"10 Things Trump Supporters Are Too Stupid To Realize"

[Seeker]

8 hours ago, Say Again, Over! said:

Seeker,

Clearly, the answer to this election is...... 42!

That part's easy - now, what's the question?

[Don Hudson]

As ugly as he appears, in the phenomenon "Trump" some are observing that we are seeing a much larger change in politics - a true fed-up-ness with a ruling elite in a complicitous political environment that has arranged affairs very nicely for themselves and that has, since the 80's, set aside ordinary people. Trump is no Conservative, nor is he libertarian, nor democrat. We don't know what he is yet.

The following from the Guardian's "Long Read" section, (and it is...), is well worth considering when looking at the beast that is Trumpism.

This man is certainly no George Soros, and remains entirely untrustworthy and wholly unsuited for any office, but he has captured the imagination of sufficient numbers of angry, disaffected people such that dismissing the phenomenon is no longer possible or wise.

To be sure, the choices in this election are as ugly as the election process itself.

I think the appropriate scale with which to measure what we are witnessing is at the level of "empire" and what happens to them when original sources and principles are lost; this is not just another presidential election.

Here begins the teasing out, the through-a-glass-darkly delineations of the reasons for perhaps why this election is entirely different than all previous ones.

From the article:

Quote

The Republican party, its leaders like to say, is a party of ideas. Debates over budgets and government programmes are important, but they must be conducted with an eye on the bigger questions – questions about the character of the state, the future of freedom and the meaning of virtue. These beliefs provide the foundation for a conservative intellectual establishment – thinktanks such as the American Enterprise Institute, magazines such as National Review, pundits such as George Will and Bill Kristol – dedicated to advancing the right’s agenda.

Over the last year, that establishment has been united by one thing: opposition to Donald Trump. Republican voters may have succumbed to a temporary bout of collective insanity – or so Trump’s critics on the right believe – but the party’s intelligentsia remain certain that entrusting the Republican nomination to a reality television star turned populist demagogue has been a disaster for their cause and their country. Whatever Trump might be, he is not a conservative.

That belief is comforting, but it is wrong. Trump is a unique character, but the principles he defends and the passions he inflames have been part of the modern American right since its formation in the aftermath of the second world war. Most conservative thinkers have forgotten or repressed this part of their history, which is why they are undergoing a collective nervous breakdown today. Like addicts the morning after a bender, they are baffled at the face they see in the mirror.

But not all of the right’s intellectuals have been so blind. While keepers of the conservative flame in Washington and New York repeatedly proclaimed that Trump could never win the Republican nomination, in February a small group of anonymous writers from inside the conservative movement launched a blog that championed “Trumpism” – and attacked their former allies on the right, who were determined to halt its ascent. In recognition of the man who inspired it, they called their site the Journal of American Greatness.

Writing under pseudonyms borrowed from antiquity, such as “Decius”, the masked authors described the site, called JAG by its fans, as the “first scholarly journal of radical #Trumpism”. Posts analysing the campaign with titles such as The Twilight of Jeb! alternated with more ambitious forays in philosophy such as Paleo-Straussianism, Part I: Metaphysics and Epistemology. More intellectually demanding than the typical National Review article, the style of their prose also suggested writers who were having fun. Disquisitions on Aristotle could be followed by an emoji mocking the latest outraged responses to Trump.

The authors at JAG were not all backing Trump himself – officially, they were “electorally agnostic” – but they were united by their enthusiasm for Trumpism (as they put it, “for what Trumpism could become if thought through with wisdom and moderation”). They dismissed commentators who attributed Trump’s victory to his celebrity, arguing that a campaign could not resonate with so many voters unless it spoke to genuine public concerns.

JAG condensed Trumpism into three key elements: economic nationalism, controlled borders and a foreign policy that put American interests first.

These policies, they asserted, were a direct challenge to the views of America’s new ruling class – a cosmopolitan elite of wealthy professionals who controlled the commanding heights of public discourse. This new ruling class of “transnational post-Americans” was united by its belief that the welfare of the world just happened to coincide with programmes that catered to its own self-interest: free trade, open borders, globalisation and a suite of other policies designed to ease the transition to a post-national future overseen by enlightened experts. In the language of JAG, they are the “Davoisie”, a global elite that is most at ease among its international peers at the World Economic Forum in Davos and totally out of touch with ordinary Americans.

Mainstream conservatives and their liberal counterparts were equally complicit in sustaining this regime, but JAG focused its attention on the right. Leading Republican politicians and the journalists who fawned over them in the rightwing press were pedlars of an “intellectually bankrupt” doctrine whose obsessions – cutting taxes, policing sexual norms, slashing government regulation – distracted from “the fundamental question” Trump had put on the agenda: “destruction of the soulless managerial class”.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/aug/16/secret-history-trumpism-donald-trump?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=The+minute+-+auto&utm_term=186290&subid=18933254&CMP=ema-2636

[DEFCON]

Politicians of all stripes have been getting elected forever by promising to employ the power of their office to gain free things for their constituents. Democrats & Liberals follow this practice more so than their opposition, but all Parties are guilty regardless.

I think all classes of working people are generally tired of having the product of their work forcibly taken away and used to satisfy another man's lifestyle choices. That applies across the board whether it's paying to keep the 1%ers in the style to which they're accustomed right down through to the support of the irresponsible masses that all want the finer trappings of civilized life, but without ever having to contribute to the greater good.

Trump has struck a chord with the working people regardless of their Party affiliation. For instance, Hilary and Bernie continue to attract loads of have-not followers by promising to enforce bs Rights and to deliver all forms of free stuff to them. It's not funny either that neither has ever acknowledged the role of the suckers that are required to work and pay for the other guy's wish-list, or even mention little things like personal responsibility and effort.

