. Everyone knows that Pence is really running the country.

"Unfortunately," since Trump won the last election, some people have become frightened and they do not realize that his winning was a fluke. By the time the next election comes around, Trump is going to have to answer some tough questions about his time in office. At that time, he will scream about "Fake news," and "Hillary," and "Obama." His red hat wearing supporters will be interviewed and they will struggle to answer even the most basic questions about why Trump deserves to be reelected, just like they struggle to answer the most basic questions about almost every other question they are asked.

Fortunately, Trump is going to lose in 2020. He deserves to lose. America deserves a better president.

Peace.



“I regret that the press treats me so badly.” Donald Trump.
progpen
Posted: Thursday, October 18, 2018 1:41:48 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/2/2015
Posts: 2,046
Neurons: 369,910
Location: March, England, United Kingdom
It doesn't matter if the US deserves a better president and his election was not a fluke. The election ended the way it did because very complex computer algorithms calculated exactly how to gerrymander electorally significant sections of the US. From that, the GOP relied on voter suppression and caging to reduce the number of non GOP voters to a point that it has become a statistical improbability for the GOP to lose those electorally significant sections. He also won because the Democratic party leadership have not been able to play nicely with their own base.

His election was continuation of a natural progression over the past 30 years.

Nolite te bastardes carborundorum
Chazlee
Posted: Thursday, October 18, 2018 6:19:38 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/24/2016
Posts: 443
Neurons: 4,214
progpen wrote:
It doesn't matter if the US deserves a better president and his election was not a fluke. The election ended the way it did because very complex computer algorithms calculated exactly how to gerrymander electorally significant sections of the US. From that, the GOP relied on voter suppression and caging to reduce the number of non GOP voters to a point that it has become a statistical improbability for the GOP to lose those electorally significant sections. He also won because the Democratic party leadership have not been able to play nicely with their own base.

His election was continuation of a natural progression over the past 30 years.


You're wrong. It does matter and the US deserves a better president than Trump. It is also a fluke that a proven con-artist like Trump would ultimately end up being elected president. It is a most strange statement for you to make that a person with Trump's background would lead to his becoming president due to "natural progression." I am not saying it was a fluke that a Republican won the election. However, how was it "natural progression" that Trump would win, and not another Republican? People who knew Trump when he was running claimed he wanted publicity for himself and his brand, but he really didn't want or think he would be elected. Thus, Trump, if he could ever be honest, would probably describe his win as a fluke as well.

If you want to put forth the idea that "complex computer algorithms" revealed how a Republican instead of a Democrat won, then that's possible. Yet, if you are claiming that those same "algorithms" predicted a win by a character like Trump, I would be interested in hearing more. Yet, I don't think you can produce any credible evidence which will prove that happened.

Peace.


“I regret that the press treats me so badly.” Donald Trump.
Andrew Schultz
Posted: Thursday, October 18, 2018 11:06:59 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/7/2015
Posts: 432
Neurons: 5,321,004
Location: Chicago, Illinois, United States
Hope123 wrote:
Thanks Andrew and Proggy,

I think Avenatti has the right idea, though. Dems need someone who is a real fighter - but classy while doing it if that is possible. It is hard to fight a street fighter con without getting down and dirty yourself. (Although I'm sure they could avoid such nasty name calling as "Pocohontas" and "horseface".) Someone who can beat Trump campaigning but then knows enough to change to governing mode would be ideal.

I like the young Kennedy - Joe is it? But I guess he is too young and inexperienced. He has been a senator and he has been taught politics from birth. This admin shows that experience is necessary if chaos is to be avoided, although T's supporters think he got a lot of what they wanted done in spite of it.

Beto O'Rourke has a lot of support on Twitter but someone was begging for more support for him saying Cruz was ahead. The video I saw of him was impressive.

Bernie has to unite his supporters with the middle or he'll split the vote again. He and Biden are rather old. Do you really think the US is ready for a woman president?

As for info I have learned about the US govt on the forum and the voter purging and smear campaigns, I am so disappointed to have the United States of America fall off the pedestal where I had placed it, not believing the opinions of others even before Trump.

