Donald John Trump: 2016 President-Elect

[Darian]

6 minutes ago, Kromm said:

Seems like he either didn't know, didn't understand, or didn't CARE about the actual purpose of the dinner.

He even said at the beginning that he knew he was supposed to make a self-deprecating joke. He just...didn't. He went so ugly and completely against the tone of the dinner. Everyone else always manages to laugh at themselves, get a few pointed but jokey jabs in. Trump can't. He's unfit. 

[maraleia]

40 minutes ago, millennium said:

As a practicing Catholic, I find it disgusting that either Drumpf or Clinton was invited to sit beside the Cardinal.

Drumpf's a lying, racist, misogynist satyr and Clinton advocates abortion.  

I normally keep my personal religious views in check when discussing politics, but this time they are at a Catholic function, and I find their presence as guests of honor wrong in so many ways.

This is a tradition in election years to have both candidates sit on either side of the NYC Cardinal and every Democratic candidate for at least 30 years has been pro-choice in one way or another. It's all about raising money and doing a roast in a good-natured way nothing more, nothing less.

Also, many Catholics are pro-choice especially in the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Europe.

Edited October 21, 2016 by maraleia

[Guest]

37 minutes ago, millennium said:

As a practicing Catholic, I find it disgusting that either Trump or Clinton was invited to sit beside the Cardinal.

Trump's a lying, racist, misogynist satyr and Clinton advocates abortion.  

I normally keep my personal religious views in check when discussing politics, but this time they are at a Catholic function, and I find their presence as guests of honor wrong in so many ways.

I think that's a valid complaint based on Catholic doctrine. I had to look up the Al Smith dinner to see what it was all about and Wikipedia mentioned this:

In 1996 and 2004, the Archdiocese of New York chose not to invite the presidential candidates. In 1996, this was reportedly because Cardinal John Joseph O'Connorwas angry at Democratic nominee Bill Clinton for vetoing a bill outlawing some late-term abortions. The organizers' explanation was that the candidates had been unable to commit to attending the dinner. The vice-presidential candidates spoke instead. In 2004, Archdiocese spokesman Joseph Zwilling explained that the candidates were not invited because "the issues in this year's campaign could provoke division and disagreement,"but some speculated that the decision was due to Democratic nominee (and Roman Catholic) John Kerry's pro-choice stance on abortion.

So, it's not without precedent that candidates aren't invited/don't participate due to conflicts of ideology. That being said, most all Democratic candidates are always pro-choice so that any one of them gets to sit there is kind of baffling to me.   

[Moose135]

30 minutes ago, biakbiak said:

There are a few reports he wrote the speech himself.

Watching some of the replay on Lawrence O'Donnell's show, and it looked like it was the first time he was seeing it as he read it off the card.

[Rapunzel]

I just read on Time that Trump walked out on an interview with an Ohio journalist early when the reported asked him how he felt about being labeled a racist and a sexist. Apparently, he said he was the "least racist person you've ever met" and then just walked out. Good job controlling that great Presidential temperament Donald.

The man just keeps getting worse and worse and now his monstrous sons are joining in. Wonder if their Coke supply is running low on the road and they are starting to feel the withdrawal.

Edited October 21, 2016 by Rapunzel
typos

[biakbiak]

CBS is reporting that Jim Murphey has quit the campaign, after Politico reported he was "stepping back"." So if anyone wants to head a GOTV plan 19 before the election there is an opening!

[partofme]

1 hour ago, millennium said:

As a practicing Catholic, I find it disgusting that either Trump or Clinton was invited to sit beside the Cardinal.

Trump's a lying, racist, misogynist satyr and Clinton advocates abortion.  

I normally keep my personal religious views in check when discussing politics, but this time they are at a Catholic function, and I find their presence as guests of honor wrong in so many ways.

I'm a practicing Catholic and this doesn't bother me in the least(well Trump bothers me as a human).    I'm a practicing Catholic who is pro choice and agree completely with Hillary's position on abortion.

[millennium]

1 hour ago, Giant Misfit said:

I think that's a valid complaint based on Catholic doctrine. I had to look up the Al Smith dinner to see what it was all about and Wikipedia mentioned this:

 

 

So, it's not without precedent that candidates aren't invited/don't participate due to conflicts of ideology. That being said, most all Democratic candidates are always pro-choice so that any one of them gets to sit there is kind of baffling to me.   

