The 2016 Presidential Election Trainwreck

[myboynoah]

Oh crud, oh crud, oh crud.

Embedded Tweet

The Scold is the worst candidate ever.

I actually heard her campaign manager on one of those Sunday shows appealing to third party candidate and write-in voters to vote for The Scold because it was imperative to prevent a The Dump presidency. The worst by far.

[Goatnapper'96]

Oh crud, oh crud, oh crud.

Embedded Tweet

The Scold is the worst candidate ever.

I actually heard her campaign manager on one of those Sunday shows appealing to third party candidate and write-in voters to vote for The Scold because it was imperative to prevent a The Dump presidency. The worst by far.

I think the coalition that has the ability to push Trump to a victory is what I call the "Coalition fed up with the absurd." It is composed of folks fed up with everything from bathroom identification craziness to the frustration that it is so frequently implied by so many on the left that any opposition to President Obama is racism. The irony is that they are running into the loving arms of the most absurd Presidential candidate in history. As one opposed to a significant amount of the goals of the left to transform America I can't help but chuckle about their realization that while many might be on board that gays ought to be able to legally marry - this bathroom stuff just sounds crazy to much of America. While many Americans might genuinely understand and agree that the economic blight in inner cities negatively impacts people of color, and I think the most frequent color of those impacted is black, disproportionately and that the impacts of slavery and historical racism are a huge independent variable in causing the situation- Michael Brown's death was primarily caused by his own stupidity. Things like the President never saying "Militant Islamic Terrorism" and then going back to his gentry liberal circles and toasting with expensive champaign to making fun of guys in Appalachia who fit into both Mitt Romney's 47% and Clinton's "basket of deplorables" comments really well, I think grates on a lot of reasonable people. The middle voters might just be tired enough of the left to vote in the most absurd candidate in history. So while I chuckle and admit that I might enjoy the fallout of lamentations from the left but I honestly do share some of their concerns.

[Moliere]

Oh crud, oh crud, oh crud.

Embedded Tweet

The Scold is the worst candidate ever.

I actually heard her campaign manager on one of those Sunday shows appealing to third party candidate and write-in voters to vote for The Scold because it was imperative to prevent a The Dump presidency. The worst by far.

Ha! Have a little faith.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[YOhio]

I think the coalition that has the ability to push Trump to a victory is what I call the "Coalition fed up with the absurd." It is composed of folks fed up with everything from bathroom identification craziness to the frustration that it is so frequently implied by so many on the left that any opposition to President Obama is racism. The irony is that they are running into the loving arms of the most absurd Presidential candidate in history. As one opposed to a significant amount of the goals of the left to transform America I can't help but chuckle about their realization that while many might be on board that gays ought to be able to legally marry - this bathroom stuff just sounds crazy to much of America. While many Americans might genuinely understand and agree that the economic blight in inner cities negatively impacts people of color, and I think the most frequent color of those impacted is black, disproportionately and that the impacts of slavery and historical racism are a huge independent variable in causing the situation- Michael Brown's death was primarily caused by his own stupidity. Things like the President never saying "Militant Islamic Terrorism" and then going back to his gentry liberal circles and toasting with expensive champaign to making fun of guys in Appalachia who fit into both Mitt Romney's 47% and Clinton's "basket of deplorables" comments really well, I think grates on a lot of reasonable people. The middle voters might just be tired enough of the left to vote in the most absurd candidate in history. So while I chuckle and admit that I might enjoy the fallout of lamentations from the left but I honestly do share some of their concerns.

Amen. Good post. Dems have f'd this up just as bad as the GOP. And if their PC bullshit ends up keeping BYU out of the B12 I just don't know how I'll lash out.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Oh crud, oh crud, oh crud.

Embedded Tweet

The Scold is the worst candidate ever.

I actually heard her campaign manager on one of those Sunday shows appealing to third party candidate and write-in voters to vote for The Scold because it was imperative to prevent a The Dump presidency. The worst by far.

"Stop worrying" he said. "It could never happen" he said.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

Just to expand on Nate Silver's tweet, he has Donald Trump at a 48% chance at winning. If one more state starts trending to Trump, and Colorado and New Hampshire are close, then he'll be at over 50% because then the state polls will be saying that Trump is set for 269 or above.

