Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Wow. Well, thanks, I guess, to several people for making my point. And more sincere thanks to people like Awsi Dooger and Alan (runningart2004)--there are others--who realize that putting everything into Slot A or Slot B, with no possibility of degree or nuance, is both intellectually lazy and incongruent with reality.

As it happens, I detest Donald Trump and would be happy to see him out of the presidency--though I do fear what could happen with Mike Pence in the Oval Office. (Yes, I'm one of the folks who think that that could be worse.) But that doesn't blind me to the fact that the Trump Administration--which was what I specified--has done some good things, to go with many bad ones.

And as a result of that previous sentence, some people will conclude that I'm a troll--because everyone has to be on one team or the other (there are only two teams), and the only possible grades are A+ and F-, right? Well, that attitude comes under the heading of intellectual laziness or else intellectual dishonesty--take your pick, I guess. And it's a sad statement about the tribalism that increasingly has come to infest American culture.

Trollminator wrote:

On a separate note - the way the country is reacting to McCain’s death is literally eating Trump alive. You’ve got people from all walks of life praising him. There is no way Trump hasn’t thought about the probable turnout for his own funeral and the public reaction. He must know it will be at best non-existent and more likely “good riddance”. He absolutely cannot stand it when reality pierces his little ego bubble. Reminds me of a colleague who is a member of a prestigious Westchester County country club. He said every now and then Trump’s driver would walk in and announce Trump was there if anyone wanted to play with him. You would rarely see it happen. He is a reject.

It is all about attention and it is not on Trump so he tries to make it about him.

You seem like a smug jackass and I don't like you. Incredibly arrogant.

It's just about tribalism, it's about leadership, competence, and integrity. None of which Trump possesses. He's a blowhard and a grifter. Worst president in just about anyone's lifetime. Coolidge, Harding, and Hoover were not great but certainly better presidents and human beings than Donald effing Drumpf. Nixon may have been a crook but he was a good politician. All the others had there flaws and some were shadier than others but none as corrupt as Trump. Maybe only Andrew Johnson was as bad.

Trump may or may not be impeached, but highly doubtful he'll be forced to resign and even less likely that the senate would vote him out with 66 votes. So we're stuck with this POS for another 21 months. I hope the lawsuits and investigations continue to pile up and he is as miserable as hell.

Runningart2004 wrote:

Could it be Pence v Clinton in 2020?

I don't see Pence getting the party nomination unopposed and I don't see him winning the nomination if it's competitive.

Ted Cruz would be more likely if Trump implodes before 2020.

Clinton won't run again.

It is not possible to make any intelligent comments to intellectually lazy, arrogant, smug jackass, hardloper. He is barely 30 and thinks he knows everything about everything -- except about getting laid. He only cares about not having to pay for healthcare insurance -- which is why he loves Trump. But with Trump exposing his racism, hardloper has discovered an outlet for his no-longer buried racism. . . . Hardloper is an idiot who is best ignored.

You say Trump has done some good things along with the many bad things.

That’s fine. He can’t be all bad.

List the good things he has done.

Monkeys typing wrote:

Runningart2004 wrote:

Could it be Pence v Clinton in 2020?

I don't see Pence getting the party nomination unopposed and I don't see him winning the nomination if it's competitive.

Ted Cruz would be more likely if Trump implodes before 2020.

Clinton won't run again.

Cruz was born in Canada and was a Canadian citizen. That excludes him from running for president. He did run in 2016 making the bogus claim that his mother did not allow him to chose his citizenship when he was born—mother's chose their newborn's citizenship, not the newly born baby.

Agreed that Clinton won't run again. First she is too old. Second she has too much baggage—mostly bogus dropped on her by republicans—to overcome.

So, is 2020: No Cruz. No Clinton.

It’s going to be harder for Ted Cruz to run for President after he loses his Texas Senate seat to Democrat Beto O’Rourke.

L L wrote:

It’s going to be harder for Ted Cruz to run for President after he loses his Texas Senate seat to Democrat Beto O’Rourke.

O’Rourke is saying all the right things, and easily staying out of Cruzian political slandering game. People are interested in what he has to say, and that he got his nickname from Hispanic kids he grew up with who respected him. The attempt by Cruz to diminish O’Rourke for playing and touring in a Punk Rock band when he was young backfired, spectacularly. It only served to bestow a coolness factor on O’Rourke. . . . And remember that ultra-uber-mega-religious Cruz is the one who posted topless photos of Melania Trump in an attempt to win the Republican presidential nod. There have been few fakes bigger in politics than Cruz . . . of course, Trump be the biggest fake of all time.

Canadian Cruz wrote:

Monkeys typing wrote:

I don't see Pence getting the party nomination unopposed and I don't see him winning the nomination if it's competitive.

Ted Cruz would be more likely if Trump implodes before 2020.

Clinton won't run again.

Cruz was born in Canada and was a Canadian citizen. That excludes him from running for president. He did run in 2016 making the bogus claim that his mother did not allow him to chose his citizenship when he was born—mother's chose their newborn's citizenship, not the newly born baby.

Agreed that Clinton won't run again. First she is too old. Second she has too much baggage—mostly bogus dropped on her by republicans—to overcome.

So, is 2020: No Cruz. No Clinton.

No, real crap she pulled off in life...by herself and with her husband. Nice try with the bogus comment. Still upset over less than 2 years ago. Gosh you must be miserable to live with.

The blip I am referring to is some polls from 41 level to 39 level. I think that is temporary and will bounce back up.

Last December Trump was polling at 35% approval on Gallup and 37% consensus on 538. I think that Alabama senate special election between Moore and Jones was in the second week of December. Something like that. Smack in Trump's long extended downturn. I post on some liberal sites and obviously everyone was rejoicing the outcome. Immediately after the result there were forecasts toward 2018 and 2020. Posters were salivating at the prospect of running against Trump and his 38% approval rating.

I immediately jumped in and said it won't be 38%. They jumped all over me. That happens all the time. Lots of cheerleader types on those partisan political sites, and ones who can't see beyond today. But the point I made then is the same one I'll emphasize here and now: Trump can remain exactly the same, with all the outrageous tweets and priorities, and rants against fake news and the media, and his approval rating will steadily rise. It is simply logical. The public may not like it but as long as their lives are okay and they don't feel threatened by prospects of war or a collapsing economy, slowly they become more accepting of the moron in charge. Late last year it was 38%, now basically 41% despite the recent downturn, and I would expect small uptick by this time next year.

In essence, Trump has to commit even more atrocities to keep his approval down where it is now. And he is certainly capable of that. I saw several pundits commenting last night on how unstable he is currently, compared to that Lester Holt sit down interview a year and a half ago.

I have wagered on politics since 1992. I started studying the political numbers and situational trends for wagering purposes. I would estimate I have wagered on the Republican at least 75% of the time, even though I am a registered Democrat and would never vote for a Republican. The value is more often on the Republican, because of that national slant of roughly 10% more conservatives than liberals. When either side is understated by polling and the media it is typically the Republican. That Shy Tory factor began in the United Kingdom but now it has sailed across the Atlantic and right leaning voters are more likely to distrust pollsters or opinion companies, either refusing to share their opinion or fudging their opinion. Right now I am looking at the Texas senate race as potential opportunity to wager on the Republican, because polling is very tight and all the hype toward Beto, but bottom line that state holds 44% conservatives, which means extremely low margin for error the other way.

In regard to 2020, Trump has massive advantage in terms of an incumbent whose party has been in power only one term. Only Jimmy Carter has failed in that situation in more than a century. It is the reason I laughed at Republicans who thought Clinton was going to lose in 1996, and I laughed at Democrats who thought Bush was going to lose in 2004, and I laughed at Republicans who thought Obama was going to lose in 2012. Those were three very simple wagers. I cleaned up all three times but especially on Obama since the odds were so favorable throughout 2012. It is hilarious that people love to handicap and fixate on the day to day details and developments during a campaign, when essentially those variables mean nothing at all in the big picture, and especially when an incumbent is involved. The fundamentals of those cycles have been set in stone for years. But naturally the nightly cable programs can't sit there every night and say everything we saw today means nothing. They have to wave arms and analyze every gesture and syllable. Every cycle there are a handful of professorial types who trot out their list of all the key factors and who it points to. Those people are treated as oddities, when far more often than not they nailed it, and the nightly chatter is comparative garbage.

If Trump's approval moves toward 45% and above in 2020 I think he'll be re-elected. If it remains at current 41% level he will fail. Democrats figure to reach into the far left of the party for the nominee, as evidenced by the Andrew Gillum choice as Florida governor nominee. The activists aren't going to spend so much energy on a statewide primary and then retreat safe and strategic for the presidential nod.

There are NO Vietnamese Texans who vote republican

souR Grapes wrote:

Gosh I AM SO miserable to live with.

^ Yup.

XY wrote:

Mexican-Americans who live near the US-Mexico border, and Vietnamese who came to the US to escape Vietnam before the Vietnam War.

There are NO Vietnamese Texans who vote republican[/quote]

You have no clue what the comma in the sentence means. Two entirely different parts. They are not combined into one part.

Awsi Dooger wrote:

If Trump's approval moves toward 45% and above in 2020 I think he'll be re-elected. If it remains at current 41% level he will fail. Democrats figure to reach into the far left of the party for the nominee, as evidenced by the Andrew Gillum choice as Florida governor nominee. The activists aren't going to spend so much energy on a statewide primary and then retreat safe and strategic for the presidential nod.

mostly agree, but have to say that it depend on the electoral college - while polls are correlated....if the Dems recapture MI, WI and PA, it doesn't matter much what trump's approval rating is. THe dems would have enough electorl votes to elect a president.

You will respond, rightly, that most likely if trump's approval is 45, he'll win those states. I dunno. Maybe. These elections across the nation showing a blue wave are no joke. Hard to see purple states staying red even if nationally he gets to 45%.

should also point out that the generic ballot continues to blow out for the dems. Now 9.4%.

Hard to imagine this wave receding in the next 8 weeks. It's too late. National trends don't reverse themselves that quickly.

UNless there is a major terror attack or war or something.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/congress-generic-ballot-polls/

Awsi Dooger wrote:

. Democrats figure to reach into the far left of the party for the nominee, as evidenced by the Andrew Gillum choice as Florida governor nominee. The activists aren't going to spend so much energy on a statewide primary and then retreat safe and strategic for the presidential nod.

I will also disagree with this, with a little more force. Beto is capturing national attention like no young dem has since Obama, and he is no lefty.

I could point at other dems, often ex military, who are taking the center and doing well.

But yeah, the dems have a tough job - to get the passion of the bernie bros without scaring off too many indies.

agip wrote:

Awsi Dooger wrote:

. Democrats figure to reach into the far left of the party for the nominee, as evidenced by the Andrew Gillum choice as Florida governor nominee. The activists aren't going to spend so much energy on a statewide primary and then retreat safe and strategic for the presidential nod.

I will also disagree with this, with a little more force. Beto is capturing national attention like no young dem has since Obama, and he is no lefty.

I could point at other dems, often ex military, who are taking the center and doing well.

But yeah, the dems have a tough job - to get the passion of the bernie bros without scaring off too many indies.

Andrew Gillum does not seem to he "far left". He is seem as a progressive. Moderates Florida democrats have run for governor for the last 20 years have always lost. One issues Gillum was deemed to be very much in line with the the positions of other democratic candidates for governor.

agip wrote:

Awsi Dooger wrote:

. Democrats figure to reach into the far left of the party for the nominee, as evidenced by the Andrew Gillum choice as Florida governor nominee. The activists aren't going to spend so much energy on a statewide primary and then retreat safe and strategic for the presidential nod.

I will also disagree with this, with a little more force. Beto is capturing national attention like no young dem has since Obama, and he is no lefty.

I could point at other dems, often ex military, who are taking the center and doing well.

But yeah, the dems have a tough job - to get the passion of the bernie bros without scaring off too many indies.

Ted Cruz is in panic mode. Cruz spent zero money on yard signs in 2016 for failed presidential run. Beto has had people asking for signs (the are small and simply say "BETO") posting signs in their yards. Especially scary are the massive number of signs going up in conservative neighborhoods won by Cruz in the past. Cruz supporters are outraged and have demanded Cruz signs to counter the "attack." So Cruz has panicked and now giving his supporters tens-of-thousands of signs.