Lazy8 wrote: 
I'm afraid you don't get it. You can see on my FB page that I have a lot of friends who don't vote the way I do. I love and respect everyone (even hair-splitters like you). What I take issue with, and typically respond to is actions and statements. In this case, it's the refusal to acknowledge reality, i.e. how the GOP funders and leadership played a fundamental role in creating the conditions which allowed someone as obnoxious to many of the GOP's leadership as Trump to gain political ascendancy. Pointing out that Trump (or Bernie Sanders) is tapping into anger or fearfulness misses the point. Any time we have weak fundamentals (like the current slow recovery from the great recession of 2008-2009), there are going to be people who feel upset, marginalized, etc. The shrinking middle class, which has been occurring on both parties' watches, and seems to be a particularly intractable problem, is another contributor to economic anxiety for many, certainly. The existence of such angst doesn't typically compel obviously unsuitable/unacceptable candidates (rather than what Marty Cohen called "credible and at least reasonably electable representatives of their partisan traditions") to a GOP or Democratic presidential nomination. Most savvy political candidates will try to tap into such angst/unrest if they think they can use it to advantage. Trump's candidacy is anomalous, and ascribing it to common conditions (like the eagerness of the voters whose party has not been in the WH for the last 8 years to recapture it) which have not produced such anomalous candidacies in the past is wrong-headed IMO.

This is from January, and contains some good insight.

The Republican Party May Be Failing 

 aflanigan wrote: 
Proving it's not biased just means your sources are part of the Great Conspiracy.

BRB, have to go to the store for more foil. 

 meower wrote: 
How dare you cite snopes as evidence? Republicans are sure it is biased.

 rotekz wrote: 
If by "grammar" you mean "words that in no way mean anything possible," then yeah. And after that steaming shitpile of a "cartoon" you posted yesterday, and your use of the word "classy" here, again I'm wondering if English is your first language.

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
You must have been nitpicking grammar then. Classy.

 rotekz wrote: 
I know what it means. 

 ScottFromWyoming wrote: 
https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&es_th=1&ie=UTF-8#safe=off&q=trump%20runs%20the%20table

 rotekz wrote: 
Is English your first language?

The GOPe are pushing for a brokered convention to rob Trump of the nomination, handing it to Rubio even if Trump runs the table. They know the massive blow-back will likely hand HRC the presidency but are happy with that. She can be bought and will ultimately serve their grubby needs nearly as well as Rubio would. 

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/03/02/kristol-lays-strategy-give-white-house-hillary-trump-shouldnt-win/

 DaveInVA wrote: 
Well it certainly fits his mo!

 sirdroseph wrote:

 
http://www.snopes.com/1998-trump-people-quote/

 

the hoax was spot on

 sirdroseph wrote: 

Fact Check.org: Bogus Meme Targets Trump

Well I reckon the proof is in the pudding.  Seems he was spot on.

 Steely_D wrote: 
 "i've made a huge mistake"

go look in "what makes you laugh" thread.

Scott Adams analyses Trump's impromptu press conference last night.

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/140333940251/super-tuesday-master-persuader-series

Donald Trump did well in the Super Tuesday primary states, surprising no one who reads this blog. Here are my thoughts about last night, as seen through the Master Persuader filter.

Candidates who win primaries usually do a little victory speech the same night. Trump turned his brief remarks into an extended press conference that had all the optics of a sitting president. He called on reporters, took hard questions, and swatted them away like King Kong at the top of the Empire State building.

In other words, he made you think past the sale. Your rational mind knows Trump is not yet president, and yet you observe Trump looking and acting like a sitting president. When it comes to persuasion, visuals beat reason. This was one of Trump’s best 3D chess moves so far.

It was obvious that Trump was trying to showcase his moderate, non-scary side – so the public knows he has one – and by most accounts he succeeded. I thought he succeeded as well. His statements about supporting women’s health in the context of Planned Parenthood funding – against the grain of his own party – were especially powerful.

