• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2016 |OT8| No, Donald. You don't.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nevertheless, he was picked as VP, aka 1st in line to the presidency.

Wouldn't be surprised to see the Trump campaign doing oppo research on the Khans. They're that sleazy.

If not the GOP is looking into their entire family history. If this becomes a big issue they will smear everyone in that family.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
I love how the American Gold Star Mothers page has to have an FAQ and one of the questions is debunking the claim that Hillary refused to meet with them. Conservative trash media.
 
Dude on AM Joy flipping out on the Trump tool
Yeah, was just watching that. She had some guy from "Muslims for Trump" who said Trump going after Khan's wife was alright because it was "unclear" (much to Joy's bafflement, but he wouldn't budge) whether he was actually attacking her or not and some other guy also defending his comments because "Islam does have a huge problem with women" so even though it doesn't apply in Khan's case apparently Trump was still right to bring that up as it brings attention to the suffering of women in those countries or something (of course, he then got shown down when it was pointed out that many of those same countries have actually had women leaders while we've yet to have our first, but still).

Basically, it seems the Trump campaign is really going full-steam-ahead with this with the argument that "well, they're Muslim, so it's alright that Trump says whatever the hell he wants about them." Not surprising, but still, insane.

Was definitely glad that Joy not only brought up Trump's comments about McCain but how on top of that he's the last person who should have any say whatsoever since on otp of it all he avoided the draft in Vietnam. I mean, I don't actually care about the act of dodging the draft itself since that's so whatever and Vietnam was a terrible war that we shouldn't have fought to begin with, but it's just one more reason that Trump should shut his mouth and has no place to talk on this, but yet he just can't help himself.

But yeah, I get that Trump can't let anything go--that's long established, he's an idiot who has super-thin skin and has to, just absolutely has to, be right about everything, etc. But seeing so many connected to him or those who support him doing the same thing and not being able to let this go either and dying on the same sword is just crazy and is one aspect of this I wasn't exactly expecting in this particular case, but I guess they just can't resist. At least they're open about it and it makes it easier than ever to know who's not worth giving the light of day I guess. Idk.
 

ampere

Member
I love how the American Gold Star Mothers page has to have an FAQ and one of the questions is debunking the claim that Hillary refused to meet with them. Conservative trash media.

But nobody who watches Fox News will check that out. That's the real danger with an unethical news source that idiots trust, they don't fact check it
 
Khizr Khan said this in 2015



Trump has no idea what he's gotten himself into. The judge wasn't really able to properly defend himself due to his position. The Khans have nothing at all to lose and everything to gain by fighting this fight for as long as the media will let them.

Oh Shit. I hope this never goes away.
 
I cant believe Donald Trump Jr went to Philadephia MS and told them he was in support of them keeping the confederate flag. I mean it won't get that much play because it's Trump Jr, but everyone knows what he was doing down in MS
 
Fox News weighed in yet?

Official thoughts from Fox News on the Khan situation:

-- What James Caan died? Man 2016 keeps losing. He was amazing as Sonny in the Godfather.
-- Wrath of Khan is totally my favorite Star Trek moving. Ricardo Montalbán 4 life yall.
-- Does this have something to do with cricket? Never understood that game.
 

Zereta

Member
This is getting nasty. I hope the Khans are and remain safe.

Yea they're being thrust into a battle they don't want to be fighting. I don't trust Trump supporters to not be savages and go after the Khans.

Though this fight is not gonna end well for Trump either...

I would almost say the Khans need protection.
 
Powerful. God, I just feel so terrible for the two of them, with some of the stuff that's getting thrown their way over this. They were both so brave to get up on stage and summon the courage to talk about this, and continue to do so by sticking up for themselves and not let themselves get bullied by Trump or the Trump campaign trying to diminish all that. Really hope they stay safe and don't end up getting doxed and harassed by some fuckwits on 8chan or some shit by putting themselves in the spotlight like this.
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
It's not really about "his voters" though.
I mean, we all know that his core vote is white, nativist, racist, xenophobic, protectionist morons.
If anything this helps with them.

But I think this is the sort of thing, that if he continues to do, makes him even more repugnant to moderate GOP voters. To the point where they just can't vote for him.
They may ultimately vote Hillary. They may vote for some other random. Or they may just not vote.

Any of those outcomes helps repudiate him.

Attacking the family of a soldier killed saving others? That seems like it would be something of a GOP red-line. There's a reason that FOX news basically avoided the topic altogether to begin with.

