First time there's been a significant convention bounce since 2000. Have to wait until after the DNC to get stabilised numbers, but there's no doubt Trump's winning the campaign right now.
Just confirms that Trump isn't negatively affected by drama, though.
I found this interesting:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/...really-a-thing
1-3 are purely circumstantial, and 6 seems like the natural consequence of things he's said. The ones regarding his staffing are interesting (but hardly damning on their own).
Most of these are circumstantial, but this bit really isn't:4. Then there's Paul Manafort, Trump's nominal 'campaign chair' who now functions as campaign manager and top advisor. Manafort spent most of the last decade as top campaign and communications advisor for Viktor Yanukovych, the pro-Russian Ukrainian Prime Minister and then President whose ouster in 2014 led to the on-going crisis and proxy war in Ukraine. Yanukovych was and remains a close Putin ally. Manafort is running Trump's campaign.
5. Trump's foreign policy advisor on Russia and Europe is Carter Page, a man whose entire professional career has revolved around investments in Russia and who has deep and continuing financial and employment ties to Gazprom. If you're not familiar with Gazprom, imagine if most or all of the US energy industry were rolled up into a single company and it were personally controlled by the US President who used it as a source of revenue and patronage. That is Gazprom's role in the Russian political and economic system. It is no exaggeration to say that you cannot be involved with Gazprom at the very high level which Page has been without being wholly in alignment with Putin's policies. Those ties also allow Putin to put Page out of business at any time.
I wouldn't have thought anything of the links, except for that last one. That's really weird.7. Here's where it gets more interesting. This is one of a handful of developments that tipped me from seeing all this as just a part of Trump's larger shadiness to something more specific and ominous about the relationship between Putin and Trump. As TPM's Tierney Sneed explained in this article, one of the most enduring dynamics of GOP conventions (there's a comparable dynamic on the Dem side) is more mainstream nominees battling conservative activists over the party platform, with activists trying to check all the hardline ideological boxes and the nominees trying to soften most or all of those edges. This is one thing that made the Trump convention very different. The Trump Camp was totally indifferent to the platform. So party activists were able to write one of the most conservative platforms in history. Not with Trump's backing but because he simply didn't care. With one big exception: Trump's team mobilized the nominee's traditional mix of cajoling and strong-arming on one point: changing the party platform on assistance to Ukraine against Russian military operations in eastern Ukraine. For what it's worth (and it's not worth much) I am quite skeptical of most Republicans call for aggressively arming Ukraine to resist Russian aggression. But the single-mindedness of this focus on this one issue - in the context of total indifference to everything else in the platform - speaks volumes.
Bernie also has a former Yanukovich-advisor on his staff, but the last point really is the one that ties all of the circumstantial stuff together.
If there's anything that might scare away baby boomers it's Russia.
A 'bounce' of any kind after the shitstorm that was the RNC is frightening.
Keeping drinking the koolaid buddy, RealClearPolitics has Trump leading in 5/6 last polls, many of which suffer from sampling bias against him:Originally Posted by ItalAussie
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...nton-5491.html
I've never before seen a man transcend all barriers thrust in front of him by what I had long ago accepted to be an untouchable and intractable political elite, this election will be in the history books as the moment when the tide was turned against the seemingly inevitable collapse of Western civilization, where the people rose up to again became Masters of their Destiny:
Without having paid much attention to this of late the one thing that strikes me is that Trump has the better slogans. And if the whole EU Referendum taught us anything it was that catchy slogans about taking back control of things etc are very potent. Hilary is such an uninspiring mook as well. Trump probably couldn't have conceived a better opponent to run against on an anti-establishment/angry white man ticket. If he wins it certainly will be one for the history books, although I don't know if it'll be in the positive sense Mert suggests or as Western society's Sarajevo moment.
Hillary's seethe when she loses is almost enough to make it worth it. Add four years of comedy and then it's hard not to be pro-Trump.
And given that he wanted to have Kasich as VP handling "foreign and domestic policy", how much harm can he really do in 4 years?
Trump is going to be doing an ama over at /r/The_Donald
I bet he chimps out within five minutes.
Almost.
I'd love his ama to be spammed with questions about his tiny hands, mainly because he seems to have absolutely zero sense of humour about the subject.
Think you're missing out on what /r/The_Donald is
O lawd, Trump at 57.5% likelihood of winning the election, Clinton at 42.5% according to Nate Silver's Election Forecast:
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...-forecast/#now
The American electoral math[s] is the most boring thing in the world, but Michael Moore of all people had a good point about how 'The Donald' can afford to lose the likes of Florida as long as he concentrates on places like Michigan and that wanker cheese state who might be receptive to his protectionist bollocks.
The other two forecasts on that page predict Hillary winning.O lawd, Trump at 57.5% likelihood of winning the election, Clinton at 42.5% according to Nate Silver's Election Forecast:
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...-forecast/#now
So that's where mert gets all his copy pasta from, I did wonder.Think you're missing out on what /r/The_Donald is
Technically it's all just 4chan talk that beta cucks such as /r/the_donald copy and then charlie cucks such as mert then find in memes on 9gag.
Bounce or not, my view remains that it's difficult to see Trump building the necessary voting 'coalition' to win.
The situation isn't helped by Hillary Clinton being utterly dislikable. However, I'm not building the Anderson Shelter just yet.
Some Sanders supporters are causing a scene, apparently:
This isn't the time to purge people who aren't true believers, lads. Stop being wankers and be pragmatic, for fuck sake.
Maybe they figure that 4 years of Trump catastrophe would be better for their agenda than 8 years of establishment Hillary?
Republicans always get a bounce at their convention and Democrats always protest theirs. Not the end days, just usual service.
More interestingly, David Duke is back after being inspired by Trump. Hopefully this brings back my favorite home state politician Edwin Edwards. Last time he ran against Duke he sold bumper stickers saying "Vote for the Crook; It's Important" because there was a bit of graft in it.
This Russian influence seems likely. There's been an ongoing attempt from Obama and chums to destabilise Putin's government in a circumspect way (see: World Cup/Olympic scandals, Panama Papers). This feels like Russia trying to get their own back (by helping an enormous fucknugget get elected)
The Guardian group had £173m odd worth of losses recently. We won't have to put up with their sanctimonious shite for much longer.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...testers-226148
That's going well, then. That they're booing, heckling and chanting for "Bernie" demonstrates why he should have chucked it well before he did - this is the consequence of dragging it out and whipping these idiots up into thinking there's some sort of REVOLUTION underway.
Are they disrupting the coronation?
So delicious.
He lost, and he lost a long time ago. Unless you're a mental, you get behind Clinton as the alternative is Trump. If you'd rather Clinton lose to prove a point, then lol at you.Are they disrupting the coronation?
These people aren't rational, otherwise they wouldn't support Bernie in the first place.
It's perfectly valid to vote for him to begin with. This is just rejecting the results of democracy when you don't like the result. See: the left, Remain voters, the SNP.
Anyone who thinks Sanders' progressive agenda will be in any way advanced by a President Trump is a delusional moron.
If the Democrats implode because their far left would rather Hitler than Blair, what even is the point of politics.
Incidentally, if it is actually true that Trump is a patsy for Putin, then it's one of the most masterful pieces of political manoeuvring to have ever been pulled off. First-class stuff.
I'm sure he's not a patsy for him, he's getting a full intelligence briefing this week and I doubt the CIA/FBI would let that happen if there was a single shred of truth to those accusations. However, that Russian intelligence might actively be working for Trump to win is another question.
Cory Booker is pretty freaking great. Should make a run in 2020 if Hillary loses or in 2024 if she wins.
He's not and it's a laughable accusation by desperate Democrats seizing on anything to distract from their corruption.
Nobody's really talking about it, though. And you have to admit that the convention thing is a bit weird. If you asked me to rank the full list of issues by how much I'd guess Donald Trump cares about them, Ukraine would rank somewhere distantly below the Antarctic Treaty. But apparently, it's the single policy issue he cares enough about to intervene with.
Couple that with some of his other statements - admiration for Putin, whole-hearted rejection of NATO, etc. - and it's got to be at least slightly disquieting. It's certainly possible that he simply sees Russia as a key ally and wants to stay in their good books, but even that's hardly encouraging. Especially at the expense of the North Atlantic.
That said, if a foreigner was to pick a Presidential candidate, they'd always default to the kind of brash, macho, hyper-patriot that everyone stereotypes America as loving.
EDIT: It's all fine though. Even if Trump does want to deep-six NATO, Boris will save the day.
Michelle's speech was incredible.
The contrast with the RNC is astonishing.
Trump as a patsy for Putin isn't credible. Trump as a Putin sympathiser and Putin therefore quietly using a little soft power to support him and undermine Clinton certainly is.
Russia fear is a bit overblown anyway - the Red Army isn't going to be marching into Warsaw even with a President Trump - but Putin would be right in assessing that Trump is a lot less likely to try to stop Russia re-establishing the Soviet sphere of influence in Russia's immediate neighbours.
You're underestimating the contempt for Hillary among Bernie's supporters then, and to suggest people just throw away their beliefs as soon as their candidate has lost is fucking bizarre. Trump is dangerous enough to force enough people to hold their nose and do so I reckon, but the arrogant contempt for voters who actually have principles is wank.
You really are a massive, boring, old-before-your-time, cunt.
I'm still really struggling to come to terms with Revolutionary Dave.
It is just baffling to me the depth of the mental illness of Clinton supporters. She openly undermined the democratic process by rigging an election, colluded with the media to distort public opinion, and is actively suppressing speech criticizing any of this. And in response to this what do you do? Fucking nothing?
How can you save this society? People have totally lost it.
DNC thought: how many of the people in that building will be on the front lines if war were to break out protection the nation's borders? Probably none, it will be those evil scum conservative white males who would be willing to sacrifice themselves to protect them.
HE IS AN ISOLATIONIST. Holy crap. He has consistently been against intervening in stable countries.Nobody's really talking about it, though. And you have to admit that the convention thing is a bit weird. If you asked me to rank the full list of issues by how much I'd guess Donald Trump cares about them, Ukraine would rank somewhere distantly below the Antarctic Treaty. But apparently, it's the single policy issue he cares enough about to intervene with.
Couple that with some of his other statements - admiration for Putin, whole-hearted rejection of NATO, etc. - and it's got to be at least slightly disquieting. It's certainly possible that he simply sees Russia as a key ally and wants to stay in their good books, but even that's hardly encouraging. Especially at the expense of the North Atlantic.
That said, if a foreigner was to pick a Presidential candidate, they'd always default to the kind of brash, macho, hyper-patriot that everyone stereotypes America as loving.
EDIT: It's all fine though. Even if Trump does want to deep-six NATO, Boris will save the day.
Ital how could you possibly take this seriously?
This. Plus Putin probably sees Trump as an ally more willing to overlook 'necessary' domestic actions to ensure stability within the government, as well as a ruthless partner in the fight against terror.
So is Dave.
Like Trump, who was first to put up his hand in a time of war.
On the other stuff, if it makes you feel better, I don't actually believe that Trump is a patsy for Putin. I do think he's very sympathetic to Putin's agenda, which is what led to his convention behaviour. That's worrying for the future of NATO though.
His convention behaviour is weird though, given that he apparently didn't care one jot about any other item on the agenda. Like, if it was just not intervening in Ukraine and a bunch of other things, then fair play, he's an isolationist. But to totally ignore anything else on the agenda, then drill in on that one issue, suggests that keeping Russia happy is at the very least one of his foremost priorities.
EDIT: Holy hell, apparently the FBI think the DNC hackers were Russian government. You'd struggle to make this up.
Good stuff, they've finally figured out Trumps own tactic and started using it. That shit works over there
Is this the same FBI that didn't recommend charges for HillaryLike Trump, who was first to put up his hand in a time of war.
On the other stuff, if it makes you feel better, I don't actually believe that Trump is a patsy for Putin. I do think he's very sympathetic to Putin's agenda, which is what led to his convention behaviour. That's worrying for the future of NATO though.
His convention behaviour is weird though, given that he apparently didn't care one jot about any other item on the agenda. Like, if it was just not intervening in Ukraine and a bunch of other things, then fair play, he's an isolationist. But to totally ignore anything else on the agenda, then drill in on that one issue, suggests that keeping Russia happy is at the very least one of his foremost priorities.
EDIT: Holy hell, apparently the FBI think the DNC hackers were Russian government. You'd struggle to make this up.?
If you truly believe that your own security forces are openly corrupt against you, then your country is already lost.
Do I think they are corrupt? Yes. Do I think the Russians probably did this. Also yes.
The Liberal political infiltration runs deep, the issue is that Conservatives are generally more averse to intervening in neutral state institutions because of quaint beliefs in ideas like objectivity, reason, morality, etc; the Left is not constrained by any such limitations. So they win every time. In a nutshell we are so so fucked, we need Trump to clear house.
http://www.behindthename.com/name/donald
It was Ordained.Given Name DONALD
GENDER: Masculine
USAGE: Scottish, English
PRONOUNCED: DAHN-əld (English) [key]
Meaning & History
From the Gaelic name Domhnall which means "ruler of the world", composed of the old Celtic elements dumno "world" and val "rule".
Sanders spent months declaring Clinton the enemy to whip his supporters up. That's fine. When it was clear he'd lost, he kept going and hammering the same points home anyway - making it inevitably far more difficult to bring the party back together. It's difficult for him to say "we need President Clinton" after constantly and repeatedly stating she was an appalling human being for several months, usually followed by thunderous applause.
It's not a case of "throwing away your beliefs". It's recognising you now have a binary choice and being pragmatic. If Sanders' supporters don't put their shoulder into it because "Hillary, lads" and Trump wins, then lol.
It's not 'arrogant contempt', by the way. It's pity.
There's no-one more zealous than a convert. See: Tobias.
Reply With Quote