If New Hampshire is the next state then Trump is at 269. I would like to imagine the impossible -- the election actually goes the way state polls indicate and then Utah voters are smart enough to know that they can deny Trump and Hillary the election if they vote for McMullin, as long as the House plays along. But, yeah, that's a one in a million scenario.

[Northwestcoug]

Amen. Good post. Dems have f'd this up just as bad as the GOP. And if their PC bullshit ends up keeping BYU out of the B12 I just don't know how I'll lash out.

There's 'picking an ethically challenged and very underwhelming but who has a government service track record candidate' f'd up. And then there's 'picking a morally reprehensible embarrassment of a human being who has no qualifications to run for office candidate' f'd up. There is a difference.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

There's 'picking an ethically challenged and very underwhelming but who has a government service track record candidate' f'd up. And then there's 'picking a morally reprehensible embarrassment of a human being who has no qualifications to run for office candidate' f'd up. There is a difference.

He's talking about more than just the candidate. It's the constant blaming and division in situations like the Michael Brown matter.

[Applejack]

I think the coalition that has the ability to push Trump to a victory is what I call the "Coalition fed up with the absurd." It is composed of folks fed up with everything from bathroom identification craziness to the frustration that it is so frequently implied by so many on the left that any opposition to President Obama is racism. The irony is that they are running into the loving arms of the most absurd Presidential candidate in history. As one opposed to a significant amount of the goals of the left to transform America I can't help but chuckle about their realization that while many might be on board that gays ought to be able to legally marry - this bathroom stuff just sounds crazy to much of America. While many Americans might genuinely understand and agree that the economic blight in inner cities negatively impacts people of color, and I think the most frequent color of those impacted is black, disproportionately and that the impacts of slavery and historical racism are a huge independent variable in causing the situation- Michael Brown's death was primarily caused by his own stupidity. Things like the President never saying "Militant Islamic Terrorism" and then going back to his gentry liberal circles and toasting with expensive champaign to making fun of guys in Appalachia who fit into both Mitt Romney's 47% and Clinton's "basket of deplorables" comments really well, I think grates on a lot of reasonable people. The middle voters might just be tired enough of the left to vote in the most absurd candidate in history. So while I chuckle and admit that I might enjoy the fallout of lamentations from the left but I honestly do share some of their concerns.

I don't think people are voting for Trump because of his stance on bathrooms. Just my opinion.

[Goatnapper'96]

There's 'picking an ethically challenged and very underwhelming but who has a government service track record candidate' f'd up. And then there's 'picking a morally reprehensible embarrassment of a human being who has no qualifications to run for office candidate' f'd up. There is a difference.

I think the D's f'ing it up goes way beyond picking Hillary Clinton. It is the overreach, arrogance and hubris of the Dems ruling elite class and their progressive voices. It is painting anyone who is frustrated with the federal governments mismanagement of immigration as racist. It is turning Michael Brown's mother into a campaign pawn. This is ridiculous and the left has held the Presidency and forced this agenda on many people. There are folks who don't like Donald Trump but are frustrated that the left wants to dismiss their legitimate concerns and keep screaming "Donald Trump is a racist!" The left seems to think that Drumpf being a bigot gives them the right to totally ignore many of the legitimate concerns for people that he absurdly seems to represent. Hillary is a shitty candidate for sure, perhaps even worse than Drumpf as amazing as that might be but as this election moves along there is something at hand here above and beyond Drump vs Scold. There is a fundamental frustration with the folks in charge and they seem to have brought much of it upon themselves.

Take a look at this piece from Politico: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...d-trump-228649

They can't figure out why Obamacare has not won over the masses. Here is the reality about Obamacare - it made those who were paying for health insurance pay more so that the folks who were outside the system could get in. The majority of voters were already in the system and the promises that Obama and his team had to make to get the disenfranchised in were obvious lies to get enough of those already in behind their cause. It might be the right moral choice, as far as the uninsured due to pre-existing conditions, but the arguments put forward were lies and now in their echochamber the liberal elites just can't figure out why they are not hailed as heroes. This is an example, IMO, that folks are just fed up with the guys in power. It is how a semi-reasonable semi-good candidate, such as Barack Obama, was able to create such a huge victory in 2008. Folks were pissed at the overreach of the right and now they are pissed at the left.