What about the Republican candidate. Does the incumbent automatically get the nomination again?

Just as an aside - getting up there myself I find it hard to understand how these politicians find the stamina and interest to keep going that long after 65. The presidency - to be done correctly and taken seriously - is a young person's job. Michelle said Obama was often working into the wee hours of the morning. Most regular folks want to retire even earlier than 65 and enjoy some leisure time.


Hope,

Ugh! I let the computer eat my first response. Maybe this will be more to the point.

I agree we need Avenatti types, just not running for office. He says what needs to be said...then says what really doesn't.

Rep. Joe Kennedy seems earnest but doesn't have the gravitas of Beto O'Rourke. Cruz may've finally done himself in--or his wife may have--by complaining that they can't afford two homes on a senator's salary. O'Rourke is doing a fantastic job of GOTV. We need that!

We also need other attack dogs like Rep. Ted Lieu of California, who is great on Twitter. Brian Schatz and Mazie Hirono (junior/senior senator from Hawaii) also do great jobs of messaging. Schatz has one redirect he likes to use. This may not be a direct example, but it's what he does: "The thing about Kanye meeting Trump in the oval office is, millions of people will lose health insurance if the Republicans keep the House and Senate."

Of course, this isn't entirely logical, but it's not meant to be. It's an emotional gut-level poke to remind us to focus on what's important! Don't use up all our energy on outrage.

Sanders I think is better to GOTV too and to convince very left-wing types that a Democrat is not perfect but better than a Republican.

The Oval Office definitely aged Obama more than it should have, and same for GW Bush (who IMHO didn't work as hard but yeah I'm biased) and Clinton.

As for primaries? Usually, unless a president is doing badly, he does not get a major primary challenge. Obama and Clinton maybe weren't popular, but nobody really challenged them. Bush Jr, too. Eisenhower and Reagan also had no primary challenger and got second terms.

Bush Sr got a challenge from Pat Buchanan who got 25% of the vote, and of course Ross Perot showed up too.

Jimmy Carter had a primary challenge from Ted Kennedy, and Reagan challenged Gerald Ford with a primary. Carter and Ford both served only one term, as did Bush Sr. Lyndon Johnson stepped down rather than fight Robert Kennedy in a primary.

So just rumblings that a Flake, Graham, Kasich, Haley or even Pence (I wouldn't put it past him) will run a primary is bad news for Trump.

A primary challenger is a distraction from the president governing, and without enough support, the challenger's name may be mud in party circles for a long time. That didn't affect Ted Kennedy's prolific Senate deal making, but he was conspicuously absent from the 1984 and 1988 Democratic primaries.

100th person on TFD to 1 million neurons.
Hope123
Posted: Thursday, October 18, 2018 11:37:26 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,773
Neurons: 50,270
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Andrew,

Interesting. Thanks for taking the time to answer - even after you lost it.

The media seem to be the ones always pushing way too soon for the next candidates and when there are elections every two years it seems as if the campaigning never stops. Of course with Trump's rallies it hasn't.

I just updated my iPad and it doesn't seem to be as compatible with the forum as before. I always have trouble highlighting or copying but now spell checker is acting weird. Hope I didn't miss any mistakes.

"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
Hope123
Posted: Friday, October 19, 2018 12:14:29 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,773
Neurons: 50,270
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Andrew,

Thought you might enjoy this.

Spotted at Target in Cedar Park, TX today.





"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
progpen
Posted: Friday, October 19, 2018 12:41:02 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/2/2015
Posts: 2,046
Neurons: 369,910
Location: March, England, United Kingdom
Chazlee, the gerrymandering that has so decimated our electoral system is just software. It isn't dozens of people hunkered over a large map drawing lines, it's complex computer calculations done by proprietary software owned by private companies using government data as well as private data collected on individuals.

And the US will not be able to extricate itself from the mess it's in unless the people understand how they got there. Blaming flukes and bad luck, while ignoring the fact that the 'entire' country got us into the mess we are in and not just a few dingbat extremists, narcissists, and criminals only ensures that it will take a long time for the US to find its way back to the light. Money has saturated every nook and cranny of our political system and that has created an environment closer to that of a Banana Republic than a first world country. But the changes and the fixes can only come from accepting that we all carry responsibility and we all had a hand in getting us where we are today.

