The 2016 Presidential Election Trainwreck

[Jeff Lebowski]

is that a retweet?

Either way.

[Parrot Head]

If you want to delve into the analytics of social media, here's an article on the outside-the-normal-range numbers of Twitter connections the Donald and campaign have to White Power Bill and friends.

Donald Trump’s Social Media Ties to White Supremacists

[Commando]

is that a retweet?

I went to that user's twitter page and checked it out. Donald basically quoted a very intellectually challenged individual's endorsement. Loving this limbo contest we have going on here.

[Omaha 680]

yes. The very notion of tactical nukes, which we developed and deployed widely in the european theatre, always seemed like sheer lunacy to me. We are up in arms over Daesh's dismantling of Palmyra; just imagine what that place would look like if we lobbed a few "tactical" nukes at them.

Weren't tactical nukes basically only intended to be used against a massive Soviet ground force invading western europe? We only had enough troops in Europe to be a speed bump for them so my understanding was we had tactical nukes to stop an invasion.

Of course if Trump doesn't know what the nuclear triad is, I don't expect him to know this bit of history. Not to mention what JL said that we are the overwhelming military power in this situation so the logic behind tactical nukes isn't there.

[Uncle Ted]

When Piers Morgan starts agreeing with Drumpf then you know it is over...

Piers Morgan: Let's Face It, We Should Take Trump More Seriously On Terrorism

Some might find Donald Trump incorrigible, bigoted, and a total joke, but after the horrific terrorist attacks in Brussels–he’s finding a new ally: Piers Morgan. Morgan, who has known Trump for over a decade, says he’s not a racist. He’s not a fan of his politics either, but he admits that after these bombings that have left over 30 dead and hundreds wounded, and the United States’ indifference in stopping future ISIS attacks, it may be time to take the billionaire magnate more seriously on terrorism:

By coincidence, I had an interview scheduled today with the world’s most controversial man, Donald Trump, for my UK show, Good Morning Britain.
It was set up a couple of weeks ago, but the timing was eerily prescient.

[…]

I spoke to Trump for 40 minutes. He was, as you’d expect, bombastic, defiant and self-congratulatory. Why wouldn’t he be? He’s ripped up every political rulebook to take this presidential race by storm, a scenario that is hardly going to deflate the ego of New York’s most cock-sure billionaire tycoon.

But he also spoke in more detail about his plans to combat ISIS and I found myself nodding more than I expected.

Trump told me countries must tighten their borders in light of these terror attacks, especially to anyone related to an ISIS fighter in Syria.

Is he so wrong?

He told me he wants law-abiding Muslims to root out the extremists in their midst, expressing his bafflement and anger that someone like Abdeslam was able to hide for so long in the very part of Brussels he had previously lived.

Is he so wrong?

He told me America must make it far harder for illegal immigrants to enter the U.S. and thinks European countries should follow suit.

Is he so wrong?

He told me he believes there are now areas of many major European cities which have become poisonous breeding grounds for radicalized Islamic terror.

Is he so wrong?

I didn’t feel I was talking to a lunatic, as many seem to view Trump.

I saw a guy, a non-politician unfettered by PC language restraints, who is genuinely furious at the devastation which ISIS is wreaking, and seriously concerned for the security of his fellow Americans and indeed, the citizens of Europe.

[…]

Let’s be honest with ourselves, right now ISIS is winning this war and will continuing committing utter carnage on our streets on an ever graver and more barbaric scale until they are stopped.

I don’t have the answers to how to do that.

But I don’t hear any good ideas coming from any world leaders at the moment either, and it’s their highly paid jobs to work it out.

Instead, I see a global paralysis driven by fear, confusion and woeful lack of leadership.

And it will only get worse.

Hate Donald Trump all you like, but at least he seems to recognize the magnitude of the threat and at least he has firm proposals for how to try to defeat it.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattves...orism-n2138337

[Moliere]

Trump sets an all time new low (which is quite an accomplishment for him) by retweeting this meme:

[Sullyute]

I don't know who either of those women are or understand what the meme is.

[imanihonjin]

Trump sets an all time new low (which is quite an accomplishment for him) by retweeting this meme:

I love how his response to any push back from these types of actions seems to always be, "but they did it first." It is the same argument my 4 year old makes.

[imanihonjin]

I don't know who either of those women are or understand what the meme is.

The woman on the left is Cruz's wife, the one on the left is a airbrushed version of Trump's wife.

[BlueK]

maybe we'll end up with 3 parties now. The dems, the sane republicans and the Donald Trump national socialists.

[Moliere]

The woman on the left is Cruz's wife, the one on the left is a airbrushed version of Trump's wife.

On top of that, there was an ad put out by a superpac that used a scantily clad picture of trumps wife. Trump accused Cruz of being behind the ad, to which Cruz obviously denied. Apparently it was one of the anti-trump superpacs so Cruz likely didn't have any part in the ad.

Trump, in typical form, then threatens Cruz's wife. I guess this is him spilling the beans. Cruz's wife isn't exactly Margot Robbie, but it's funny (not funny funny) that the trumpions used such a bad picture.

[Uncle Ted]

I don't know who either of those women are or understand what the meme is.

The one on the left is Heidi Cruz. The one on the right is an (illegal?) alien?

[old_gregg]

lol. republicans, this is going to be your presidential nominee. how do you feel about that?

[Uncle Ted]

lol. republicans, this is going to be your presidential nominee. how do you feel about that?

Yeah, I am not sure which is worse...




Thank god for the Libertarian party.

[happyone]

Weren't tactical nukes basically only intended to be used against a massive Soviet ground force invading western europe? We only had enough troops in Europe to be a speed bump for them so my understanding was we had tactical nukes to stop an invasion.

Of course if Trump doesn't know what the nuclear triad is, I don't expect him to know this bit of history. Not to mention what JL said that we are the overwhelming military power in this situation so the logic behind tactical nukes isn't there.

When I was in the Army the joke wast that the war plan to stop the Soviets in the Fulda Gap was to fight like hell for 3 days then pop nukes.