[Goatnapper'96]

I don't think people are voting for Trump because of his stance on bathrooms. Just my opinion.

I think it is his stance within bathrooms. You see he is just hung like "YOUGEE!" and as such needs to get one of those kids stools in Sacrament meeting to stand on at even the low down urinal! People love him as a result.

I think if Trump wins it is because people are just fed up with the left and clearly really fed up to elect someone as bad as Drumpf.

[byu71]

I don't think people are voting for Trump because of his stance on bathrooms. Just my opinion.

Napper is excellent at speaking for himself, but I took it too mean a lot of people are sick and tired of all the things the government (mainly dems) think they need to tell the American public they have to do. The bathroom thing is just an example.

The LGBT community feeling they can stop a private University from joining a football conference is another symptom of the minority exerecising authority over the majority. Why, because the majority is too chicken shit and afraid of being called names. It is just a matter of, let it go, it doesn't matter.

Well, if we get Hillary and a democratic congress the damage they will be able to do in the next 4 years is HUGE.

By the way, on the bathroom issue I am all for us going to non-gender bathrooms. I like using the ladies restromms on the course. They are cleaner and smell better.

[Goatnapper'96]

I think it is his stance within bathrooms. You see he is just hung like "YOUGEE!" and as such needs to get one of those kids stools in Sacrament meeting to stand on at even the low down urinal! People love him as a result.

I think if Trump wins it is because people are just fed up with the left and clearly really fed up to elect someone as bad as Drumpf.

I will take it a step further, I don't think we can underestimate the extent to which many are fed up with the left if Trump wins. Not only is he a bad candidate but I am totally convinced that we will find out his get out the vote infrastructure will not be "YOUUUUGE!" I think it will suck. So if a pathetic candidate can win with a pathetic get out the vote infrastructure there is only one conclusion. The voters really disdain his opponent or at least what the voters perceive his opponent to stand for. Pretty slick conclusion, I know eh?

The deeper issue might really just be us and the fact that no politician who honestly addresses the issues can be elected. Globalism is not going away and technology will always give advantages to those capable to leverage it and that rate of change to existing orders is only going to increase. That is not a winning slogan in the Rust Belt. So what happens is whoever is in power is blamed for not being able to change fundamental economic forces and their opponent takes control and forces their agenda, in the areas that can be influenced, without being able to fundamentally impact the real issues making Americans unhappy. This will result in folks just getting pissed at the overreach as the overreach represents where they put their efforts and resources into instead of addressing the real concerns - which they might not address because they can't be addressed. Repeat in 8 years as Drumpf loses to the running shoe wearing state senator from Texas.

[Non Sequitur]

Napper is excellent at speaking for himself, but I took it too mean a lot of people are sick and tired of all the things the government (mainly dems) think they need to tell the American public they have to do. The bathroom thing is just an example.

The LGBT community feeling they can stop a private University from joining a football conference is another symptom of the minority exerecising authority over the majority. Why, because the majority is too chicken shit and afraid of being called names. It is just a matter of, let it go, it doesn't matter.

Well, if we get Hillary and a democratic congress the damage they will be able to do in the next 4 years is HUGE.

By the way, on the bathroom issue I am all for us going to non-gender bathrooms. I like using the ladies restromms on the course. They are cleaner and smell better.

The LGBT community isn't holding a gun to anybody's head. They have influence because a significant portion of the population agrees with them.

[Goatnapper'96]

The LGBT community isn't holding a gun to anybody's head. They have influence because a significant portion of the population agrees with them.

I would say that "significant portion of the population" doesn't really care. However, I think the LGBT community's influence is disproportionately represented in the decision makers involved in cases such as this. Personally, I don't think the LGBT issue will keep BYU out of the Big-12 but if BYU is not invited my prediction is that is the cover the decision makers will hide behind. If the Big-12 wants to expand they will pick BYU because it brings the most money. If it chooses not to expand it will be because the increased money is not worth the risks the member institutions perceive are out there, of which I think the LGBT is a very small concern, but it will be made to be the largest one by the University decision makers (because that is what their friends in their echochambers want to hear) and the media which will become a permanent impediment for the BYU.