The natural progression is just the fact that the results of our bad decisions have been most visible to the world via our choice for President. Reagan was not fit to be President and his handlers (and Nancy) did much of the mental heavy lifting for him. George W. was thoroughly incompetent (if not a well meaning dip that everyone would like to have a beer with). Trump has just taken this to the next level, and to think that Trump is as bad as it can get is hideously dangerous.

Nolite te bastardes carborundorum
Hope123
Posted: Friday, October 19, 2018 12:49:50 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,773
Neurons: 50,270
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/e-mail-revelation-puts-neat-bow-on-donald-trump-fbi-hq-scandal-1347889731555

It figures. And nothing happens?

Plus what's all this about?

http://dctribune.org/americans-enraged-after-100-million-dollars-is-coincidentally-wired-to-us-from-saudi-arabia-amid-journalist-scandal/

DNC chairman Tom Perez came up with the best slogan Dems have been playing with: "When they go low, we go vote".



"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
Drag0nspeaker
Posted: Monday, October 22, 2018 12:52:40 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/12/2011
Posts: 32,945
Neurons: 204,246
Location: Livingston, Scotland, United Kingdom
Hi Hope.

I get the headline - "Rachel Maddow reports on newly released e-mails that show how Donald Trump used his position to help his own business, and the lies told in the course of following Trump's orders."

Where's the article? Where's her report? I can't see how to access it or her sources. All I can find are links to other headlines without articles.


Wyrd bið ful aræd - bull!
Hope123
Posted: Monday, October 22, 2018 1:02:26 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,773
Neurons: 50,270
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Drag0nspeaker wrote:
Hi Hope.

I get the headline - "Rachel Maddow reports on newly released e-mails that show how Donald Trump used his position to help his own business, and the lies told in the course of following Trump's orders."

Where's the article? Where's her report? I can't see how to access it or her sources. All I can find are links to other headlines without articles.


Hi Drago. Rachel Maddow does a several minute video report on all her topics. I've never seen a transcript. I watched the video but can't remember if she credited her sources or not.

Maybe the video is not available to you.

Here's the link again. It's all I can copy.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/e-mail-revelation-puts-neat-bow-on-donald-trump-fbi-hq-scandal-1347889731555

The photograph of Trump in a meeting with the woman (forget her name) says it all. She testified she never met with him. I don't remember what Rachel said about Trump's claim about any meeting,

No time to watch it again - off to vote for our Municipal Election. That's often more important than elections for govts above it.


"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
Drag0nspeaker
Posted: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 4:58:12 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/12/2011
Posts: 32,945
Neurons: 204,246
Location: Livingston, Scotland, United Kingdom
Thanks.

I originally just looked at the first few minutes of the video and it seemed to be all about how decrepit and debased the FBI really are, as they can't even look after their own offices.
So I assumed that's a different story.

Wyrd bið ful aræd - bull!
Romany
Posted: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 5:57:40 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 15,496
Neurons: 48,745
Location: Brighton, England, United Kingdom
Hope -

you said, regarding Maddow "I watched the video but can't remember if she credited her sources or not."

Although I don't, personally, like the woman, and often don't agree with the conclusions she draws from facts, I do trust her research. She's like a terrier in sniffing out forgotten facts and overlooked events. Each time, in my 2 year journey learning about America, I've researched Maddows info. and facts, she had always been meticulous.

fwiw...
Hope123
Posted: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 8:07:17 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 8,773
Neurons: 50,270
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Drago, Rachel takes her time, and is organized and logical as she supplies all the details. I quite like her as I relate to her when posting too long posts here on the forum...

As Rom says her research is meticulous and she wants to pass on everything she has learned, I guess.


"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)
philips daughter
Posted: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 11:00:12 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/21/2017
Posts: 233
Neurons: 43,646
Trump said he was a “nationalist”. Go Nazi’s!
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2008-2019 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.