Right.  I get that they represent the people and not their personal beliefs, so I have no problems with the viewpoints they advocate as public officials.    And I don't blame them for attending an event to which they were invited.   My quarrel is with the diocese.   Every Sunday without fail we are exhorted in church to pray for pro-life legislation, pro-life candidates, etc. (they can't be endorsed or promoted by name or else the church risks losing its tax-exempt status)   Confirmation candidates are encouraged to participate in anti-abortion prayer demonstrations as part of their service requirement ...   What I'm trying to say is, it's a BIG deal.   So for church officials to rub elbows and yuk it up alongside someone who champions abortion rights (Clinton) and the other guy, who by many reports sexually assaults women, seems grossly hypocritical.  Furthermore, a few Sundays ago we were treated to a long sermon about our duty to welcome Iraqi and Syrian refugees into our community ... and tonight there's the would-be Gatekeeper-in-Chief, fresh off his Trojan Horse tour, cozying up to the cardinal.

[Kromm]

Here's the Al Smith thing. He's actually very funny... at first.  It goes off the rails right around 12:30 (click to go jump to a version of the video starting right there), where the word "corrupt" enters into his "jokes".  Everything after ceases to be a joke and is just an attack. They get meaner and meaner and meaner after that.

Edited October 21, 2016 by Kromm

[backformore]

3 hours ago, millennium said:

Trump's a lying, racist, misogynist satyr and Clinton advocates abortion.  

To be fair, Clinton doesn't actually advocate abortion, that makes it sound like she recommends terminating pregnancies.    Nobody is in favor of abortion.   She does advocate for the choice to be made by an individual woman, with her doctor, in a legal and safe manner.  

I'm too old now, but I can envision a number of scenarios where I could have had an unplanned, unwanted pregnancy.  While I don't think I would ever have chosen to have an abortion, I firmly believe that it would be my right to carefully weigh my options and come to a decision on the matter. 

[millennium]

23 minutes ago, Kromm said:

Here's the Al Smith thing. He's actually very funny... at first.  It goes off the rails right around 12:30 (click to go jump to a version of the video starting right there), where the word "corrupt" enters into his "jokes".  Everything after ceases to be a joke and is just an attack. They get meaner and meaner and meaner after that.

 

 

Maria Bartoromo looks fantastic.

I think Hillary whispered to the Cardinal: "Get the hook."

[millennium]

3 minutes ago, backformore said:

To be fair, Clinton doesn't actually advocate abortion, that makes it sound like she recommends terminating pregnancies.    Nobody is in favor of abortion.   She does advocate for the choice to be made by an individual woman, with her doctor, in a legal and safe manner. 

I think you stated it better than I did.

[InsertWordHere]

Wow, I thought people were exaggerating about how awful Trump was at the dinner. I really should have known not to underestimate him. Also, this is shallow, but he is one of the few men I've ever seen who looks worse in a tuxedo than he does in normal attire. I'd feel guilty about the shallowness if it weren't for the fact that he's probably said something shallow about every woman he's ever met. 

[maraleia]

1 hour ago, millennium said:

Right.  I get that they represent the people and not their personal beliefs, so I have no problems with the viewpoints they advocate as public officials.    And I don't blame them for attending an event to which they were invited.   My quarrel is with the diocese.   Every Sunday without fail we are exhorted in church to pray for pro-life legislation, pro-life candidates, etc. (they can't be endorsed or promoted by name or else the church risks losing its tax-exempt status)   Confirmation candidates are encouraged to participate in anti-abortion prayer demonstrations as part of their service requirement ...   What I'm trying to say is, it's a BIG deal.   So for church officials to rub elbows and yuk it up alongside someone who champions abortion rights (Clinton) and the other guy, who by many reports sexually assaults women, seems grossly hypocritical.  Furthermore, a few Sundays ago we were treated to a long sermon about our duty to welcome Iraqi and Syrian refugees into our community ... and tonight there's the would-be Gatekeeper-in-Chief, fresh off his Trojan Horse tour, cozying up to the cardinal.

You must go to a really conservative church because when I was younger our sermons were never political and we weren't required to do anything like what you describe to get confirmed. Not all Catholic churches are the same. Look at St. Monica in Santa Monica, CA. They are really liberal.

[millennium]

14 minutes ago, maraleia said:

You must go to a really conservative church because when I was younger our sermons were never political and we weren't required to do anything like what you describe to get confirmed. Not all Catholic churches are the same. Look at St. Monica in Santa Monica, CA. They are really liberal.

It was different when I was younger too.   Guitar masses were the new thing.   It was a more innocent (or ignorant, depending on one's point of view) time.  

Edited October 21, 2016 by millennium

[33kaitykaity]

On 10/19/2016 at 4:42 PM, Kromm said:

Bush was a bit dim, but he wasn't particularly egotistical or thin-skinned. And he had his actually Daddy (George H.), and his virtual Daddy (Dick Cheney) looking over his shoulder. He'd listen to people, and he was in the end a party loyalist, even if a schmuck. There's no sign he was especially selfish, nor that in the context of his belief system particularly cruel (Cheney took care of "cruel"). He did the country and the world a good deal of damage, but it was for more complicated reasons than him simply being a bad man. He probably wasn't and isn't. He was just an idiot.

Have you seen this?  Michelle Obama adores GWB.

 

I trust Michelle's judgement.  And judging from Dubya's post-presidential life, he would have been happiest if he had had enough talent and freedom to make his own way when he was young as an artist. a painter.  

It's really weird for me b/c I've hated him for 16 years...

Edited October 21, 2016 by 33kaitykaity

[backformore]

59 minutes ago, millennium said:

I think you stated it better than I did.

I respect your religious beliefs.  I bet I have more years of catholic school education than almost anyone you know.  But I stepped away when I found out the truth about a priest in our parish, and how he was enabled  by the church leaders to commit atrocious crimes.

11 minutes ago, millennium said:

It was different when I was younger too.   Guitar masses were the new thing.   It was a more innocent time.  

I remember the guitar masses when they were new and somewhat controversial.  Things weren't all that innocent though, they just seemed like it.

I don't mean to offend, I respect what the church is doing with the Al Smith dinner, and the good works the church does.  My relationship with the church I grew up in is broken beyond repair, and sometimes I miss it.

[backformore]

to get back on topic - WEIRD AL!!

[millennium]

42 minutes ago, backformore said:

I bet I have more years of catholic school education than almost anyone you know.  But I stepped away when I found out the truth about a priest in our parish, and how he was enabled  by the church leaders to commit atrocious crimes.

 

I got the full ride: 16 years, grade school through college.

If nothing else, my Catholic school education made me aware of false prophets and the dangers they pose -- case in point, the subject of this thread.

Edited October 21, 2016 by millennium

[film noire]

Quote

Bush was a bit dim, but he wasn't particularly egotistical or thin-skinned. And he had his actually Daddy (George H.), and his virtual Daddy (Dick Cheney) looking over his shoulder. He'd listen to people, and he was in the end a party loyalist, even if a schmuck. There's no sign he was especially selfish, nor that in the context of his belief system particularly cruel (Cheney took care of "cruel"). He did the country and the world a good deal of damage, but it was for more complicated reasons than him simply being a bad man. He probably wasn't and isn't. He was just an idiot.

Trump would clearly be worse than Dubya, but still -- Dubya was toxic and mean as hell when crossed. He loved his attack dog Rove, and applauded every dirty trick Uncle Karl used to get him to the White House. The "Aw shucks dumb dumb" bullshit was a front to keep his hands clean, but it was a front, as the  (brilliant) Ann Richards found out, publicly regretting having underestimated him & losing the gubernatorial race in the process. And any president who says "This is the guy who tried to kill my Dad" as partial justification to take down a dictator/plunge a whole region into chaos,  is driven by a very damaged and hungry ego, imo. Any president who lands on a warship in a flight suit in front of a sign bragging ""Mission Accomplished" is egotistical. Any president who behaves as he did while New Orleans and her people drowned,  is callous and cruel.  

Quote

Dubya didn't want to hurt people, his Presidency just DID.

I'm not sure any of us can know  if Dubya wanted to hurt people or not, but he was known for demanding loyalty to himself over party, and holding grudges/exacting revenge:

"Among those who have encountered Bush's hard-nosed approach are Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.)--who contested Bush for the GOP presidential nomination in 2000 and who on many issues remains a thorn in his side--and those who worked in McCain's campaign.The Bush White House "went out of its way to make sure McCain people had a hard time finding work in the administration or elsewhere in Republican politics," said a senior GOP congressional staffer. McCain eventually brought up the matter privately with Bush but to no avail. McCain was subjected to a high-profile White House snub after the passage this year of the campaign finance reform bill he long had championed."

"Some who have crossed Bush over the years believe that he not only can nurse grudges, but also deliver paybacks....In the mid-1980s, as his father--then vice president under Ronald Reagan--was contemplating a presidential bid, the younger Bush confronted the late Lee Atwater, a flamboyant, take-no-prisoners Republican strategist. Bush told him that he intended to monitor Atwater's commitment and loyalty to his father. In late 1987, after Newsweek published a negative cover story on his father, titled "Fighting the Wimp Factor," Bush told a senior magazine staffer: "Newsweek's been cut off. You're out of business." 

"Many longtime Bush watchers believe that Bush in 1994 challenged incumbent Texas Gov. Ann Richards, a Democrat, in large part because of her oft-quoted quip in a speech at the 1988 National Democratic Convention that his father had been "born with a silver foot in his mouth."

And more at:

http://articles.latimes.com/2002/oct/03/nation/na-grudge3

The real danger with Trump, imo,  is not that he is so outside the bounds -- if he were, he wouldn't have gotten this far -- but that he is the logical heir to what the Republican Party have been promising the most extreme part of their base for decades; to deliver unto them a gun-toting, god-fearing, xenophobic, woman-hating hero. And when the Republican leadership looked away, the conservative base saw their hero finally arrive.  He had a New York City accent and wore an expensive suit, but still; here he finally was! The Repubs can pretend Trump has nothing to do with them, but they own him, fair and square. Trump was made in America, built by Republican rhetoric. Willie Horton finally came home to roost.

Edited October 21, 2016 by film noire

[MulletorHater]

8 hours ago, Kromm said:

Here's the Al Smith thing. He's actually very funny... at first.  It goes off the rails right around 12:30 (click to go jump to a version of the video starting right there), where the word "corrupt" enters into his "jokes".  Everything after ceases to be a joke and is just an attack. They get meaner and meaner and meaner after that.

 

He's that child with the parents who know deep down inside that they can't take his ass anywhere.  Not to school; not to a party; not to someone's home; not even to church or a venue where one is expected to be on his best behavior.  Sure, there are several stern warnings beforehand, "Pleeeeze don't embarrass us!"  They always have to pray and cross their fingers and hope for the best because they can never trust that he will always behave.  

When they reach their destination, it may start out well.  The child is charming, engaging--funny even.  Unfortunately, because he was never properly disciplined the first time he misbehaved, the "bad seed" eventually shows up.   The parents wring their hands and act embarrassed until they become so desensitized to it that it doesn't phase them anymore.  Their friends, family and acquaintances are sympathetic at first, but there comes a time when they want nothing to do with them or their bad seed except on a superficial level.  The parents try everything including sending their demon child to military school but nothing works because the pattern has already been set.  He screws up, and they rush in to rescue him instead of allowing him to face the consequences for his own shitty behavior.

Fast forward several decades later and we have a 70-year-old narcissistic man-child with poor impulse control and with no boundaries whatsoever.  

[madmaverick]

Quote

83%

The number of Donald Trump supporters who believe if Hillary Clinton wins the election it is likely to have been the result of voter fraud, according to an Economist/YouGov poll.

That's crazy.

[Landsnark]

2 minutes ago, madmaverick said:

Quote

83%

The number of Donald Trump supporters who believe if Hillary Clinton wins the election it is likely to have been the result of voter fraud, according to an Economist/YouGov poll.

That's crazy.

I suppose we need to know how to define what a "Donald Trump supporter" is.  A wingnut fanatic, or rank and file Republican moderates?  I'd say roughly 15% of the electorate are true believing whack job Trumpers.

[random chance]

11 hours ago, Giant Misfit said:

So, it's not without precedent that candidates aren't invited/don't participate due to conflicts of ideology. That being said, most all Democratic candidates are always pro-choice so that any one of them gets to sit there is kind of baffling to me.   

Yeah that is very weird - why some and not others?

9 hours ago, millennium said:

My quarrel is with the diocese.   Every Sunday without fail we are exhorted in church to pray for pro-life legislation, pro-life candidates, etc.[...] So for church officials to rub elbows and yuk it up alongside someone who champions abortion rights (Clinton) and the other guy, who by many reports sexually assaults women, seems grossly hypocritical. 

That does seem pretty hypocritical, I can see why it makes you angry.

7 hours ago, millennium said:

It was different when I was younger too.   Guitar masses were the new thing.   It was a more innocent (or ignorant, depending on one's point of view) time.  

Haha! Guitar masses, awww that brings back memories.

[partofme]

9 hours ago, millennium said:

Right.  I get that they represent the people and not their personal beliefs, so I have no problems with the viewpoints they advocate as public officials.    And I don't blame them for attending an event to which they were invited.   My quarrel is with the diocese.   Every Sunday without fail we are exhorted in church to pray for pro-life legislation, pro-life candidates, etc. (they can't be endorsed or promoted by name or else the church risks losing its tax-exempt status)   Confirmation candidates are encouraged to participate in anti-abortion prayer demonstrations as part of their service requirement ...   

I don't know if I just live in a more liberal part of the country but I've never been to a Catholic church that asks us to pray for this.  Catholic churches I go to ask us to pray for the poor and the less fortunate.   I firmly believe that on the whole the Democratic party is more in line with Catholic beliefs than the Republican party.

[Kromm]

7 hours ago, backformore said:

to get back on topic - WEIRD AL!!

I kind of hate the sound of these Songify things. Always have, but over time I hate it even more. I hate normal autotune, so over the top autotune for humor isn't really much better to me.

But adding Weird Al actually singing WITH it makes it much better.

Also, while the sound of the damn Songify things irritates me now, I do admit that most of the skill is finding and editing the clips so that it forms rhymes. That's very well done here.

Plus "UHF News". Loved that one bit, the fake credit.

 

------------------------------

re: the 83% thing...

18 minutes ago, Landsnark said:

I suppose we need to know how to define what a "Donald Trump supporter" is.  A wingnut fanatic, or rank and file Republican moderates?  I'd say roughly 15% of the electorate are true believing whack job Trumpers.

Exactly. How was that polled? Among who and with what margins of accuracy/error?

Edited October 21, 2016 by Kromm

[madmaverick]

20 minutes ago, Landsnark said:

I suppose we need to know how to define what a "Donald Trump supporter" is.  A wingnut fanatic, or rank and file Republican moderates?  I'd say roughly 15% of the electorate are true believing whack job Trumpers.

The figure was quoted by the BBC and they linked to the poll.  Makes for fascinating reading when you have the time and I welcome analysis from any experts here.  I can't give it more than a cursory glance right now but it looks like a very thorough poll.  I think the figure came from p.144.  Even if you look at the whole figures, the % of people who believe there's likely voter fraud is still higher than I would have expected.  So many don't trust the system? I don't know if the percentages would have been the same before Trump did his whole 'rigged' campaign, or jumped after.

Edited October 21, 2016 by madmaverick

[NewDigs]

21 minutes ago, madmaverick said:

The figure was quoted by the BBC and they linked to the poll.  Makes for fascinating reading when you have the time and I welcome analysis from any experts here.  I can't give it more than a cursory glance right now but it looks like a very thorough poll.  I think the figure came from p.144.  Even if you look at the whole figures, the % of people who believe there's likely voter fraud is still higher than I would have expected.  So many don't trust the system? I don't know if the percentages would have been the same before Trump did his whole 'rigged' campaign, or jumped after.

Took reply to Many Methods of Voting thread.

[Princess Sparkle]

9 hours ago, Kromm said:

Here's the Al Smith thing. He's actually very funny... at first.  It goes off the rails right around 12:30 (click to go jump to a version of the video starting right there), where the word "corrupt" enters into his "jokes".  Everything after ceases to be a joke and is just an attack. They get meaner and meaner and meaner after that.

 

He just can't help himself.  In the beginning, you can see those flashes of why David Letterman and Howard Stern liked having him as a guest for so many years - when he's not spewing hateful bullshit, he can be charming.  But it's like once he got those laughs, he couldn't help himself just going way too far.  

My favorite person is the guy on the right side of the screen (so, the one over Trump's left shoulder).  The look on his face when Trump starts talking about how Hillary was fired from the Watergate committee was hilarious.  His eye got as big as saucers and had a look of "Shit, why did I get the seat where I'm on camera the whole time?"

[candall]

Melania's language skills:

Clearly she shows up and says what she's been told to say, but it may have been years since she's had much chance to practice her English.

What is this woman's life like?  I can't picture Donald listening to his wife go on about her day during dinner, or ever soliciting her opinion on anything except whether he's amazing.  Pretty sure the older Trump kids don't condescend to hang with Melania.  (Her son, Barron, is fluent in Slovene.)  Are there paparazzi photos of Mrs. Trump going to a Hamilton matinee with her besties?

Her English was no doubt better when she married Trump and has become rusty--she probably talks on her cell to old friends in Slovenia more than anyone else in her life.  Must be lonely.

 

On ‎10‎/‎20‎/‎2016 at 11:36 AM, Frost said:

As awful as this election cycle has been (and may continue to be depending on the reaction of these people when Donald loses) it will be fascinating to look back on it in a decade or so. 

This is so funny!  I can just see all of us in 20 years:  You have NO IDEA!  He was this big bully-buffoon who said ridiculous things and told outrageous lies every time he opened his mouth and she was a highly qualified candidate with a lifetime of public service.  No one will believe us.  Oh, come on, the race was so tight, obviously you're leaving out some huge part of the story, like, the rational explanation.

 

21 hours ago, Padma said:

I -did- like Chris Wallace's curve ball at the end, "Give us a closing statement."

I thought it was a bit of an underhanded trick, but I wouldn't have minded so much if Trump had been forced to go first.  Did you see him jot down some notes while Hillary was speaking?  It would have been an amusing finale to the debate if he'd been backed into such a tight spot he could only bluster out:  "Emails!  Crooked Hillary!  I have the largest hands in the world--it's true!"

But I guess if he'd had to go first, he'd be talking about how the debate was rigged so Clinton would have time to formulate a closing statement.

 

15 hours ago, BuckeyeLou said:

I thought Hillary looked fabulous last night (I'm close to her age), her hair was shiny and styled great, her make-up gave her a glowy look and the white pantsuit was more flattering than some others she has worn.  She didnt sweat(Like Trump), she looked confident and self-assured.

Shallow of me, but I couldn't stop thinking that this was the best she's looked since the beginning.  She was beautiful! 

(I decided everyone else lights for max visibility, but Vegas technicians use lights that compliment and flatter.)

 

13 hours ago, millennium said:

Right.  I get that they represent the people and not their personal beliefs, so I have no problems with the viewpoints they advocate as public officials.    And I don't blame them for attending an event to which they were invited.   My quarrel is with the diocese.   Every Sunday without fail we are exhorted in church to pray for pro-life legislation, pro-life candidates, etc. (they can't be endorsed or promoted by name or else the church risks losing its tax-exempt status)   Confirmation candidates are encouraged to participate in anti-abortion prayer demonstrations as part of their service requirement ...   What I'm trying to say is, it's a BIG deal.   So for church officials to rub elbows and yuk it up alongside someone who champions abortion rights (Clinton) and the other guy, who by many reports sexually assaults women, seems grossly hypocritical.  

I totally get where you're coming from, but it's a charity fundraiser for needy children of New York.  There's an argument in there somewhere that the kids will eat better with the bigot and the pro-lifer speaking than, say, Cardinal Dolan himself, eh? 

Thousands of years of religious conflict over principle versus people . . . well, the Political Forum is very popular, maybe they'll give us a Religion Forum and we can get that figured out.  : )

Edited October 21, 2016 by candall
avoid replying to seven posts until the quote function is fully repaired!

[Kromm]

14 minutes ago, candall said:

Melania:

Clearly she shows up and says what she's been told to say, but it may have been years since she's had much chance to practice her English.

What is this woman's life like?  I can't picture Donald listening to his wife go on about her day during dinner, or ever soliciting her opinion on anything except whether he's amazing.  Pretty sure the older Trump kids don't condescend to hang with Melania.  (Her son, Barron, is fluent in Slovene.)  Are there paparazzi photos of Mrs. Trump going to a Hamilton matinee with her besties?

Her English was no doubt better when she married Trump and has become rusty--she probably talks on her cell to old friends in Slovenia more than anyone else in her life.  Must be lonely.

Have you heard the story (from no less a person than Ivanka Trump herself, in a book she wrote a few years ago) about how "much" patience Donald has for his wives? The WSJ had this about it:

Quote

‘The message I got at home was to take extra-special care with other people’s time,” daughter Ivanka Trump writes in “The Trump Card: Playing to Win in Work and Life” (2009). Once, she and Mr. Trump were in his private plane in Palm Beach, waiting for Marla Maples,his second wife and former mistress. Ms. Maples pulled up on the tarmac unfashionably late, “all frantic and frazzled and running just a bit behind. I tapped my father on the shoulder and told him to look out the window, but when he saw Marla all he did was throw up his hands. He didn’t tell the pilot to stop, and we took off anyway.”

[maraleia]

Last night's so-called performance by Orange Hitler proved that he has no spiritual center and has, as we all know, been lying to the far right Christian religious community about being religious since he announced last summer.

[qtpye]

22 hours ago, madmaverick said:

I think there's definitely a sizable portion of his supporters who are more about the emotions (anger, frustration, prejudice, disenfranchisement etc.) he gives voice to and amplifies on their behalf, and aren't too concerned with how his plans will work in reality or his lack of knowledge, competency etc.  (I see the rise of Palin last time around in the same way. It was more about what she represented on some level rather than the hollow substance underneath.)  That explains his Teflon like resistance among his base no matter what inexcusable thing he says or does.  Could also be his base actually subscribes to whatever inexcusable thing he says or does, so there's that. ;)  Unfortunately, the racist, misogynist talk does have an audience.  Ugh, still trying to get that image of that women wearing a tshirt inviting Trump to grab her pussy out of my mind.  And the men who told cameras that plenty of women wanted Trump to grab theirs.

Agreed.  I would venture that one reason he appeals to white males who feel stripped of power in today's more gender equal and globalized society is that Trump has all those alpha male things that they want but can't get anymore.  Riches, women, power, power over women and immigrants. ;)

There has been a narrative that some white males buy into that the country belonged to them.  It is true in the fact that they had white privilege, but richer white males gave two shits about the "little guy".  Please I know many white males that are kind and good people, but this only pertains to the ones who support Trump wholeheartedly.

They do not blame their poor quality of life on their own bad decisions, but on everyone else keeping them down because of their awesomeness (sort of like the way Trump has no accountability for anything).

These people know that Trump is not qualified, but do not care.  They rather burn the nation down then let go of their ego and entitlement.  This is what scares me.

[needschocolate]

I saw a Trump surrogate on one of the news channels this morning talking about Trump not agreeing to accept the results.  The interviewer said that Ivanka and Kellyanne were both interviewed Wednesday morning and said that he would accept the results of the election, then, that evening, Trump refused to say he would accept the results.  The surrogate said that one of Donald Trumps "attributes" is that he hasn't been in politics for 30 years and he isn't as articulate or polished.  

This is similar to what other Trump surrogates have said, but it got me thinking about a few things. First, the surrogate said that it was a Donald Trump "attribute" but he didn't say it was a positive or desirable attribute.  

Second, as others have mentioned, the president needs to be articulate. A president who is not well spoken, who is not able to get their real message across, could be dangerous.  Trump won't suddenly become articulate and polished if he becomes president.  What is their plan if he wins? - Trump meets with other world leaders, then after he leaves the room, Kellyanne comes in and explains to the world leader what Trump really meant?  "I know, Ms. Merkel, that he said he was going aim all our nuclear weapons at the Berlin and that if you don't agree to this trade agreement, he would put in the code, but he really meant that he looks forward to increasing commerce between our two great nations."

They can't keep claiming that Trump isn't articulate because he hasn't spent decades in politics - at some point it becomes a sign that he is stupid and/or lacks common sense. Trump has been campaigning for more than a year but he hasn't figured out that he shouldn't say certain things?   He and his surrogates complain that the media focuses on the wrong things, but, after all this time, shouldn't Trump have a clue that, if he wants them to report on his 5 point plan for whatever, he shouldn't say inflammatory things? Is that really what some are want in a president?  

For the record, although I think he isn't too bright and does lack common sense, I am sure Trump knows exactly what sort of comments get that attention.  He has been finding ways to draw attention to himself for decades

[doodlebug]

15 hours ago, millennium said:

As a practicing Catholic, I find it disgusting that either Trump or Clinton was invited to sit beside the Cardinal.

Trump's a lying, racist, misogynist satyr and Clinton advocates abortion.  

14 hours ago, partofme said:

 

I'm a practicing Catholic, too, but disagree that HRC 'advocates' abortion.  She advocates for the right to privacy for a woman to choose.  She advocates for the availability of safe pregnancy termination.  Abortion used to be illegal in this country, it didn't stop women from having them.  If we make it illegal again, it won't eradicate abortion, it will eradicate SAFE abortions.  Just as I believe adultery is immoral, I don't believe we need to legislate against it. 

Edited October 21, 2016 by doodlebug

[mythoughtis]

Please no one take this comment as rude - I like that the Cardinal sat with both of them. It reflected ( to me) the acknowledgement that Jesus dined with sinners, and the unwanted, in his own time.

[Kitty Redstone]

2 hours ago, madmaverick said:

The figure was quoted by the BBC and they linked to the poll.  Makes for fascinating reading when you have the time and I welcome analysis from any experts here.  I can't give it more than a cursory glance right now but it looks like a very thorough poll.  I think the figure came from p.144.  Even if you look at the whole figures, the % of people who believe there's likely voter fraud is still higher than I would have expected.  So many don't trust the system? I don't know if the percentages would have been the same before Trump did his whole 'rigged' campaign, or jumped after.

I'm not finding the 83% figure but am going to read through it again.  It looks like the poll was limited to primary voters.

[MulletorHater]

50 minutes ago, maraleia said:

Last night's so-called performance by Orange Hitler proved that he has no spiritual center and has, as we all know, been lying to the far right Christian religious community about being religious since he announced last summer.

Well, according to some of them, Drumpf is a "baby Christian," and the vessel through whom the End Times will be achieved.  Of course, it suits their agenda that they can see President Obama and other Democrats as the anti-Christ, sulfur-smelling demons and the most evil people who ever eviled.  

But, on a more worldly level, I have no doubt that Mr. "Two Corinthians" contributes heavily to their building funds and that he has promised them he would appoint justices who would get rid of Roe v. Wade.  I'm sure he promised them a seat at the table [with Mike Pence] and that they would have undue influence over policy.  Never mind the fact that Drumpf's word and promises are as valuable as soiled toilet tissue.  Never mind that they had a born-again Christian in the White House for 8 years (GWB) and it didn't happen.  Never mind that they have been pimped for years by politicians making the same promises to get their votes.  Never mind that the conman they hitched their wagon to has conveyed by word and that nobody influences or tells him what to do. 

It's beyond disgusting that the religious right and their pastors in sheep's clothing are so willing to hang their hopes on a man who in no way, shape or form represents what they claim are their values.

[random chance]

6 minutes ago, MulletorHater said:

Never mind that the conman they hitched their wagon to has conveyed by word and that nobody influences or tells him what to do.

I think you hit on the key thing they all seem to be missing: they can't influence him -- or reason with him, or ever count on him conceding a point no matter how well it's made. People think he'll be going to battle for them but it's just part of the sales package, not something he's actually going to do. He goes to battle for himself, period. (I guess a lot of Republicans have found that out the hard way now that I think about it.)

[qtpye]

Billy Bush was a staunch Trump supporter and friend.  His outgoing phone message was Trump's slogan.  Look at how Trump threw him under the bus the first second there was any trouble.  I know Billy Bush got a huge 10 million dollar settlement, but his career as a vacant TV mannequin is over.

[NewDigs]

40 minutes ago, mythoughtis said:

Please no one take this comment as rude - I like that the Cardinal sat with both of them. It reflected ( to me) the acknowledgement that Jesus dined with sinners, and the unwanted, in his own time.

And when I see Dolan I consider him to be one of the sinners.

He managed to attempt to cover up not just ped-priests but more recently a homosexual-priest scandal.

I had wondered what happened to him. Nothing. Now I know.

I was surprised Hillary didn't cringe when Donald twice walked behind her, on the way to and fro the dais, and patted her back or touched her shoulder both times. 

Edited October 21, 2016 by NewDigs

[Kitty Redstone]

43 minutes ago, Kitty Redstone said:

I'm not finding the 83% figure but am going to read through it again.  It looks like the poll was limited to primary voters.

I misspoke - the poll was not just limited to primary voters.  But, and I think this is important, the highest percentages of respondents answering SOME of the questions relating to voting fraud were Donald-leaning primary voters and people planning to vote for Donald.   For example, the Donald-bot respondents  thought voter fraud was more likely to happen than denying someone the right to vote.  They also thought the likelihood of Russia trying to interfere with US elections was very low, and that voter fraud would not happen in their polling locations but in other places.

The whole thing is a fascinating example of confirmation bias.

[candall]

8 minutes ago, NewDigs said:

I was surprised Hillary didn't cringe when Donald twice walked behind her, on the way to and fro the dais, and patted her back or touched her shoulder both times. 

Not really??  So glad I didn't see.  (Is it going too far to assume that was a calculated move--either to throw her off or provoke some reaction he could use later to show that Hillary doesn't recognize "simply being a friendly touchy guy" or some such nonsense?)  

Trump's people keep downplaying 'temperament,' but that woman's poise and composure are rock solid.  I would have let out a scream like a scalded cat.

[backformore]

11 hours ago, millennium said:

I got the full ride: 16 years, grade school through college.

 

I got you beat by 4 years of grad school.   First the school sisters of St Francis, the the Jesuits.

Edited October 21, 2016 by backformore

[needschocolate]

1 hour ago, random chance said:

I think you hit on the key thing they all seem to be missing: they can't influence him -- or reason with him, or ever count on him conceding a point no matter how well it's made. People think he'll be going to battle for them but it's just part of the sales package, not something he's actually going to do. He goes to battle for himself, period. (I guess a lot of Republicans have found that out the hard way now that I think about it.)

And some think that he has no interest in being president, he just wants to win the election.  But I don't see anything in his behavior during the campaign that would lead me to think that he would go along with what anyone else had to say or let someone else make the decisions (except, I suppose, if he realizes that if he lets others make the decisions, he would have someone else to blame when things go wrong).

1 hour ago, NewDigs said:

I was surprised Hillary didn't cringe when Donald twice walked behind her, on the way to and fro the dais, and patted her back or touched her shoulder both times. 

Well, after his looming behind her at the second debate, she probably prepared for the third debate by having large men in business suits randomly walk up behind her as she practiced her answers, so she got used to it.  

As for the touching, she was likely comforted by the fact that she was in a room full of witnesses, she was wearing pants, and he probably doesn't think she is good looking enough for more than a shoulder pat.

[Silver Raven]

Trump spent this morning attacking Michelle Obama for daring to campaign against him.  And he's repeating the previously proven lie that it was Michelle who said that if Hillary can't take care of her own home, she can't take care of the White House or the country.  And then he said, "After Michelle Obama said that, I said that it was a wrong thing to say."  O Rly?

[madmaverick]

I wonder what people Trump will vow to destroy after he loses the election. 

He just seems like such a petty, vindictive guy, who always faults others instead of looking to himself.

[Bookish Jen]

1 hour ago, backformore said:

I got you beat by 4 years of grad school.   First the school sisters of St Francis, the the Jesuits.

I got my undergrad at at a school founded by the School Sisters of St. Francis.

[atomationage]

55 minutes ago, needschocolate said:

if he realizes that if he lets others make the decisions, he would have someone else to blame when things go wrong

Drumpf blames others, even when he makes the decisions.  After the election, armchair psychiatrists will be analyzing him for years.  Maybe they'll name a syndrome after him.  He reminds me of Nixon more than anyone else that ever got close to the Presidency. 

[NewDigs]

34 minutes ago, madmaverick said:

I wonder what people Trump will vow to destroy after he loses the election. 

He just seems like such a petty, vindictive guy, who always faults others instead of looking to himself.

OohOoh! Richard Branson? 

Mark Cuban has to be on that list. 

Surprised there are only five.