is it really possible that Donald trump could be president????? [Part 3]

[Lweji]

Continuing the thread, and in reply to the two last posts of thread 2

Today 08:15 OhYouBadBadKitten

I don't think it is about Trump taking risks, its more that he is a narcisstic sociopath. He feels untouchable in what he says and has no regard for the consequences.

Today 06:53 fourmummy

To be fair, voters know that all political rhetoric mostly comes to nothing (rhetoric = argumentation and persuasion, elevated to an art from in Ancient Greece). Why do you imagine Labour want to introduce votes for 16 year olds? They know that people don't become "more conservative" as they get older-they become wiser to the political process and its lies rhetoric. So what's different with Trump? Why hasn't his unbelievably unlikeable public and private persona sunk him?

Answer=risk

He is not a ready-rolled, ready-prepped and ready-to-go politician (think Blair's son parachuted into a constituency; MIliband brothers, Clintons). These are not risking much because they were cast in the role when they were made. We know that this is the case with, certainly, Clinton (numerous interviews with aides attest to this; ditto for the others). Voters are doing a risk assessment of his risks and have decided that he is worth something. It's not as simple as suggesting that if someone votes for him then they must be racist or sexist, as I've seen journos assert. Voters are effectively doing a risk assessment and deciding that given the enormous costs both to him (energy, health, time away from family, reputation, financial, career, historical implications, ) and to his voters (risk of being viewed as sexist, racist, intolerant, asshole), the benefits must outweigh these costs. Very unwise to dismiss ordinary voters as simplistically sexist and racists, as many, many journalists have (shortsightedly) done. Even non-experts are very good at performing cost/benefit analyses

As I said I don't see anything of what he says as taking a risk. Because he is saying what many people want to hear.
As for personal cost, he is clearly someone who enjoys the power, the limelight, the adoration. All that is missing for him is the ultimate power, particularly as he sees other true billionaires taking central stage.
But he doesn't have the heart to be Gates.
So, he's going for the highest office, and on the back of American voters most primal fears.

But...
He's not averse to risk. He's built his empire on it. He's had four bankruptcies. Anyone should be worried about the way he manages risk.

It wasn't a joke, claig. That's the trouble, I'm not sure you understand the concept of a joke.

Well, I understand the concept of Gordon Brown, if that is what you mean

No, still demonstrating your inability to understand jokes.

Here are some selected quotes by claig about Palin's thinking skills, which demonstrate that until very recently she did not agree that Palin is stupid (all these are from March ie about a month ago).

I like her, I don't think she is as dumb as is made out by the media. I doubt yoy could get as high as she got in politics by being dumb.

My guess is that Palin is cleverer than she makes out and keeps it simple, the same way Trump does, to communicate directly.

I just watched the Florida Attorney General being interviewed on Fox and I have to admit, I wasn't impressed, she didn't seem to be as bright as Sarah Palin

Elsewhere, you say she is "just like Trump" and has "unique appeal" to republicans. So are they all stupid too?

I'm sorry claig, I used to have some sympathy for you but here you have been caught bang to rights making stuff up - you know, what normal people call "lying". It is simple to go back to an earlier part of this thread to find examples of you praising Palin.

It's not credible that you suddenly believe her to be a joke. That would involve you being right about something, which would be a first.

Mistigri, you really don't understand it. I am defending Trump, so I will obviously counter criticism of him such as that Palin who supports him is thick. I personally don't believe she is thick, but she also isn't very smart, and the public perception is that she is clueless, so I play along with that stereotype for a laugh by exaggerating how clever she is and how great a creative, analytic thinker she is. It is a joke, I don't believe that she advises Trump with her creative, analytic thinking.

'I just watched the Florida Attorney General being interviewed on Fox and I have to admit, I wasn't impressed, she didn't seem to be as bright as Sarah Palin'

That was another joke you didn't get. I thought the Florida Attorney was outstandingly, stunningly bad and inept and frankly stupid, to such an extent that she was less clever than the public perfception of how clever Sarah Palin is, which is abysmal.

'It's not credible that you suddenly believe her to be a joke. '

I have really always thought she wasn't all that clever, and I in fact don't think Trump is all that clever in that sense either. But I don't think those things matter which is why i joke about them. What matters is being right, not clever.

You're making yourself look stupid: the first rule of being caught in a falsehood is to admit, and not to keep digging the hole.

This is an Internet forum; there are few clues as to whether someone is joking or not, and one of the clues that readers use is context. Here, the context is a poster who has repeatedly defended Palin's (and Carson's) intellectual and conservative qualities, and who repeatedly claims that people are joking when they plainly are not.

You are posting in bad faith and I don't know why any of us engages with you. I certainly won't be doing so in future.

' the context is a poster who has repeatedly defended Palin's (and Carson's) intellectual and conservative qualities'

I was joking. How stupid do you think I am? Ben Carson is not an intellectual giant and nor is Palin and not even Trump, although he is as close as it gets. But I like them all because they are conservative.

'You are posting in bad faith and I don't know why any of us engages with you. I certainly won't be doing so in future.'

Joking is not bad faith. Good, I am glad I won't have to put up with your accusations of bad faith and "writing drivel" and of being dead serious when I am joking.

Some questions just shouldn't be asked if the person asking doesn't want to hear the answer.
Just saying. In general...