Trump’s impromptu press conference was insanely brilliant. CNN probably lost money because they couldn't take a commercial break until he was done, and he was in no hurry. It was the longest free political commercial of all time, and the best possible format for Trump. It was also riveting because you didn’t know what would happen next.

Unlike other formats – such as debates and normal press interviews – Trump completely dominated the stage and the reporters. He made them raise their hands to talk, then he interrupted when he didn't like the question, and dismissed the trouble-makers with their long, repetitive, damning questions.

Best of all, Trump got to do some disavowing of David Duke in front of the world. And this time he did it right. The first words out of his mouth this time were “I disavow.” 

That is good technique. A Master Persuader says FIRST the thing he wants you to remember. Then he explains why. If you do those things in reverse order – which is a common error – you get a hot mess. Good persuaders start with the conclusion first in this sort of situation. Bad persuaders give the reasoning first and work toward the conclusion.

Regular readers of this blog know that laughter can be a tell for persuasion. As I watched Trump’s press conference, I found myself giggling without an obvious cause. I’ll bet some of you did the same.

Chris Christie did his best impression of Trump’s future vice president, but he seemed physically uncomfortable on stage when Trump was speaking. I think he was either exhausted or not feeling well. The Internet was not kind to him.

By now you know there is a rumor that the New York Times has a recording of Trump acting reasonable about his deportation plans. When asked about it at his “press conference,” Trump said he was not contemplating any compromise “at this time.”

In other words, Trump said he would not compromise, but he did so in language that assures you it is an option for later. Everyone gets to hear what they want. That’s strategic ambiguity.

Trump’s Super Tuesday dominance gives him a solid lead. But his impromptu press conference was Trump showing us what his afterburners will look like when he fires them up for the general election. 

You haven’t seen anything yet.

You might wonder what it’s like to be me, and to see the future so clearly in this particular case. The answer is that this is my normal, so yesterday just seemed like Tuesday to me. When you learn enough about the science of persuasion, the mysteries of life start to fall away. A good start on that journey is my Persuasion Reading List.

 steeler wrote: 
The media, it is part of the problem.

I see a Mad Max only if we continue the present course.  I still believe that it is preventable, but this election is the last chance to avoid it, especially given conditions throughout the world.

Besides my personal thoughts of which I have shared, I believe that polling over the past 4 or 5 years has consistently shown that between 60% to 70% of Americans believe that our country is going in the wrong direction.  That is, the powers that be, Obama and the establishment in Congress (and I mean on both sides in both Houses) are ruling / governing against the will of the people.  

I have to trust that this major majority of Americans who believe that things are headed in the wrong direction will stand up and stop this insanity.  The insanity of electing the same people over and over again and expecting something different.

I firmly believe that with Trump, we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.  I have dug hard and deep into Trump, I'm listening to my head and my gut.  My heart (emotions) have nothing to do with my decision.  I took the test that Yibbyl linked to and came out 86% with Cruz and 80% with Trump.  Be a cold day in hell before I would vote for Cruz.  Besides the things that I disagree with Cruz are total deal breakers.  Trump, not so much.  And based upon what I saw Cruz say in his wrap up speech tonight about Trump and previous behavour earlier on against Carson and Rubio, he is one mother fing lying sack of shit.

Not trying to change anyone's mind about this,cuz I recognize that everyone here is well informed and has already made their choices.  Just clearing my head out is all.

  

 Lazy8 wrote: 
Oh you were clear. Democracy is in itself a lesser of evils. But I do think voting for Hill is a vote for status quo and that anti-government rhetoric is a greater danger at this point in history.

Besides, I always try to take the opportunity to yank someone's chain.  

 Beaker wrote: 
Don't even begin to presume to go there with me. Nope. We're done here.

 Beaker wrote: 
When do we get permission to vote for the person we want to be President?