The 2016 US Election (Part IV)

[The Romulan Republic]

And since they believe that Trump is winning, many will naturally conclude that Clinton's likely win by a large margin could only have happened via fraud.

[Lagmonster]

It's worth mentioning that there aren't a whole lot of ways for Trump to come out of this a 'loser'. He's successfully proven that he can be as huge an asshole as he wants, personally demolish a long-standing political juggernaut in the former Republican party, and build a following of sincere fanatics willing to spend their time and money on him.

[The Romulan Republic]

I don't know about that.

Enough stuff has come to light, or gained more attention, in this election that I hold out some hope that one of his criminal accusations will finally catch up with him.

[maraxus2]

Wait there are still people other than die hard Trumpista's who think Donnie Douchebag can (legitimately) win the election despite his entire campaign being Diarrhea Mountain (With Eruptions Every 2-5 hours, Bring the Kids!)?

I see it all over Facebook, too. Someone will post something about the election in support of Hillary, or insulting Trump, and they get harangued by comments like, "Count Trump out at your own peril!" or "I can't wait to see your face when Trump wins!" and whatnot.

It would really be quite fascinating a phenomenon to study if it weren't so depressing and stupid. It's not even just the most hardcore Trump supporters, too; I have seen several people who I know are conservative/Republicans but who don't personally like Trump still making comments like, "He is a more viable candidate than the lying liberal media elite are claiming" or "He has a greater chance than most people realize".

There's a lot of self-delusion that goes into an election, even setting aside the unhealthy skepticism in mainstream media sources. Remember when Romney was so certain he was going to win that he didn't write a concession speech? And his campaign was made up of relatively normal plutocrats. I can only imagine the kind of conspiracy-mongering going on down in the Bunker.

[maraxus2]

I don't know about that.

Enough stuff has come to light, or gained more attention, in this election that I hold out some hope that one of his criminal accusations will finally catch up with him.

Not likely. Is there any indication that what Trump did was illegal? How often to rich people go to jail for tax evasion? How many people did it take for Cosby to get set up for a criminal prosecution?

I'll eat my boots if Trump ever sees the inside of a criminal courtroom.

[Q99]

Not likely. Is there any indication that what Trump did was illegal? How often to rich people go to jail for tax evasion? How many people did it take for Cosby to get set up for a criminal prosecution?

I'll eat my boots if Trump ever sees the inside of a criminal courtroom.

He's literally up for a trial that was postponed so as to not conflict with the election.


Aside from anything criminal, I find it hard to see how he could not lose in position greatly when faced with an election loss.

First thing, his early comments on Mexicans cost him all of his NBC TV shows, and his TV shows were his most successful endeavor. Second thing, his businesses have been taking a big hit and the brand losing power- They cater to richer, generally educated people, who were turned off by his campaign which is aimed at people who don't buy Trump stuff. His new Trump TV thing is entering into a highly competitive market where many new ventures fail.

He's almost certain to complain heavily and look like a sore loser when he loses, his financial position will be much worse than before, and his name will be associated with a giant debate. It's hard to spin that into a win.

[U.P. Cinnabar]

He's all but acknowledged that he won't accept the results of the election if Clinton wins.

[Civil War Man]

It's worth remembering a little snippet from one of Patton's most famous speeches. "Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser."

There were people who were also convinced that Sarah Palin was going to become a leading voice in the GOP when McCain picked her for his VP candidate, but she quickly became a laughing stock, and at this point there are maybe 5 people outside of her immediate family who could give even 2 shits about what she thinks about anything.

Assuming the election goes about as well for Trump as the forecasts are predicting, then that loser label will be permanently branded on his forehead, and only the people already drowning in the fever swamps will think of him as anything but a loser. At that point, at best history will only remember him in order to use him as an example of the dangers of hubris. More likely, he'd become another name on the heap of Presidential also-rans, along with people like Dukakis, McGovern, or Bryan, hardly ever brought up except as occasionally an answer on a Trivial Pursuit card.

[Crossroads Inc.]

There's a lot of self-delusion that goes into an election, even setting aside the unhealthy skepticism in mainstream media sources. Remember when Romney was so certain he was going to win that he didn't write a concession speech? And his campaign was made up of relatively normal plutocrats. I can only imagine the kind of conspiracy-mongering going on down in the Bunker.

The article you linked to in your posts one I have archived from a while back and have saved on my computer.
That it was done so quickly after the 2012 election, I think it perfectly captures the bunker mentality of Romney and the GOP during those final days.

This time around I think things are both 'not as bad' but also 'far far worse'

With the amount of elder GOP members jumping ship and fleeing the stricken wreck that is "S.S Trump" I think we will see far less people being caught off guard. Indeed, already a great many in the GOP seem to be counting on Trump loosing and seem to be planning accordingly for a Hillary Presidency.
On the flip side that...
Trump himself, and most likely those he has surrounded himself with, seem to be deliberately feeding the notion that he WILL WIN. And as has been stated, the ONLY way he could NOT win is out right fraud.

I think when election day rolls around, it is going to be VERY Interesting to see what the Elder GOP Leadership does, if it wakes up and truly DOES find Trump declaring himself as "winner" and screaming bloody murder about the rigged election
(The above statement in no one condones or assumes such actions will take place but is meant only as a possible example of one such outcome)

[Q99]

It's worth remembering a little snippet from one of Patton's most famous speeches. "Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser."

There were people who were also convinced that Sarah Palin was going to become a leading voice in the GOP when McCain picked her for his VP candidate, but she quickly became a laughing stock, and at this point there are maybe 5 people outside of her immediate family who could give even 2 shits about what she thinks about anything.

She still has some following, but dwindled, small, and irrelevant. Mostly used to sell the odd book to or get a speech job.

Assuming the election goes about as well for Trump as the forecasts are predicting, then that loser label will be permanently branded on his forehead, and only the people already drowning in the fever swamps will think of him as anything but a loser. At that point, at best history will only remember him in order to use him as an example of the dangers of hubris. More likely, he'd become another name on the heap of Presidential also-rans, along with people like Dukakis, McGovern, or Bryan, hardly ever brought up except as occasionally an answer on a Trivial Pursuit card.

Unlike Sarah, though, he's not likely to let his attempt die down purely into a profit-making endeavor. I see more kicking and screaming!

[Terralthra]

Trump has....updated his rhetoric on accepting the results of the election.

In front of an exuberant crowd Thursday in Delaware, Ohio, Donald Trump again addressed whether he would accept the outcome of the November election.

"Ladies and gentleman I want to make a major announcement today," Trump said, continuing, "I would like to promise and pledge to all of my voters and supporters, and to all of the people of the United States, that I will totally accept the results of this great and historic presidential election ..."

But there was more. Trump then finished that sentence with, "if I win," seemingly admitting a strange logic: that a system rigged against him would be totally acceptable if that rigging ultimately worked out in his favor.

At Wednesday night's presidential debate, moderator Chris Wallace asked Trump if he would accept the results of the presidential election. For weeks, Trump has been claiming the race is rigged in Hillary Clinton's favor, in part because of deceased individuals and immigrants in the country illegally casting votes and election officials throughout the country colluding against Trump.

When first asked, Trump refused to say yes, replying in part, "I will look at it [the election results] at the time." When pushed on the issue, Trump told Wallace, "I'll keep you in suspense."

At Thursday's event, Trump went on to expound on why he thinks the election is rigged. He cited Clinton staff emails recently leaked to the public by WikiLeaks, alleging that Clinton campaign Chairman John Podesta said that immigrants in the country illegally could vote with just driver's licences. "Don't be naive, folks," he told the crowd. Trump also claimed that the Clinton campaign paid people to "incite bedlam" at Trump campaign events. Trump called Clinton a candidate "capable of anything, including voter fraud."

Several elections experts have spoken out against Trump's comments on a rigged election, saying that his words threaten one of the central tenets of American democracy: the peaceful transition of power.

Trump cited the presidential election of 2000 as justification for his refusal to accept outright this year's election results. "If Al Gore or George Bush had agreed three weeks before the election to concede the results, and waived their rights to a legal challenge, or a recount, then there would be no Supreme Court case, and no Gore v. Bush, or Bush v. Gore." (That election case didn't start until on and after Election Day, unlike Trump, who has started claiming the election is rigged weeks before the the country finishes casting its ballots.)

Trump then went on to say that even asking him to accept the results of the election is unfair. "In effect," Trump said, "I'm being asked to waive centuries of legal precedent designed to protect the voters."

In his remarks Thursday, Trump seemed to contradict himself on the issue of a rigged election. After citing several examples that he claimed prove the entire American election system is corrupt, Trump then seemed to suggest that very system could be fair. "Of course I would accept a clear election result," Trump said, appearing to read from a teleprompter, "but I would also reserve my right to contest or file a legal challenge in the case of a questionable result. And always I will follow and abide by all of the rules and tradition of all of the many candidates who have come before me."

Before moving on to other topics in his speech, Trump seemed to brush the whole issue off. "Bottom line, we're gonna win," Trump said, "We're gonna win so big. We're gonna win so big. Nov. 8, we're gonna win."

I mean, it's what we all knew he meant when he said "we'll see," but the loud cheer when he said it was particularly frightening, from a "democratic institutions" perspective.

[Ziggy Stardust]

It's worth remembering a little snippet from one of Patton's most famous speeches. "Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser."

There were people who were also convinced that Sarah Palin was going to become a leading voice in the GOP when McCain picked her for his VP candidate, but she quickly became a laughing stock, and at this point there are maybe 5 people outside of her immediate family who could give even 2 shits about what she thinks about anything.

Assuming the election goes about as well for Trump as the forecasts are predicting, then that loser label will be permanently branded on his forehead, and only the people already drowning in the fever swamps will think of him as anything but a loser. At that point, at best history will only remember him in order to use him as an example of the dangers of hubris. More likely, he'd become another name on the heap of Presidential also-rans, along with people like Dukakis, McGovern, or Bryan, hardly ever brought up except as occasionally an answer on a Trivial Pursuit card.

Fair point about Palin, but Barry Goldwater is still a hero figure among conservatives despite being on the losing side of a landslide presidential election. In fact, he is often credited with essentially founding the modern conservative movement. There is a potential outcome here where Trump acts as the standard-bearer for the next generation of the far-right. (Of course, Goldwater had the advantage over Trump in that, despite losing the presidential election, he was a duly elected senator and was otherwise a career politician, so the "loser" label probably didn't stick to quite the same extent)

[Gaidin]

Fair point about Palin, but Barry Goldwater is still a hero figure among conservatives despite being on the losing side of a landslide presidential election. In fact, he is often credited with essentially founding the modern conservative movement. There is a potential outcome here where Trump acts as the standard-bearer for the next generation of the far-right. (Of course, Goldwater had the advantage over Trump in that, despite losing the presidential election, he was a duly elected senator and was otherwise a career politician, so the "loser" label probably didn't stick to quite the same extent)

That's because in spite of his "certain" awkward views that led to how badly he lost he ran his campaign well and had other positions that were "there". Trump has literally said "if I win I win" and "if I lose I win".

Goldwater was still a politician who played by the rules of the system.

[Simon_Jester]

Yeah. You could say "Goldwater had the courage of his convictions."

With Trump, you kind of have to say "what convictions?"

[Feil]

I think Politico might have the right of it, more or less: Trump is attempting to set up a media outlet built on a grievance narrative as a post-election Plan B.

[Lord Insanity]

I had the most absurd conversation possible regarding the last debate at work today.

A delivery guy (20 something black male - relevant only due to the current polling demographic breakdown) asked if I had seen the debate.
Me: Yes.
Him: I think am supporting the wrong candidate, Trump crushed her.
Me: What? What do you mean?
Him: Well like health care, she wants to keep Obamacare.
Me: Why would we want to get rid of Obamacare?
Him: Seriously we should have one healthcare plan for everybody like in Canada. Trump wants to get rid of Obamacare.
Me: Yeah but he doesn't want a single payer system like Canada. The Republicans will fight that tooth and nail. The only way we would ever get anything even close is to start by fixing the flaws in Obamacare.
Him: But Obamacare is junk. Why do we want that?
Me: Because even if Hillary wins by a landslide the Republicans in congress are going to fight any single payer system. The only way we would ever get a single payer system is by slow incremental steps toward that dragging the Republicans kicking and screaming the whole way.
Him: I don't know I am going to have to look into it more.

I seriously don't even know where to begin. He watched the last debate and his take away from that was maybe I should vote for Trump because I want a single payer healthcare system.

[Thanas]

Hot damn.



Hillary Goddamn Clinton, everybody.

[Q99]

Trump went after her non-comedically and got booed. Booed!

How does one lose at a charity dinner??

I had the most absurd conversation possible regarding the last debate at work today.

I seriously don't even know where to begin. He watched the last debate and his take away from that was maybe I should vote for Trump because I want a single payer healthcare system.

I mean, she wants to add a government option....

[bilateralrope]

The Orange Cosby* count is now at 10.


*I saw this nickname for him in an opinion piece that was published between the recordings going public and the sexual assault claims.

[Terralthra]

I've been watching the Al Smith dinner for 20 years, and tonight was the first time I've ever seen someone booed and heckled there. Way to be a trailblazer, Mr. Trump.

[The Romulan Republic]

Sigh... Iowa is back to leaning (marginally) red in the Now-cast and Polls-plus. Surprising, since not too long ago it was leaning blue by a fairly strong margin, as I recall. Then again, before that it looked to be solid red for a while. Iowa's been fluctuating a lot. Hopefully when they get more post-debate polls in, it'll move back away from the basket of deplorables.

Still... the thought of Arizona being potentially more likely to go blue than Iowa is rather amusing.

[FireNexus]

You are like the John Madden of political color commentary.

[The Vortex Empire]

Stop. Looking. At. The. Now-cast.

[The Romulan Republic]

I find it interesting to follow the ups and downs of poll numbers and election projections. Their is nothing wrong with that. To my knowledge, I am not in violation of any board rules. Nor did I, in my opinion, attach any undue weight to the information- I acknowledged that the shifts were relatively minor and might be subject to future change.

In other words, I see no reason for insults every time I mention the Now-cast, other than personal dislike for me. And I don't find that a compelling argument.

[Q99]

It's ok to follow the ups and downs.... but we *know* this is the pre-third debate/etc. numbers, so I think people here are especially not interested in it at the moment, not till the new info comes in. I think people would appreciate it if you either did so less frequently, or only when there was a notable change and not when there's some minor day-to-day shift of a state at the edge. These aren't even swings, just dents and divots.

I'm a poll-follower too, but you do gotta recognize when it's worth not paying attention- or at the least, when other people aren't interested in comments.