Anyway, I realise it's old news, but I have just become aware that Trump pinatas were being sold out. It must be great fun.

And Clinton and Sanders continue to dominate the election polls in relation to GOP candidates.

Tell you what, Claig, why don't you try not joking. It clearly isn't working.

'but I have just become aware that Trump pinatas were being sold out. It must be great fun.'

Not really, it just shows the violence and hatred that is part of the left and which the media refuses to condemn. There are rightly no pinatas of Clinton and Sanders and no Republican voters act agressively towards pinatas of them.

'And Clinton and Sanders continue to dominate the election polls in relation to GOP candidates.'

It is still early days. In April, Reagan was 24 points behind Carter in the polls, but Reagan ended up winning in a landslide.

As Trump repeatedly says, he hasn't "even started on Hillary yet" and when he does, everything will change.

'why don't you try not joking'

Impossible, it is like breathing. I like having a laugh. I can't be responsible for people who don't get the jokes and think that saying that the Florida attorney was less bright than Palin is bad faith rather than a comic observation of how bad she was.

Seriously, you aren't joking. You just don't seem to understand the concept. The reality is that you use claims that you are joking as your safety net - it's what you produce every time you or your idols are caught out. If you just made the effort to post without that safety net your posts might actually carry some weight. Why not give it a try? Are you afraid to?

'Seriously, you aren't joking. You just don't seem to understand the concept. '

I realise you are very clever, but I can assure you that I am joking and do understand the concept of a joke.

'The reality is that you use claims that you are joking as your safety net'

I don't need a safety net, I am not on a highwire trapeze, I am telling it like it is, like Trump.

OK, you don't need a safety net, so don't try to joke. Can you not realise that people find it frustrating having a discussion when you keep making apparently serious points and, when their weaknesses are pointed out, instantly claim you were joking?

AugustaFinkNottle

Imagine yourself in a maze with moving walls and mirrors which is controlled by someone who really doesn't want you to leave the maze.
That's what you're up against.

I understand that you are frustrated that you can't see an obvious joke. There are no "weaknesses" in the point, because the point was a joke. It wasn't serious. Strewth! Watch some Trump rallys and get a sense of humour. Have a laugh, have a day off from the Left Wing Inquisition.

Polls, e.g. CBS April Poll make Trump the clear fav for Republican nominee, 42% / 29% Cruz / 18% Kasich which hasn't changed much .

Vs Clinton, he is still 10% behind, but his unfavourability ratings across all voters have increased 10% over the last month to 63%. Cruz would come much closer ...

AND Kasich beats her by 6%

• Only 21% of voters look on him unfavourably and there's not much time before November for the Dems to switch tack and increase that much.

The GOP convention might take a radical step and actually consider how to win in November, especially if Trump just fails to get a majority of delegates.
Clinton looks surprisingly beatable if the GOP reject their current racist / batshit / religious nutter options. Maybe not so surprising with her sleazy history. Her OH boosts her with Dem voters but he probably doubles the sleaze factor for everyone else.

Chill out to Trump joking about "Crooked Hillary"

My worry is the convention might go for Cruz, who might well be intentionally nastier in office than Trump.

Seems to be pitched at the under-10 age group, imo
However, that may well be the emotional intelligence level of many US - and UK - voters

BigChocFrenzy, Cruz can't win, but some of the desperate Republican Establishment don't care, because they fear what Tump will do to them.

But as Trump said, Cruz can't win anything, he got thrashed by Trump and even Kasich in New York. Cruz does not appeal to a large enough segment of voters. Trump has huge cross-party appeal.

As we near the end, Trump will pull cards out of the hat and Cruz will be finished. Trump has it all planned. They can't stop him now. The greatest, highest turnout election in US history is about to take place and contrary to the wishes of all the world leaders, Trump will win and then the fireworks and laughter of the people will begin.

The GOP convention might take a radical step and actually consider how to win in November, especially if Trump just fails to get a majority of delegates.

If he just only falls short then I can't see how they can avoid nominating him without destroying the party. If he falls well short, they might get away with nominating someone else - but who? Kasich is simply not going to happen, even if the polls say he might beat Clinton. He's not popular enough. And why would they give it to Cruz, who they hate nearly as much as Trump, and who has already had a clear shot at the nomination? Ryan has ruled himself out, presumably because he wants a "clean" run at the nomination in 4 or 8 years' time.

Who else is there? I think instead they will try and get Trump to clean up his act (there are signs of that happening already).

'Seems to be pitched at the under-10 age group, imo'

They want him to act "presidential" but he has not disappointed Trump fans, he has refused to "tone it down" so far. They are trying to end his appeal, but he is too smart for them.

Clinton polarises voters; she is such a hate symbol for many Republican (& Indie) voters I think the GOP might chance it - especially if Trump doesn't win the 1st delegate vote at conference - aren't most delegates then cut free ?
Trump could make their brand toxic for most voters - those running in 2016 for the Senate / Congress / Governor would be lobbying to Dump Trump. Also, anyone fancying a Presidential run in 2020.

Yes, the Republican Convention will be very interesting.

If they do switch to Cruz, they have very similar chances as with Trump, so, no benefit.
Will they get an outside candidate? While making a mockery of the whole nomination process?
Or rally behind Trump (or Cruz), mostly as a party exercise before embarking on a much needed soul searching exercise?