It's interesting to me though, how many times have liberal posters on this board stated how important this election is for the balance of the SCOTUS? And that the most important thing is that Donald trump loses and Hillary gets to nominate setting the court for a generation. I imagine such a voter would accept quite a bit of flaws in the candidate if the ends is so important (and indeed several have described it as holding their nose). BUT this point of view I am sure is just as prevelent among moderate GOP voters, the question becomes how much is too much?

When is it too much to pull the lever for the ideal, the court etc, because if the man? is this threshold symmetrical between the parties? Does it even exist if something as huge as the SCOTUS hangs in the balance?
 
I cant believe Donald Trump Jr went to Philadephia MS and told them he was in support of them keeping the confederate flag. I mean it won't get that much play because it's Trump Jr, but everyone knows what he was doing down in MS
What part of that? Because it's definitely not surprising to me that he or his father would defend the Confederate flag. That much is perfectly fitting since Trump is the white supremacist candidate, like, no doubt, so dog whistling like that is exactly what I would expect. Like when Maddow brought it up on Friday, the only thing that's surprising about that is why they're wasting time in Mississippi to begin with instead of focusing on places that actually matter, but if they want to waste time and money there, that's their business I guess.
 
I know Chuck Todd is a lightweight, but damn if he didn't fold in front of Manafort (who gave him every opening in the world) and yet felt like he had to needle with 4 separate question Clinton's CM on the 33,000 emails.

Also, Todd's electoral map is a weird one. Nebraska blue?
 
It's interesting to me though, how many times have liberal posters on this board stated how important this election is for the balance of the SCOTUS? And that the most important thing is that Donald trump loses and Hillary gets to nominate setting the court for a generation. I imagine such a voter would accept quite a bit of flaws in the candidate if the ends is so important (and indeed several have described it as holding their nose). BUT this point of view I am sure is just as prevelent among moderate GOP voters, the question becomes how much is too much?

When is it too much to pull the lever for the ideal, the court etc, because if the man? is this threshold symmetrical between the parties? Does it even exist if something as huge as the SCOTUS hangs in the balance?

I've thought about this as well and how much would I be willing to accept from a liberal candidate in order to get the Supreme Court back, and I guess the conclusion I came to is that I would hope that the primaries wouldn't allow someone on the same level as Trump to make it through. It's also one of the reasons I think super delegates should have some importance so I'm never forced to make that kind of decision.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Don't NBC/ABC/CBS always drop polls on Sunday morning? Surprised there's nothing. Guess they want Friday-Sunday and will drop tomorrow?

It's interesting to me though, how many times have liberal posters on this board stated how important this election is for the balance of the SCOTUS? And that the most important thing is that Donald trump loses and Hillary gets to nominate setting the court for a generation. I imagine such a voter would accept quite a bit of flaws in the candidate if the ends is so important (and indeed several have described it as holding their nose). BUT this point of view I am sure is just as prevelent among moderate GOP voters, the question becomes how much is too much?

When is it too much to pull the lever for the ideal, the court etc, because if the man? is this threshold symmetrical between the parties? Does it even exist if something as huge as the SCOTUS hangs in the balance?

Can you give me an example of policies of a liberal politician who might hold views as objectionable as the ones Trump has put forward?

Like if Romney were in Trump's position this year, it would suck, but at least we're not dealing with a piece of human trash. If there were a Democrat who believed in, I dunno, eugenics or something, I'd have to think about it. But so much about my objection to Trump is character driven rather than policy driven (though those are highly objectionable as well).
 
Don't NBC/ABC/CBS always drop polls on Sunday morning? Surprised there's nothing. Guess they want Friday-Sunday and will drop tomorrow?

CBS battleground poll dropped showing Clinton ahead 43-41 from being a point down after RNC.

Rest polls should drop tomorrow after being in field 3 days.
 
When is it too much to pull the lever for the ideal, the court etc, because if the man? is this threshold symmetrical between the parties? Does it even exist if something as huge as the SCOTUS hangs in the balance?
Some equally unqualified far left nutso should also give people pause against a "rational Republican".

I know it's not possible to be entirely objective... but Donald Trump is fundamentally unqualified.

Like if you want equivalents Jill Stein is unqualified too.

Deez Nuts is unqualified but I don't know where he is ideologically.
 
Can you give me an example of policies of a liberal politician who might hold views as objectionable as the ones Trump has put forward?

Like if Romney were in Trump's position this year, it would suck, but at least we're not dealing with a piece of human trash. If there were a Democrat who believed in, I dunno, eugenics or something, I'd have to think about it. But so much about my objection to Trump is character driven rather than policy driven (though those are highly objectionable as well).

