jerseyhoya wrote:Like I'm an amoral piece of crap when it comes to campaigning and I would have no problem whatsoever for a hypothetical GOP candidate running against Clinton lighting her up on her role in trashing the women her husband had affairs with through the years. It's just Donald is utterly and completely unable to stage this line of attack because in every conceivable way he has behaved worse than she has in this department.

OK fine he's a self absorbed baby who can't see this, and he wants to do this because he is an idiot. Is there really no one who can talk to him and explain how goddamn stupid this is? I realllllllly wish all the top campaign people hadn't signed NDAs because I would pay a large amount of money for an unvarnished look at the Trump campaign from the perspective of various people in the mix at Trump Tower.

Donald Trump is uniquely poorly positioned to make this line of attack, I agree, but I think the larger point here is that no one who has attempted to make hay by going after Clinton/the Clintons for sexual misconduct has ever gotten anywhere with it. GHWB stumbled through a bad campaign yammering on about family values and had his lungs handed to him, to the point that Bob Dole practically pretended to be besties with Bill in 96 rather than repeat that embarrassment, but then congressional Republicans learned nothing from this and spent two years going after Clinton for another affair during which time he got more popular.

How is going after a putative victim in his serial philandering - his wife - supposed to turn a losing strategy into a winning one, even if the attack was being leveled by a candidate whose personal life was beyond reproach?

mozartpc27 wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:Like I'm an amoral piece of crap when it comes to campaigning and I would have no problem whatsoever for a hypothetical GOP candidate running against Clinton lighting her up on her role in trashing the women her husband had affairs with through the years. It's just Donald is utterly and completely unable to stage this line of attack because in every conceivable way he has behaved worse than she has in this department.

OK fine he's a self absorbed baby who can't see this, and he wants to do this because he is an idiot. Is there really no one who can talk to him and explain how goddamn stupid this is? I realllllllly wish all the top campaign people hadn't signed NDAs because I would pay a large amount of money for an unvarnished look at the Trump campaign from the perspective of various people in the mix at Trump Tower.

Donald Trump is uniquely poorly positioned to make this line of attack, I agree, but I think the larger point here is that no one who has attempted to make hay by going after Clinton/the Clintons for sexual misconduct has ever gotten anywhere with it. GHWB stumbled through a bad campaign yammering on about family values and had his lungs handed to him, to the point that Bob Dole practically pretended to be besties with Bill in 96 rather than repeat that embarrassment, but then congressional Republicans learned nothing from this and spent two years going after Clinton for another affair during which time he got more popular.

How is going after a putative victim in his serial philandering - his wife - supposed to turn a losing strategy into a winning one, even if the attack was being leveled by a candidate whose personal life was beyond reproach?

Highlighting how Hillary says women who say they are raped deserve to be believed, unless they happen to be Juanita Brodderick and the rape accusation is leveled at her husband. Her willingness to level serious character attacks against the various women Bill slept with through the years, tearing them down publicly while standing by her husband, who was in the position of power. I dunno.

There are 100 better lines of attack against Hillary, even if the person delivering the lines was as innocent as could be. But there might be some effectiveness there especially with younger Bernie type voters who don't know all the old stories.

You know I just had an evil thought.

If The Donald wants to undermine Hillary's win, the move isn't, as he himself has suggested, to directly question the validity of the result by broadly accusing her of cheating in some way, or as others have suggested, by pursuing some legal challenge, or by refusing to make a concession call.

No, the move is to do almost the exact opposite: when he's lost, to make a speech congratulating Hillary, winking at the camera, and then imply - well, who are we kidding here, this is The Donald - directly state something to the effect of "I told you we could do it." In other words, appear to confirm the old, forgotten conspiracy theory that Donald is now what he always was - a Democrat - and that he was working in secret cahoots with Hillary to guarantee her path to the White House.

This accomplishes two things, from his perspective: it absolves him for "losing," because now, his loss was his all-along intended outcome (and thus preserves his ego), and it gets revenge on Hillary because this will surely set Republican conspiracy theorists through the roof searching for "proof" that Hillary and her camp knew and thus "rigged" the election.

It's a long shot that such a thing would happen, but man, that would be the devastating move from him, if he just wanted to watch the world burn in a rage of revenge for being rejected.

Quick, someone delete that post before Trump sees it.

and then, the day after that....

matt aukamp
‏@mattaukamp
One day, Donald Trump is going to look a reporter straight in the eyes on national TV and say "I never ran for President."

So true.

Fake controversy surrounding Clinton alert. She empathises with the young underemployed and their idealism. That bitch!

Seeing more trump signs around the neighborhood than I thought since its upper middle class. More Toomey than Trump though. Wonder if Hillary ran against Hitler if the deplorables would have Hitler signs on their lawn

I see a lot of undocumented, unverified accounts of Hillary cursing out plebians behind closed doors, like guys in her secret service detail the like. "Dont #$%^ing talk to me!! Don't even #$%^ing LOOK at me!" should I write this all off as fiction??

Bucky wrote:I see a lot of undocumented, unverified accounts of Hillary cursing out plebians behind closed doors, like guys in her secret service detail the like. "Dont #$%^ing talk to me!! Don't even #$%^ing LOOK at me!" should I write this all off as fiction??

yes.

Bucky wrote:I see a lot of undocumented, unverified accounts of Hillary cursing out plebians behind closed doors, like guys in her secret service detail the like. "Dont #$%^ing talk to me!! Don't even #$%^ing LOOK at me!" should I write this all off as fiction??

I heard this as well...on Alex Jones's podcast. Also, the Clintons don't tip.

Also, I've heard similar stories about Jimmy Carter of all people.

it was probably the rabbits that started that one

Alex Jones is asking if she is getting blood transfusions
He's just asking.

It's interesting/ sad to see people who I thought were just normal conservatives now posting Info Wars stuff on their timelines.

Trump is still tweeting about the debate.

He's mentally ill.

Bucky wrote:I see a lot of undocumented, unverified accounts of Hillary cursing out plebians behind closed doors, like guys in her secret service detail the like. "Dont #$%^ing talk to me!! Don't even #$%^ing LOOK at me!" should I write this all off as fiction??

depends on how degraded looking the jpeg you read it on is. if it's poor quality you can trust it - that means it's been shared a lot because of it's truthfulness.

pacino wrote:Alex Jones is asking if she is getting blood transfusions
He's just asking.

It's interesting/ sad to see people who I thought were just normal conservatives now posting Info Wars stuff on their timelines.

and going on his show. I gotta think he runs for something soon. the GOP of course will welcome him with open arms.

Youseff wrote:

Bucky wrote:I see a lot of undocumented, unverified accounts of Hillary cursing out plebians behind closed doors, like guys in her secret service detail the like. "Dont #$%^ing talk to me!! Don't even #$%^ing LOOK at me!" should I write this all off as fiction??

depends on how degraded looking the jpeg you read it on is. if it's poor quality you can trust it - that means it's been shared a lot because of it's truthfulness.

Turns out another one crossed my timeline just now. And apparently the root of it is the book Unlimited Access, by a retired FBI agent who worked in the white house during slick willy's first term. Turns out there are more than a few conspiracy theories about the tome. Maybe Alex Jones should be consulted. Seems like it boils down to a he says/she says thing at this point. Anybody have any more illuminating info???

Trump may not have paid taxes in 18 years lol

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/02/us/po ... hone-share