I've been hugely disappointed with much of Trump's behaviour lately and I don't know if that's a perception that will ever change now, but I do hope he wins regardless and that's only because some major sober national reconsiderations are definitely in order and there isn't anyone else in the hopper that's capable of introducing a change in direction. If Hilary should prevail, I think it's safe for the Country and its people to expect to experience all sorts of bad in the worst case scenario and a whole lot more of the nothingness she's known for at a minimum.

It's going to be interesting ...  

[Guest]

Funny. 

[Jaydee]

Considering the very questionable person he is running against, love him or hate him, if this speech doesn't get Trump elected, nothing will.

 

Remarks in Charlotte, North Carolina:

"Thank you. It’s great to be here in Charlotte. I just met with our many amazing employees right up the road at our property.

I’d like to take a moment to talk about the heartbreak and devastation in Louisiana, a state that is very special to me.

We are one nation. When one state hurts, we all hurt – and we must all work together to lift each other up. Working, building, restoring together.

Our prayers are with the families who have lost loved ones, and we send them our deepest condolences. Though words cannot express the sadness one feels at times like this, I hope everyone in Louisiana knows that our country is praying for them and standing with them to help them in these difficult hours.

We are one country, one people, and we will have together one great future.

Tonight, I’d like to talk about the New American Future we are going to create together.

Last week, I laid out my plan to bring jobs back to our country.

On Monday, I laid out my plan to defeat Radical Islamic Terrorism.

On Tuesday, in Wisconsin, I talked about how we are going to restore law and order to this country.

Let me take this opportunity to extend our thanks and our gratitude to the police and law enforcement officers in this country who have sacrificed so greatly in these difficult times.

The chaos and violence on our streets, and the assaults on law enforcement, are an attack against all peaceful citizens. If I am elected President, this chaos and violence will end – and it will end very quickly.

Every single citizen in our land has a right to live in safety.

To be one united nation, we must protect all of our people. But we must also provide opportunities for all of our people.

We cannot make America Great Again if we leave any community behind.

Nearly Four in ten African-American children are living in poverty.I will not rest until children of every color in this country are fully included in the American Dream.

Jobs, safety, opportunity. Fair and equal representation. This is what I promise to African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, and all Americans.

But to achieve this New American Future we must break from the failures of the past.

As you know, I am not a politician. I have worked in business, creating jobs and rebuilding neighborhoods my entire adult life. I’ve never wanted to use the language of the insiders, and I’ve never been politically correct – it takes far too much time, and can often make more difficult.

Sometimes, in the heat of debate and speaking on a multitude of issues, you don’t choose the right words or you say the wrong thing. I have done that, and I regret it, particularly where it may have caused personal pain. Too much is at stake for us to be consumed with these issues.

But one thing I can promise you is this: I will always tell you the truth.

I speak the truth for all of you, and for everyone in this country who doesn’t have a voice.

I speak the truth on behalf of the factory worker who lost his or her job.

I speak the truth on behalf of the Veteran who has been denied the medical care they need – and so many are not making it. They are dying.

I speak the truth on behalf of the family living near the border that deserves to be safe in their own country but is instead living with no security at all.

Our campaign is about representing the great majority of Americans – Republicans, Democrats, Independents, Conservatives and Liberals – who read the newspaper, or turn on the TV, and don’t hear anyone speaking for them. All they hear are insiders fighting for insiders.

These are the forgotten men and women in our society, and they are angry at so much on so many levels. The poverty, the unemployment, the failing schools, the jobs moving to other countries.

I am fighting for these forgotten Americans.

Fourteen months ago, I declared my campaign for the Presidency on the promise to give our government back to the people. Every day since then, I’ve worked to repay the loyalty and the faith that you have put in me.

Every day I think about how much is at stake for this country. This isn’t just the fight of my life, it’s the fight of our lives – together – to save our country.

I refuse to let another generation of American children be excluded from the American Dream. Our whole country loses when young people of limitless potential are denied the opportunity to contribute their talents because we failed to provide them the opportunities they deserved. Let our children be dreamers too.

Our whole country loses every time a kid doesn’t graduate from high school, or fails to enter the workforce or, worse still, is lost to the dreadful world of drugs and crime.

When I look at the failing schools, the terrible trade deals, and the infrastructure crumbling in our inner cities, I know all of this can be fixed - and it can be fixed very quickly.

In the world I come from, if something is broken, you fix it.

If something isn’t working, you replace it.

If a product doesn’t deliver, you make a change.

I have no patience for injustice, no tolerance for government incompetence, no sympathy for leaders who fail their citizens.

That’s why I am running: to end the decades of bitter failure and to offer the American people a new future of honesty, justice and opportunity. A future where America, and its people, always – and I mean always – come first.

Aren’t you tired of a system that gets rich at your expense?

Aren’t you tired of the same old lies and the same old broken promises? And Hillary Clinton has proven to be one of the greatest liars of all time.

Aren’t you tired of arrogant leaders who look down on you, instead of serving and protecting you?

That is all about to change – and it’s about to change soon. We are going to put the American people first again.

I’ve travelled all across this country laying out my bold and modern agenda for change.

In this journey, I will never lie to you. I will never tell you something I do not believe. I will never put anyone’s interests ahead of yours.

And, I will never, ever stop fighting for you.

I have no special interest. I am spending millions of dollars on my own campaign – nobody else is.

My only interest is the American people.

So while sometimes I can be too honest, Hillary Clinton is the exact opposite: she never tells the truth. One lie after another, and getting worse each passing day.

The American people are still waiting for Hillary Clinton to apologize for all of the many lies she’s told to them, and the many times she’s betrayed them.

Tell me, has Hillary Clinton ever apologized for lying about her illegal email server and deleting 33,000 emails?

Has Hillary Clinton apologized for turning the State Department into a pay-for-play operation where favors are sold to the highest bidder?

Has she apologized for lying to the families who lost loved ones at Benghazi?

Has she apologized for putting Iran on the path to nuclear weapons?

Has she apologized for Iraq? For Libya? For Syria? Has she apologized for unleashing ISIS across the world?

Has Hillary Clinton apologized for the decisions she made that have led to so much death, destruction and terrorism?

Speaking of lies, we now know from the State Department announcement that President Obama lied about the $400 million dollars in cash that was flown to Iran. He denied it was for the hostages, but it was. He said we don’t pay ransom, but he did. He lied about the hostages – openly and blatantly – just like he lied about Obamacare.

Now the Administration has put every American travelling overseas, including our military personnel, at greater risk of being kidnapped. Hillary Clinton owns President Obama’s Iran policy, one more reason she can never be allowed to be President.

Let’s talk about the economy. Here, in this beautiful state, so many people have suffered because of NAFTA. Bill Clinton signed the deal, and Hillary Clinton supported it. North Carolina has lost nearly half of its manufacturing jobs since NAFTA went into effect.

Bill Clinton also put China into the World Trade Organization – another Hillary Clinton-backed deal. Your city of Charlotte has lost 1 in 4 manufacturing jobs since China joined the WTO, and many of these jobs were lost while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State – our chief diplomat with China. She was a disaster, totally unfit for the job.

Hillary Clinton owes the State of North Carolina a very big apology, and I think you’ll get that apology around the same time you’ll get to see her 33,000 deleted emails.

Another major issue in this campaign has been the border. Our open border has allowed drugs and crime and gangs to pour into our communities. So much needless suffering, so much preventable death. I’ve spent time with the families of wonderful Americans whose loved ones were killed by the open borders and Sanctuary Cities that Hillary Clinton supports.

I’ve embraced the crying parents who’ve lost their children to violence spilling across our border. Parents like Laura Wilkerson and Michelle Root and Sabine Durden and Jamiel Shaw whose children were killed by illegal immigrants.

My opponent supports Sanctuary Cities.

But where was the Sanctuary for Kate Steinle? Where was the Sanctuary for the children of Laura, Michelle, Sabine and Jamiel?

Where was the Sanctuary for every other parent who has suffered so horribly?

These moms and dads don’t get a lot of consideration from our politicians. They certainly don’t get apologies. They’ll never even get the time of day from Hillary Clinton.

But they will always come first to me.

Listen closely: we will deliver justice for all of these American Families. We will create a system of immigration that makes us all proud.

Hillary Clinton’s mistakes destroy innocent lives, sacrifice national security, and betray the working families of this country.

Please remember this: I will never put personal profit before national security. I will never leave our border open to appease donors and special interests. I will never support a trade deal that kills American jobs. I will never put the special interests before the national interest. I will never put a donor before a voter, or a lobbyist before a citizen.

Instead, I will be a champion for the people.

The establishment media doesn’t cover what really matters in this country, or what’s really going on in people’s lives. They will take words of mine out of context and spend a week obsessing over every single syllable, and then pretend to discover some hidden meaning in what I said.

Just imagine for a second if the media spent this energy holding the politicians accountable who got innocent Americans like Kate Steinle killed – she was gunned down by an illegal immigrant who had been deported five times.

Just imagine if the media spent this much time investigating the poverty and joblessness in our inner cities.

Just think about how much different things would be if the media in this country sent their cameras to our border, or to our closing factories, or to our failing schools. Or if the media focused on what dark secrets must be hidden in the 33,000 emails Hillary Clinton deleted.

Instead, every story is told from the perspective of the insiders. It’s the narrative of the people who rigged the system, never the voice of the people it’s been rigged against.

So many people suffering in silence. No cameras, no coverage, no outrage from a media class that seems to get outraged over just about everything else.

So again, it’s not about me. It’s never been about me. It’s about all the people in this country who don’t have a voice.

I am running to be their voice.

I am running to be the voice for every forgotten part of this country that has been waiting and hoping for a better future.

I am glad that I make the powerful a little uncomfortable now and again – including some powerful people in my own party. Because it means I am fighting for real change.

There’s a reason the hedge fund managers, the financial lobbyists, the Wall Street investors, are throwing their money at Hillary Clinton. Because they know she will make sure the system stays rigged in their favor.

It’s the powerful protecting the powerful.

The insiders fighting for the insiders.

I am fighting for you.

Here is the change I propose.

On terrorism, we are going to end the era of nation-building and instead focus on destroying ISIS and Radical Islamic terrorism.

We will use military, cyber and financial warfare and work with any partner in the world, and the Middle East, that shares our goal of defeating terrorism. I have a message for the terrorists trying to kill our citizens: we will find you, we will destroy you, and we will win.

On immigration, we will temporarily suspend immigration from any place where adequate screening cannot be performed. All applicants for immigration will be vetted for ties to radical ideology, and we will screen out anyone who doesn’t share our values and love our people. Anyone who believes Sharia law supplants American law will not be given an immigrant visa. If you want to join our society, then you must embrace our society, our values and our tolerant way of life. Those who believe in oppressing women, gays, Hispanics, African-Americans and people of different faiths are not welcome to join our country.

We will promote our America values, our American way of life, and our American system of government which are all the best in the world.

My opponent on the other hand wants a 550% increase in Syrian refugees. Her plan would bring in roughly 620,000 refugees from all refugee-sending nations in her first term, on top of all other immigration. Hillary Clinton is running to be America’s Angela Merkel, and we’ve seen how much crime and how many problems that’s caused the German people.

We have enough problems already, we don’t need another one.

On crime, we are going to add more police, more investigators, and appoint the best judges and prosecutors in the world. We will pursue strong enforcement of federal laws.

The gangs and cartels and criminal syndicates terrorizing our people will be stripped apart one by one. Their day is over.

On trade, we are going to renegotiate NAFTA, withdraw from the TPP, stand up to China on our terrible trade agreement, and protect every last American job.

Hillary Clinton has supported all of the major trade deals that have stripped this country of its jobs and its wealth.

On taxes, we are going to massively cut tax rates for workers and small businesses – creating millions of new good paying jobs.

We are going to get rid of regulations that send jobs overseas and we are going to make it easier for young Americans to get the credit they need to start a small business and pursue their dreams.

On education, we are going to give students choice, and allow charter schools to thrive. We are going to end tenure policies that reward bad teachers and hurt good ones. My opponent wants to deny students choice and opportunity, all to get a little bit more money from the education bureaucracy. She doesn’t care how many young dreams are dashed in the process.

We are going to work closely with African-American parents and students in the inner cities – and what a big difference that will make. This means a lot to me, and it is going to be a top priority in a Trump Administration.

On healthcare, we are going to repeal and replace Obamacare. Countless Americans have been forced into part-time jobs, premiums are about to jump by double-digits yet again, and just this week Aetna announced it is pulling out of the exchanges in North Carolina. We are going to replace this disaster with reforms that give you choice and freedom and control in healthcare – at a much lower cost.

On political corruption, we are going to restore honor to our government.

In my Administration, I am going to enforce all laws concerning the protection of classified information. No one will be above the law.

I am going to forbid senior officials from trading favors for cash by preventing them from collecting lavish speaking fees through their spouses when they serve.

I am going to ask my senior officials to sign an agreement not to accept speaking fees from corporations with a registered lobbyist for five years after leaving office, or from any entity tied to a foreign government.

Finally, we are going to bring this country together. We are going to do it by emphasizing what we all have in common as Americans. We are going to reject the bigotry of Hillary Clinton, which sees communities of color only as votes and not as human beings worthy of a better future.

If African-American voters give Donald Trump a chance by giving me their vote, the result for them will be amazing. Look at how badly things are going under decades of Democratic leadership – look at the schools, look at the 58% of young African-Americans not working. It is time for change.

What do you have to lose by trying something new? – I will fix it. This means so much to me, and I will work as hard as I can to bring new opportunity to places in our country which have not known opportunity in a very long time.

Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party have taken African-American votes totally for granted. Because the votes have been automatically there, there has been no reason for Democrats to produce.

It is time to break with the failures of the past, and to fight for every last American child in this country to have the better future they deserve.

In my Administration, every American will be treated equally, protected equally, and honored equally. We will reject bigotry and hatred and oppression in all of its forms, and seek a new future built on our common culture and values as one American people.

This is the change I am promising all of you: an honest government, a fair economy, and a just society for each and every American.

But we can never fix our problems by relying on the same politicians who created these problems in the first place.

72% of voters say our country is on the wrong track. I am the change candidate, Hillary Clinton is the failed status quo.

It is time to vote for a New American Future.

Together, We Will Make America Strong Again.

We Will Make American Proud Again.

We Will Make America Safe Again.

Friends and fellow citizens: Come November, We Will Make America Great Again.

Thank You, And God Bless.

[J.O.]

It's too bad the power structure of his party doesn't support a good portion of the commitments he made in this well written speech. They're a significant part of that group of "the same old politicians" he rails against. It's also abundantly clear that his new campaign team has one job and one job only - slam a lid on his off the cuff remarks and drag him kicking and screaming into staying on message. The problem then becomes does he lose the support of those who find his loose lips refreshing and not the least bit offensive?

[Lakelad]

.

Quit sneering: 3 reasons why Trump voters won’t disappear after November

Whatever the outcome of this election, we are stuck with these disheartening trends

Fri Aug 19, 2016 - MarketWatch
By Michael J. Hicks

It has become sport within popular culture to suppose supporters of Donald Trump are ignorant, bigoted, culturally regressive and mean spirited. That may describe the man himself, but it is folly to dismiss his followers so easily. There is an angry dissatisfaction with the state of affairs that will persist long after this election. Mr. Trump didn’t invent this anger; he is merely exploiting three enabling conditions.

The first of this is the intensifying disregard for truth in politics. Electioneering has always been vigorously nasty, and I don't suggest we have passed out of some golden age of political discourse. But governing has largely been conducted within reasonable limits of truthfulness. The Reagan, Clinton and George W. Bush administrations all paid a heavy political price for actual or apparent deceits. Hillary Clinton disregards truthfulness with unfettered abandon. This has served the dual purpose of desensitizing us to Mr. Trump’s wholesale disinterest in objective truth, while offering no reasonable antidote in the Democratic nominee.

Whether Hillary’s lies are worse than Donald’s are likely a matter of personal judgment. That they are both an order of magnitude greater than anything like what has come before is not. Among the electoral elite, there is no penalty for extreme mendacities. Donald Trump surely benefits from this, but he isn’t its creator.

The second enabling condition is the exploding and explosive hyper-racialism of the day. Once the sole venue of the extremes of politics — think Ku Klux Klan and Black Panthers — racial labeling, identity and resentment are now mainstream phenomena. Students at many American universities are now subject to extraordinary efforts at racial labeling and identity politics orientation. They take classes from professors who list their gendered-racial origin before their academic credentials and sit through “white privilege” training. This is aimed squarely at Americans of European and increasingly Asian descent.

Mr. Trump calls this political correctness, but whatever its name, it cripples our ability to talk frankly about immigration, inner-city policing and the terrorist threat. The best example is simply this; if #whitelivesmatter is racist, and it surely is, what can we honestly but safely say about #blacklivesmatter?

The Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. offered a tractable, morally complete vision for us to overcome a vile history of slavery and racial bigotry. Americans of goodwill have been pursuing this path for half a century. But the illusionary post-racial world of President Obama’s rhetoric has yielded to a corrosive and culturally destructive reality of ethnic tribalism that threatens any sense of a shared future.

'Donald Trump is merely riding the train of racial resentment; he isn't its engineer.'

.

 

[deicer]

Having just spent 2 weeks in China, the only English language media was either the local newspapers, or TV from Japan or Malaysia. 

The coverage Trump gets over there is huge.  Clinton is almost an afterthought. 

The big stories about Trump?  How his team is constantly changing due scandal, ie Manafort,  and in a land that follows words very carefully, how Trump keeps changing his stance.

 

[Don Hudson]

Hi Jaydee;

Re, " if this speech doesn't get Trump elected, nothing will. "

It is clear that Trump's chances of winning are no longer a matter of changing speeches.

He has shown that he is incapable of changing, and is certainly not about to pivot again, even after the speech quoted. The debates will be fascinating television but won't make a difference in the numbers.

It is not the popular vote, nor is it the media that has the Trump campaign scared, and now panicking. Nor will firing Trump's campaign management team for the third time in five months make the change needed to rescue this candidacy. He is who he is and the country is finding out.

This is a terrible choice, no question about it. But Trump has done this to himself and his candidacy.

The Trump campaign's mistake is in believing that the huge, overwhelmingly positive responses seen over and over at Trump's rallies (still being held in States he can't possibly win - go figure), is what the whole country thinks and believes. It isn't and they haven't adjusted accordingly. Now, with Breitbart/Bannon on board, the outcome is all but assured.

It is the historical and the current Electoral College numbers which make it nearly impossible for Trump to win.

The fivethirtyeight site, (Nate Silver is founder and editor-in-chief of fivethirtyeight), includes a weekly political discussion entitled, "Trump Can Still Win, Can't He?", at http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-still-has-a-chance-doesnt-he/. This week's discussion touches on the possibility of the Electoral College changing dramatically due to factors not anticipated which could swing the College sufficiently to elect Trump. The matter of overcoming a seven-to-eight point deficit in the last few months is also discussed in one of the sites below, (i.e., it has never been done).

 

http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/editorials/2014/11/22/electoral-college-president-gop-republicans-vote-michigan/19361635/

Detroit Free Press primer on what the Electoral College is and how it works.

 

A sample of sites, (followed by a short note explaining where the site is from), discussing/presenting maps/interactive graphics of Electoral College votes:

http://www.270towin.com/maps/clinton-trump-electoral-map

About this Site

270towin.com is an interactive Electoral College map for 2016 and a history of Presidential elections in the United States. Since electoral votes are generally allocated on an "all or none" basis by state, the election of a U.S President is about winning the popular vote in enough states to achieve 270 electoral votes, a majority of the 538 that are available. It is not about getting the most overall popular votes, as we saw in the 2000 election, when the electoral vote winner (Bush) and the popular vote winner (Gore) were different.

Copyright © 2004-2016 270towin.com All Rights Reserved

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

"Poll results aggregated from HuffPost Pollster, RealClearPolitics, polling firms and news reports.

"Forecast models by Nate Silver. Research by Jennifer Kanjana and Dhrumil Mehta. Design and development by Jay Boice, Aaron Bycoffe, Matthew Conlen, Reuben Fischer-Baum, Ritchie King, Ella Koeze, Allison McCann, Andrei Scheinkman and Gus Wezerek. Candidate portraits by Kristina Micotti. Have thoughts on our forecast? Notice any bugs or missing polls? Send us an email.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_elections_electoral_college_map.html

(History of realclearpolitics) http://www.realclearpolitics.com/about.html

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/07/07/fox-news-electoral-map-clinton-has-2016-edge-but-many-toss-ups-in-play.html

Fox News

http://rothenberggonzales.com/ratings/president

Rothenberg/Gonzales

http://cookpolitical.com/presidential/maps

Founded in 1984, The Cook Political Report is an independent, non-partisan newsletter that analyzes elections and campaigns for the US House of Representatives, US Senate, Governors and President as well as American political trends. In 2004, we moved to an online-based publication.

 

[Don Hudson]

Lakelad;

We have just returned from visits to Berlin and Prague - two cities in two countries which, apparently, still have much to teach a society that seems to want to be even more insular than it already is and which now openly values forced deportation of specific races and cultures. What was that poem about, '...and then they came for me'?

Even as they are today proposed by a U.S. presidential candidate, I think the U.S. has sufficient, (Executive, Legislative, Judicial), checks and balances to hobble such stupid and dangerous proposals; ...so far.

That observed, I agree with some of Hicks' (and others'), comments. I think there is something to say on behalf of an angry population, but the message has been completely destroyed by ego, vanity, hypersensitivity to the slightest criticism from anywhere, a belief that violence is a better solution to difference than diplomacy or negotiation, and a demonstrated incapacity to listen to those who know what they're doing. The American Psychiatric Association has warned against publicly analyzing & commenting on Trump's behaviours, but clearly they are tempted.

Donald Trump's failure to move from successful businessman to fit candidate for the Presidency is his alone, not the media's and not his team's.

The Republican Party had eight years to come up with a candidate that satisfied them, and, under the rules everyone must follow, Donald Trump is who that party has chosen. We may argue over Clinton but nowhere near on the same basis. She at least is a serious, experienced candidate with knowledge and history, which comes to the fore as it should, just like every other erstwhile candidate in previous elections.

As the numbers were as of December last year, given Obama's approval ratings, (http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/president-obama-approval-ratings-216756 ), the election was the Republican Party's to lose.

Truly, I would have preferred a competent, earnest conservative candidate if only to see if the Republican Party could do better than just shutting down government numerous times and following a rump parliament of obsessive Tea Partiers, to show that they can actually govern; that they can succeed where they claimed failure, and to come to terms with the issues expressed in the rare, saner moments of this sad and soulless 2016 election.

Here we are; here they are and, barring a sea-change over the next 10 weeks or so, they're going to crash and they may take the House and the Senate with them.

 

[mo32a]

 

Watch Thursday for the Donald to "walk back" the deportation of illegal immigrants.

 

 

[deicer]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/republicans-continue-to-rely-on-a-shrinking-base/article31478705/

[deicer]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-22/donald-trump-the-mortgage-broker-was-in-trouble-from-moment-one

[Don Hudson]

deicer - thanks for the G&M link - I think that's a succinct and well-written article outlining the broader issues surrounding the emergence of the phenomenon of "Donald Trump". It's a kind of, "his time has come" notion. His failures may be of  his own making but his "legitimacy" as a candidate has been in the making for years - I had not appreciated how long, and the article is an interesting and I think reasonable interpretation of the recent, (perhaps five-decades) history of the Republican Party and why it is stalling today.

Obviously the autopsy conducted after the 2012 Republican campaign was never read or taken seriously as it was contrary to older established principles.

In nature, adaptation to new circumstances is what sustains life...

[deicer]

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/06/trump-german-loan-deutsche-bank

[deicer]

Another 'flip' by Trump, this time to be more like Obama...

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2016/08/23/trump-makes-sudden-u-turn-on-immigration-in-fox-new-interview.html

[Don Hudson]

mo32a...wait, wait, wait, he's already flip-flopped and it isn't Thursday yet! ;-)    

Here's the first REAL Trump campaign ad...

 

 

[DEFCON]

The American empire is in collapse.

The Democratic contender for the Presidency is physically unfit, dishonest and disingenuous. Her very short record of accomplishment seems to be more of an indicator of incompetence than a demonstration of personal capability.

On the Republican side is the Donald, a rude, crude, lewd and contentious loudmouth with a history of success in business.

Right from the beginning of the period I've always felt that Hilary lacked the physical stamina necessary to the task. Obvious pressure cracks are now beginning to show publically through fairly regular graphic demonstrations. I bet it won't be long before her running mate, a virtual unknown, steps in to fill her place, which is an outcome that will favour Trump and the Republicans.

[Don Hudson]

Hi DEFCON - yes, I've seen the reports on Clinton - could be just part of the usual discrediting of the other candidate or partially true - we'll see. I discuss this fascinating period in U.S. history with good friends who are 150% for Trump, (and the coming sea-change which includes the disappearance of the GOP and an emergence of a blend of Trump & Sanders notions and the disappearance of simplistic left/right labels), and who have offered the same observations, (some say she won't make it to November).

In such a topsy-turvy world, it isn't possible to claim very much. In fact, my own views of a Clinton landslide are challenged by those who offer the "silent majority" argument - that no one wishes any longer to be associated with Trump but will quietly vote for him - some offer a landslide for Trump.

Numbers for the House and Senate candidates do not appear to be altering in parallel with Trump's performance, making the race really interesting, particularly in the known swing states.

Some favour Twitter-feeds and experimental software, (ZipApp, for example), which bypasses traditional voting polling methods to show Trump leading by high double-digits. This is the "silent majority" argument and while it makes sense, I doubt if it is statistically robust.

I favour the Electoral College numbers because the popular vote does not elect the President, the States do, through the College, (as you know).

Historically, the College numbers don't change much as the election approaches. While there is nothing normal about this election, the polling numbers which are drawing the numbers for the College are very large statistical-population data.

As with a rolling-average of several thousand values, it takes huge changes in the underlying data to alter the numbers behind standard deviations and the actual weightings by State and, while changes in actual voting patterns can/do occur, as the site I inserted a reference to below shows, in most scenarios Trump can't be elected without taking all, (but one), of the swing states. Anything is possible, but not probable. Within the limitations of the scenario there are three possible ties.

ed) Here's an interactive site that's particularly good - the viewer can hover over selected swing states and, (with assumptions made clear) see the combinations and permutations of various wins/losses in these States which will lead to a Clinton or Trump win, http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/presidential-polls-forecast.html

But here's a site, (fivethirtyeight, again), that disagrees, and it is equally worth reading: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-why-clinton-doesnt-have-this-race-locked-up/

Anywayt, hat's my main argument for a massive Trump failure, but that's all it is - an argument based on current information and some knowledge of the actual voting process that elects the President.

There's a very good, (among many) site explaining the College and its ways far better than I can, at http://www.learnnc.org/lp/media/lessons/davidwalbert7232004-02/electoralcollege.html#4

As for his personality, his breeding and his manners, meh...don't care. He's a hollow man and, if I may differ, seems to be a terrible businessman who gets by on (Communist China and German DeutchBank) debt and is nowhere near the man that Carnegie, Frick, Rockefeller, and other true empire builders were . He cheats, welshes on deals, lies, bullies, walks out on people, cons people - all "good" qualities at the table if you're up against Harvey Specter, but a country isn't a business deal that requires a "win" and that's his fundamental failing), but again, meh - the U.S. has checks and balances to enhance a Reagan or hobble a Trump or a Clinton. Remember, it was Bill who repealed the 1933 Glass-Steagal Act; Bush just completed the job for the world in 2008's economic melt-down, (now the GOP wants Dodd-Frank gone).

We'll be watching the U.S. $ after November 8th...

Cheers!

 

[DEFCON]

Thanks Don

 

I was debating everything Trump several months ago with a pilot friend who didn't like much about either candidate when it came right down to it.

Nevertheless, in Trumps case, 'stupid' seemed to be the most common descriptor he used to describe the man, but was it fair and due I asked? After all, for the most part, our aspirations as pilots peaked when we strapped ourselves into the cockpits of the aircraft that windbags like Trump actually own. So, while we all succeeded in that we reached our own personal objectives, in the end, our best saw us become employees of men like Trump where we worked to serve and cater to their every need, want & wish.

Accordingly, is it 'smart' to chastise and refer to those who's relentless drive & overall talent surpasses our own as 'stupid'?

And then there's the electoral college. Like others, I have my own thoughts on the role of the college and ideas for its future, not that anyone cares mind you. Although the EC is supposed to bring balance to the election process, no matter how you cut it, it stifles the free vote of the people. IMO, the Senate ensures all States are equally represented at the federal level of government. I have a preference for electoral systems that give equal weight to the vote of each eligible voter, regardless of his State of residence.

I think Trump could have easily 'ran the board' as he called it if only he had been capable of containing his ego, but as we are all aware, he failed miserably and pretty much eliminated the possibility. You are correct of course Don; if Trump isn't able to get the momentum back and the quiet vote doesn't materialize, the numbers coming from the EC are indicating victory for his opposition.

      

    .  

[Mitch Cronin]

8 hours ago, DEFCON said:

So, while we all succeeded in that we reached our own personal objectives, in the end, our best saw us become employees of men like Trump where we worked to serve and cater to their every need, want & wish.

Accordingly, is it 'smart' to chastise and refer to those who's relentless drive & overall talent surpasses our own as 'stupid'?

Forgive me..... but that strikes me as complete nonsense! They who live with a smile on their face and warmth in their heart, have "succeeded". ....and prey tell, what "talent" does an almost empty suit - all but for a voice box, like a doll's when you pull the string- have?

[DEFCON]

"They who live with a smile on their face and warmth in their heart, have "succeeded"

Yes, if reflections of a past career brings 'smiles to your face and warmth to your heart' then you certainly have achieved some measure of success in your life. However, the thrust of my entry was aimed squarely at an individual's capability, drive & ambition and not anywhere near the realm of personal contentment Mitch.

I note without offence that both of your entries on this thread employ less than flattering descriptors, stupid and nonsense for instance, to complement your view of anyone that holds a perspective different than your own in respect of Trump. I do appreciate the way topics such as the one in debate can fuel emotional rhetoric, but at the end of the day, I don't think defamatory adjectives do much to strengthen, or advance one's position.

"....and prey tell, what "talent" does an almost empty suit - all but for a voice box, like a doll's when you pull the string- have?"

Correct me if I've somehow got it wrong, but the evidence would seem to indicate the man had just enough 'talent' to merge it nicely with ambition and an apparently insatiable drive to create something of an empire.  To me anyway, Trump's children are all a positive reflection on and an earned product of parental commitment; being absent from a child's life is not the key to success in this regard. Trump's offspring are clearly members of a strong family unit and all demonstrate laudable personal characteristics, which other than for education, are not traits attributable to opportunity. 

I thought Mitt Gingrich condensed Trump's weaknesses rather well when he said; 'Trump possess an uncanny ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory'. It's only my opinion too, but I doubt that Trump has ever been limited by his potential 'talent', it's more likely that his undisciplined diatribe restricted the growth of his fortune over the years.

 

[Don Hudson]

On Glenn Beck yesterday, a caller actually said he and his friends would take out Trump, (to my ears, the only clear meaning was, assassinate), if he didn't build the wall. For the record, Glenn Beck has seen the specter of a Trump presidency right from the beginning, and has, alone among right-wing talk-show hosts, taken an early, very strong stand against the horror of Trump-as-president.

I never imagined myself saying it, but Glenn Beck is worth listening to.

The Republican's had eight years to come up with someone to replace who they hated so much that nothing got done without first shutting the nation down time after time. The Republican Party who refused to listen to the anger of the nation, is responsible for their Frankenstein. 

Listen to the real author of The Art of the Deal, Tony Schwartz.

Here's the story of the Art of the Deal in the New Yorker.

 

Roger Cohen's column in the New York Times, July 25, 2016:

Quote

The Opinion Pages | Op-Ed Columnist

Trump and the End of Truth

Roger Cohen JULY 25, 2016

Tolstoy wrote of “epidemic suggestion” to describe those moments when humanity seems to be gripped by a kind of mass hypnosis that no force can counter. The resulting movements, like the Crusades or the 17th-century Dutch tulip craze, cannot be controlled. We find ourselves in such a moment.

To imagine that the words I write, or those of countless others lamenting the world’s lurch toward the politics of violence, may stem this “epidemic suggestion” is to indulge in fantasy. It is part of the infernal nature of such eruptions that everything feeds them, including outrage. The slouching beast is insatiable.

Warnings of danger are just the self-important whining of those in whose favor the decadent, soon-to-be-destroyed system has been rigged. The movement is the answer. Mendacity is the new truth. Choreography is stronger than content. The world is upside-down.

Writing into such an environment is like directing a canoe into a gale. Still, here goes, while words still have some meaning.

Goodbye to all that. This looks like the end of a brief interlude that began in 1945. The interlude was relatively peaceful by historical standards. It saw the construction of a rules-based world order undergirded by visceral knowledge of destruction and acute awareness of potential Armageddon. The postwar order involved new institutions, treaties, alliances, and even a union of the very European nations most given to repetitive bloodshed.

Its end was signaled in 2014 by the Russian president Vladimir Putin’s annexation of Crimea, a move that ripped to shreds the “territorial integrity” of Ukraine in direct violation of Article 2 of the United Nations Charter.

But it was not so much this act itself that presaged the unraveling. It was the lies that accompanied it. The Soviet Union, in 1931, used the slogan that two plus two equals five. Putin, a pure Soviet product, traffics in lies — the supposed Western encirclement of Russia, the preposterous notion that all the Russian forces and materiel in eastern Ukraine have been figments of the world’s imagination.

As George Orwell observed, “From the totalitarian point of view history is something to be created rather than learned.”

Enter Putin’s pal, Donald Trump, who declares that “there will be no lies” as a prelude to shrieking unvarnished untruth for 76 minutes from a gold-limned podium. Where was Leni Riefenstahl when she was needed last week in Cleveland?

Trump is not alone. There is a global movement of minds. As John Lanchester has observed in The London Review of Books, “I don’t think there’s ever been a time in British politics when so many people in public life spent so much time loudly declaring things they knew not to be true.” The successful arguments of the “Leave” campaign for Britain to quit the European Union “were based on lies.” The charlatan trafficking most vociferously in these untruths, boorish Boris Johnson, has just become Britain’s foreign secretary.

Facts are now a quaint hangover from a time of rational discourse, little annoyances easily upended. Volume trumps reality, as Roger Ailes understood at Fox News, before a downfall that coincided with the apotheosis of his post-factual world.

A red-faced bully, adept in the choreography of collective hysteria, arises. He promises that he alone can set things right. He is the voice. He stands against a great tide of menace, from ISIS to immigrants, and only he understands the vast dimensions of the danger.

We have been here before. Fascism was a backlash against dysfunctional democracies. It invited belief in the leadership of the strongman against enemies within and without. Its currency was untruth and its culmination bloody unreason. It was decried and dismissed by those it would devour.

It is inevitable, given what he represents, that Trump looks to Putin. Orwell again: “Totalitarianism demands, in fact, the continuous alteration of the past, and in the long run probably demands a disbelief in the very existence of objective truth.”

Putin is not a totalitarian, but he has totalitarianism in him, and the conditions of today are not those of the 1930s. But in technology’s disorienting cacophony, the disaggregation of increasingly unequal societies, the frustrations of the many millions for whom life has become an exercise in precariousness, the pressures of globalization and mass migration, the stirring of racism, the spread of terrorism, and the steady undermining of truth, the seeds of a new authoritarianism have been sown. This is the wave Trump rides.

Trump’s strongest argument is that he represents change and Hillary Clinton does not. He will see Clinton’s charges of mendacity with accusations that she is untrustworthy. He may well win. Anyone denying this has not grasped that “epidemic suggestion” tends to be unstoppable.

Brexit illustrated a thirst for disruption at any cost. It was the supporting act for a possible American leap in the dark that would place Trump’s portrait in United States embassies around the world. Perhaps that’s the least of it. Still. That face so displayed would signal the end of an era and imminent danger to the Republic and the world.

 

 

[mo32a]

Quote

I never imagined myself saying it, but Glenn Beck is worth listening to.

I like how some people will only listen to somebody when they are saying something they want to hear or agree with. Otherwise the speaker is a buffoon, idiot, racist, hate monger, supremacist etc.

 

Gets pretty tiring.

[Mitch Cronin]

18 hours ago, DEFCON said:

"They who live with a smile on their face and warmth in their heart, have "succeeded"

Yes, if reflections of a past career brings 'smiles to your face and warmth to your heart' then you certainly have achieved some measure of success in your life. However, the thrust of my entry was aimed squarely at an individual's capability, drive & ambition and not anywhere near the realm of personal contentment Mitch.

I note without offence that both of your entries on this thread employ less than flattering descriptors, stupid and nonsense for instance, to complement your view of anyone that holds a perspective different than your own in respect of Trump. I do appreciate the way topics such as the one in debate can fuel emotional rhetoric, but at the end of the day, I don't think defamatory adjectives do much to strengthen, or advance one's position.

"....and prey tell, what "talent" does an almost empty suit - all but for a voice box, like a doll's when you pull the string- have?"

Correct me if I've somehow got it wrong, but the evidence would seem to indicate the man had just enough 'talent' to merge it nicely with ambition and an apparently insatiable drive to create something of an empire.  To me anyway, Trump's children are all a positive reflection on and an earned product of parental commitment; being absent from a child's life is not the key to success in this regard. Trump's offspring are clearly members of a strong family unit and all demonstrate laudable personal characteristics, which other than for education, are not traits attributable to opportunity. 

I thought Mitt Gingrich condensed Trump's weaknesses rather well when he said; 'Trump possess an uncanny ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory'. It's only my opinion too, but I doubt that Trump has ever been limited by his potential 'talent', it's more likely that his undisciplined diatribe restricted the growth of his fortune over the years.

 

Hi Defcon.... Please note that the "stupid" was a quote from the headline -not my words... and the "strikes me as nonsense" was my take on your initial, evidently incomplete description of "success". Pleased to see you took no offence.

As for Trump's "Empire", as you concede in your last sentence above, that 'restricted growth' suggests that anyone who'd begun with the same silver platter and golden shoes that he was gifted upon birth, who didn't share that same affliction of a proclivity to 'undisciplined diatribe', might well have done better. I see no talent whatsoever in the man. ... and he didn't raise his own kids so you're not going to tell much about him by looking at them.