I agree with a lot of what Jill Stein says, but her positions on GMOs, nuclear power and most specifically immunizations make it completely impossible for me to support her. So yeah, for me some Jill Stein's views are for me as objectionable. I'm a science voter. Her positions are measurably harmful and based on unscientific beliefs.
 
"Emotionally and physically -- she just couldn't even stand there, and when we left, as soon as we got off camera, she just broke down," Khan told the Post. "And the people inside, the staff, were holding her, consoling her. She was just totally emotionally spent. Only those parents that have lost their son or daughter could imagine the pain that such a memory causes."
:(
 

Tamanon

Banned
Some equally unqualified far left nutso should also give people pause against a "rational Republican".

I know it's not possible to be entirely objective... but Donald Trump is fundamentally unqualified.

Like if you want equivalents Jill Stein is unqualified too.

Deez Nuts is unqualified but I don't know where he is ideologically.

On your mom's chin. Up high, broski!
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
I've thought about this as well and how much would I be willing to accept from a liberal candidate in order to get the Supreme Court back, and I guess the conclusion I came to is that I would hope that the primaries wouldn't allow someone on the same level as Trump to make it through. It's also one of the reasons I think super delegates should have some importance so I'm never forced to make that kind of decision.
Yes, the democratic primary electorate being a coalition rather than more monolithic blocks makes it unlikely to have this possibility on the left (would never nominate a machismo chauvinist, with heavy streaks of race based nationalism).

I think this will hinge on turnout. Moderates who aren't going to vote for trump have already made that decision. Storys like the Khan family are not going to move the needle, at least for ideologically right voters who care deeply about the court.
 

Tamanon

Banned
Ironically, super delegates would likely keep the Democrats from nominating the left equivalent of Trump.

It's also good that these attacks on Trump are coming from someone other than the Clinton campaign. He usually attacks the messenger instead of the message. That's really going to burn him here.
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
Some equally unqualified far left nutso should also give people pause against a "rational Republican".

I know it's not possible to be entirely objective... but Donald Trump is fundamentally unqualified.

Like if you want equivalents Jill Stein is unqualified too.

Deez Nuts is unqualified but I don't know where he is ideologically.
Yep, the democratic coalition wouldn't let someone the particular flavor of awful into the ticket. GE voters on both sides are probably feeling like they are just playing the hand they are dealt though.
 
I agree with a lot of what Jill Stein says, but her positions on GMOs, nuclear power and most specifically immunizations make it completely impossible for me to support her. So yeah, for me some Jill Stein's views are for me as objectionable. I'm a science voter. Her positions are measurably harmful and based on unscientific beliefs.

What are her position on those?
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
I agree with a lot of what Jill Stein says, but her positions on GMOs, nuclear power and most specifically immunizations make it completely impossible for me to support her. So yeah, for me some Jill Stein's views are for me as objectionable. I'm a science voter. Her positions are measurably harmful and based on unscientific beliefs.

I agree, the views suck. But Romney was also pro life, pro huge tax breaks, pro getting rid of Obamacare, etc. Basically "wrong within normal parameters." I don't know of any equivalent view on the left like pull out of NATO, bring back waterboarding "and worse", and ban muslims. Oh and the wall of course.
 

spock

Member
Bernie couldn't win enough people over to win the Democratic primary! His support among the traditional Democratic voting blocks wasn't great. You're building up Bernie into this amazing transformative candidate when he really wasn't. You ignore that Hillary is going to do better among women and (I would argue) PoC than Bernie probably would have. While this is partially speculation, it's based on trends during the primaries.

But, no. What I'm saying is Bernie lost. He's going back to Vermont as an Independent. Whatever theoretical election may have happened is irrelevant because, again, he lost!

I could sit here and argue that Bernie would have lost in a landslide running against Rubio or Jeb! or Barbie. It has as much basis in reality and relevance as arguing over who would do better in NH. Especially when NH is like, literally, the most unimportant swing state ever this year. I can't think of a swing state that's electorally worth less, to be honest.

Apologies for the delayed reply as I went to bed, etc. It is true that whats done is done and Bernie is no longer an option...

However you seem to be missing my point on his strength as a candidate against someone like trump in contrast to hillary. Yes bernie had trouble with minorities and certain blocks of the democratic party, but do you think if he did win the nomination those groups would flip and vote trump over bernie? Bernie's strength with white voters is exactly why he would have done better against trump. It is white voters hillary is losing/lacking not traditional dem group.
 

