The 2016 Presidential Election Trainwreck

[Goatnapper'96]

Interesting to watch things morph in this thread. Over the past year we started out universally mocking the idea of Trump mounting a serious campaign. Then we shook our head as he kept picking up steam, and finally we watched in horror as he captured the nomination. But now the closer we get to the election, more and more posters are starting to argue how Hillary is either worse, or "just as bad" and we witness more and more Trump apologetics and even outright mocking of criticism of Trump. This is how it happens. This is how otherwise sane people do unthinkable things.

God help us, Trump may actually win.

One has to win, and in either case God help us. But I, and a few others, will not be to blame for either.

[BlueK]

I post this article for BYU71's entertainment.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...mp_131192.html

[Goatnapper'96]

One has to win, and in either case God help us. But I, and a few others, will not be to blame for either.

I also think Hillary will win decisively. Trump will step on his own pecker frequently enough.

[BlueK]

Intentionally hilarious?

Trump is pretty good at being unintentionally hilarious, but he still has a lot to learn about that from the master (SU).

[BlueK]

I don't think he's going to win. I do think he's a mess. I certainly will not vote for him.

I also think that he's crazy and scary enough that when it comes to the election folks can stick to those things. No need to pile on the other stuff.

In the article Yohio linked above, the dude upset trying to talk his dad out of voting for Trump says that the only reason people aren't voting for Hillary is because she's a woman. Really? That's it? You really can't see anything else about her that may be objectionable?

Of course, he also lists Trump wanting his children to continue running his businesses as being in the same realm as the multitude of crazy things Trump has said or done. Maybe I'm missing something, has a past president ever been a business owner? If so, did they just shut it down? I'm not sure this is any more or less problematic than what we've seen from other government officials. It needs to be monitored, for sure. But other presidents have had children, friends, and relatives work while they were in office. And let's not pretend that Hillary is incapable of finding a way to get money to her friends, family, or self - in spite of not having a business for her daughter to run.

That's the kind of stuff I'm talking about. I'm not a Trump apologist. At least I don't think I am. But I will continue to say let's leave out the dumb stuff and stick to the real stuff when lambasting him. There is plenty of material to work with.

speaking about business, George W was actually a pretty good baseball team owner -- much better than he ever was at being President.

[byu71]

I post this article for BYU71's entertainment.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...mp_131192.html

Thanks. Is the transgender lady running for the Senate against Lee? I would vote for her over him.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I don't think he's going to win. I do think he's a mess. I certainly will not vote for him.

I also think that he's crazy and scary enough that when it comes to the election folks can stick to those things. No need to pile on the other stuff.

In the article Yohio linked above, the dude upset trying to talk his dad out of voting for Trump says that the only reason people aren't voting for Hillary is because she's a woman. Really? That's it? You really can't see anything else about her that may be objectionable?

Of course, he also lists Trump wanting his children to continue running his businesses as being in the same realm as the multitude of crazy things Trump has said or done. Maybe I'm missing something, has a past president ever been a business owner? If so, did they just shut it down? I'm not sure this is any more or less problematic than what we've seen from other government officials. It needs to be monitored, for sure. But other presidents have had children, friends, and relatives work while they were in office. And let's not pretend that Hillary is incapable of finding a way to get money to her friends, family, or self - in spite of not having a business for her daughter to run.

That's the kind of stuff I'm talking about. I'm not a Trump apologist. At least I don't think I am. But I will continue to say let's leave out the dumb stuff and stick to the real stuff when lambasting him. There is plenty of material to work with.

Case in point.

[BlueK]

Thanks. Is the transgender lady running for the Senate against Lee? I would vote for her over him.

I don't know. I'm not really up to speed on Utah politics these days since I haven't lived there in 20 years. But I did go to high school with Mike Lee. I thought he was a pretty nice guy in person actually. On a personal level he doesn't have the same off-putting interpersonal habits as someone like say, Ted Cruz. Lee might seem to think a lot of himself (as most politicians do), but in my experience he isn't the kind of guy who like Cruz, for example, was so uppity at Harvard law school that he would utterly refuse to study with those who didn't go to Harvard or Yale for their undergrad. Even lesser ivy's like Brown or Dartmouth weren't good enough for Ted.

[Moliere]

God help us, Trump may actually win.

Come back to reality. He doesn't have a prayer in hell of winning. Clinton is a horrible candidate and she'll easily walk all over trump. I'd vote for Clinton before I vote for trump, but I'll never vote for Clinton.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[myboynoah]

Interesting to watch things morph in this thread. Over the past year we started out universally mocking the idea of Trump mounting a serious campaign. Then we shook our head as he kept picking up steam, and finally we watched in horror as he captured the nomination. But now the closer we get to the election, more and more posters are starting to argue how Hillary is either worse, or "just as bad" and we witness more and more Trump apologetics and even outright mocking of criticism of Trump. This is how it happens. This is how otherwise sane people do unthinkable things.

God help us, Trump may actually win.

[BlueK]

Come back to reality. He doesn't have a prayer in hell of winning. Clinton is a horrible candidate and she'll easily walk all over trump. I'd vote for Clinton before I vote for trump, but I'll never vote for Clinton.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The reason I tend to believe this for now is because Trump trails in the polls and the electoral college models out there at the moment show he has a pretty big hill to climb. On the other hand, most of us were saying the same thing about his chances for the nomination until he started winning primaries. Of course the difference there is that while everyone was saying that, Trump stayed ahead in the polls. That's the main difference. Then again, things can change quickly. Still, it's hard to find a rationale for how a candidate so disliked among every demo group outside of angry old white men can actually win a national election.

[myboynoah]

Oh my, oh my, The Dump might win. Oh Dear.

Are you people serious?

Write in Mitt!!!

[Maximus]

But white evangelicals held their noses and ultimately voted for Romney. "Nearly eight-in-ten white evangelical voters ultimately cast ballots for Romney over Obama in 2012, according to exit polls, despite some questions about whether Romney’s Mormon identity would raise concerns among evangelicals."

In the end, white evangelicals are voting against Hillary in 2016 much as they voted against Obama in 2012. "white evangelicals who say they would choose Trump mainly as a vote against Clinton outnumber those who say their choice is mainly one for Trump by a 45% to 30% margin...In June 2012, for instance, 44% of white evangelical voters said they would vote for Romney mainly as a vote against Obama, while just 23% said they would support the GOP candidate mainly as a vote for Romney".

I found this bullet point interesting as it seems many LDS have more in common with religious "nones" this election cycle.
◾About as many religious “nones” say they would support Clinton mainly as a choice for her (30%) as say they would choose Clinton mainly as a matter of opposition to Trump (36%). In 2012, by contrast, religious “nones” saw their votes much more as reflections of support for Obama (50%) than as opposition to Romney (13%).

It would seem white evangelicals had more of an issue with Romeny's "Mormonism" than religious "nones" back in 2012.

8/10 that voted

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

Last August

You mean the guy that won the debate by a mile and is leading the polls even over the Dems? Yeah, he's a non-starter. Don't worry MSNBC/Fox/Daily show will be back telling everyone what to think soon and this nightmare will be over!

Same day last August

I guess I didn't realize that he was going to have to go one on one vs the republican candidates, when does that happen? His 17 point lead seems like a lot but when you point out that all the other supporters would beat him individually it makes sense.

Some of you need to come to grips with President Apprentice, otherwise you are similar to 71 on climate change just tilting at windmills.

Interesting to watch things morph in this thread. Over the past year we started out universally mocking the idea of Trump mounting a serious campaign. Then we shook our head as he kept picking up steam, and finally we watched in horror as he captured the nomination. But now the closer we get to the election, more and more posters are starting to argue how Hillary is either worse, or "just as bad" and we witness more and more Trump apologetics and even outright mocking of criticism of Trump. This is how it happens. This is how otherwise sane people do unthinkable things.

God help us, Trump may actually win.

Never say I didn't warn you.

[BlueK]

Oh my, oh my, The Dump might win. Oh Dear.

Are you people serious?

Write in Mitt!!!

You can do whatever you want, but you do realize that states just throw the write-in votes straight into the trash can unless that candidate has actually registered as a candidate? Voting for or writing in one of the third party choices at least gets counted. But writing in someone who insists he is not a candidate is the same as not voting. Just saying. Texas actually provides the list of candidates who weren't able to get printed on the ballot but have still registered with them, I guess to make it easier to write them in, which I think is kind of funny.