Zereta

Member
Donald Trump Jr tweeted out something about challenging Mr Khan to criticize Trump to his face.

He has since deleted it.

Man, how stupid is this entire family?
 

pigeon

Banned
Did we talk at all about the fact that Donald Trump doesn't know Putin invaded the Ukraine?

CosmTB-W8AA5_uS.jpg
 

The Technomancer

card-carrying scientician
Apologies for the delayed reply as I went to bed, etc. It is true that whats done is done and Bernie is no longer an option...

However you seem to be missing my point on his strength as a candidate against someone like trump in contrast to hillary. Yes bernie had trouble with minorities and certain blocks of the democratic party, but do you think if he did win the nomination those groups would flip and vote trump over bernie? Bernie's strength with white voters is exactly why he would have done better against trump. It is white voters hillary is losing/lacking not traditional dem group.

Why is the same not true of Hillary now? Is the argument that a substantial number of those Bernie voters are now going to either sit out or switch over to Trump? Doesn't the same logic apply?
 
Apologies for the delayed reply as I went to bed, etc. It is true that whats done is done and Bernie is no longer an option...

However you seem to be missing my point on his strength as a candidate against someone like trump in contrast to hillary. Yes bernie had trouble with minorities and certain blocks of the democratic party, but do you think if he did win the nomination those groups would flip and vote trump over bernie? Bernie's strength with white voters is exactly why he would have done better against trump. It is white voters hillary is losing/lacking not traditional dem group.

Bernie would've been Dukakis 2.0. He would've easily been sunk on day 2 of the nomination. You think senate GOP 1st move wouldn't have been an ethics investigation on his wife's loan and allegations he used his name to get it? Then the mountains of skeletons in his closet and his terrible outreach to minorities would depress turnout. He would not win in the GE.
 

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
Apologies for the delayed reply as I went to bed, etc. It is true that whats done is done and Bernie is no longer an option...

However you seem to be missing my point on his strength as a candidate against someone like trump in contrast to hillary. Yes bernie had trouble with minorities and certain blocks of the democratic party, but do you think if he did win the nomination those groups would flip and vote trump over bernie? Bernie's strength with white voters is exactly why he would have done better against trump. It is white voters hillary is losing/lacking not traditional dem group.

Bernie Sanders got 12 million votes. You need 60 million to be President.

He did terribly with the base of the Democratic party, and even marginal performance or lowered turnout within those groups of people would wreck his chances in swing states.

Bernie is liked right now, largely because the Clinton's kid gloved him and never really went after him the way they could have. There are some questions about the ethics of loans that his family received. He has the Sarah Palin problem of having never been vetted. Who knows what shit is out there on Bernie. Being Senator from a relatively small state that is extremely homogeneous means you've never been put through the actual ringer.

How do you think he would have responded to this Law and Order stuff Trump is spouting currently? Given his strong anti-war ties and mollification of the extreme left when it comes to foreign policy he would have been rocked by Trump, where Hillary/Obama are able to justifiably come off as the most qualified on national defense.
 

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
I agree, the views suck. But Romney was also pro life, pro huge tax breaks, pro getting rid of Obamacare, etc. Basically "wrong within normal parameters." I don't know of any equivalent view on the left like pull out of NATO, bring back waterboarding "and worse", and ban muslims. Oh and the wall of course.
I guess the thrust of my comments wasn't "what is the left equivalent of this level of awful" so much as that maybe these negatives are already mostly baked in. i.e. It wouldn't surprise me if events like the Khans don't dissuade those who have already committed. Wether out of actual support, turning a blind eye, or willful ignorance.
 

ampere

Member
Some equally unqualified far left nutso should also give people pause against a "rational Republican".

I know it's not possible to be entirely objective... but Donald Trump is fundamentally unqualified.

Like if you want equivalents Jill Stein is unqualified too.

Deez Nuts is unqualified but I don't know where he is ideologically.

If we had instant runoff voting Deez Nuts would have to be my third pick.

Did we talk at all about the fact that Donald Trump doesn't know Putin invaded the Ukraine?

Too busy with twitter to follow world news that has been going on for two years
 

pigeon

Banned
This is just the first of the lies he said that George just let through.

Well, that's not really true. George pointed out he was wrong, let him keep talking, and got the whole thing on tape. That is actually what he is supposed to do. He's doing an interview! If you get into shouting matches in your interviews they stop happening.

Other people are supposed to publicize it, which is happening now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom