B-Man Posted May 18, 2016 Share Posted May 18, 2016 (edited) Presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump released Wednesday a list of 11 possible nominees he would put forward to fill the Supreme Court vacancy. Trump's picks, via AP: Steven Colloton of Iowa Allison Eid of Colorado Raymond Gruender of Missouri Thomas Hardiman of Pennsylvania Raymond Kethledge of Michigan Joan Larsen of Michigan Thomas Lee of Utah William Pryor of Alabama David Stras of Minnesota Diane Sykes of Wisconsin Don Willett of Texas. Part of the "unification" process, no doubt . Repeated........due to the squirrel that was attempted by Gator All are solid conservatives. Hillary is in a bind, because she still has to publicly support president Obama's nominee...........(whats his name) ADDED: Roger Simon reviews the list and asks, Will Trump’s Supreme Court List Finish Off #NeverTrump? . Edited May 18, 2016 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted May 18, 2016 Share Posted May 18, 2016 Lol, yes, you guys carry on with the serious work you are engage in here... Anyway, Trump's turnout claims not as significant as he makes it out to be http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/05/donald-trump-2016-polling-turnout-early-voting-data-213897?o=1 Maybe not, but Hilly's shrinking the Dems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted May 18, 2016 Share Posted May 18, 2016 Maybe not, but Hilly's shrinking the Dems. Yes and I'm starting to think Trump has a shot at this. Hillary's negatives I think will be harder to conquer than Trumps. He can win some people over I believe. Hers go right to integrity during her time in elected office and they are deeply concerning for many. Deliberate acts of deceit. Trumps are more superficial (mostly shooting his mouth off). He also has the angry anti-establishment crowd on his side. It's going to be an interesting summer and fall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 Think about Trump’s obvious weaknesses, why Republicans couldn’t exploit them, but why Democrats can. First, he’s running a campaign fundamentally based on racism. But Republicans couldn’t call him on that, because more or less veiled appeals to racial resentment have been key to their party’s success for decades. Clinton, on the other hand, won the nomination thanks to overwhelming nonwhite support, and will have no trouble hitting hard on this issue. Second, Trump is proposing wildly irresponsible policies that benefit the rich. But so were all the other Republicans, so they couldn’t attack him for that. Clinton can. Third, Trump’s personal record as a businessman is both antisocial and just plain dubious. Republicans, with their cult of the entrepreneur, couldn’t say anything about that. Again, Clinton can. The G.O.P. paralysis on these issues explains why, again and again, Republicans turned to a proven line of attack — that is, proven not to work: insisting that Trump isn’t a true conservative, which matters to voters not at all. Obviously Democrats will be able to go after different and, I imagine, a lot more salient issues. And there’s one last thing, which I suspect may make the biggest difference of all: Clinton’s campaign can go after Trump’s fundamental buffoonery. I mean, he is a ludicrous figure, and everything we learn just makes him more ludicrous. So why couldn’t Republicans make that stick? I’d argue that it was because there was something fairly ludicrous about all his opponents, too. http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/ It appears that Krugman is in a state of denial. GOP insiders hit him hard on all those issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 Professor Paglia shoots NYT right in the head, beautifully. http://www.salon.com/2016/05/19/camille_paglia_pc_feminists_misfire_again_as_fossilized_fearful_media_cant_touch_donald_trump/ Camille Paglia: PC feminists misfire again, as fearful elite media can’t touch Donald Trump A boastful, millionaire New Yorker liked the company of beautiful women? This is why NYT can't lay a glove on Trump Zap! If momentum were a surge of electromagnetic energy, Donald Trump against all odds has it now. The appalled GOP voters he is losing seem overwhelmed in number by independents and crossover Democrats increasingly attracted by his bumptious, raucous, smash-the-cucumber-frames style. While it’s both riveting and exhilarating to watch a fossilized American political party being blown up and remade, it’s also highly worrisome that a man with no prior political experience and little perceptible patience for serious study seems on a fast track to the White House. In a powder-keg world, erratic impulsiveness is far down the list of optimal presidential traits. But the Democratic strategists who prophesy a Hillary landslide over Trump are blowing smoke. Hillary is a stodgily predictable product of the voluminous briefing books handed to her by a vast palace staff of researchers and pollsters—a staggeringly expensive luxury not enjoyed by her frugal, unmaterialistic opponent, Bernie Sanders (my candidate). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 It appears that Krugman is in a state of denial. GOP insiders hit him hard on all those issues. Krugman and his ilk have been making those same claims for so many years about all Republicans that they've gotten to the point where they actually believe them. Their penchant for seeing racism, the evil rich, and Christian intolerance everywhere they look has turned them into a bunch of bitter, self-deluded, neo-commie-fascists, and they've blazed the trail that leads directly to the door of the Sanders campaign headquarters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/ "First, he’s running a campaign fundamentally based on racism" I stopped reading right there. Trump was not my top choice but this is utter rubbish but predictable rubbish. Liberals just can't help themselves on race, constantly bringing it up when it has no relevance. You know when we'll make progress on race in this country? When we stop bringing it up and we lambast people that do. Oh, and affirmative action of any kind can go away too. Krugman sucks at the highest level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 It appears that Krugman is in a state of denial. GOP insiders hit him hard on all those issues. And yet he got the nomination...pretty much showing that there does not exist an organized GOP right now...not sure T campaign is based on racism...but it is ludicrous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 It appears that Krugman is in a state of denial. GOP insiders hit him hard on all those issues. Around the edges. But like Liz Warren showed in her tweet war with The Donald, Libs can press the attack home and do damage. The Republicans threw this at Trump and the GOP voters liked him more. Won't work in general election "First, he’s running a campaign fundamentally based on racism" I stopped reading right there. Trump was not my top choice but this is utter rubbish but predictable rubbish. Liberals just can't help themselves on race, constantly bringing it up when it has no relevance. You know when we'll make progress on race in this country? When we stop bringing it up and we lambast people that do. Oh, and affirmative action of any kind can go away too. Krugman sucks at the highest level. It's just true, Mexicans are rapist murders etc...come on. Rich Republicans have been feeding this crap to white America for years and then reaping the benefits of an oligarchic domination of the government. The Southern Strategy is real and no one denies it. Demographics have just caught up with this strategy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 (edited) And yet he got the nomination...pretty much showing that there does not exist an organized GOP right now...not sure T campaign is based on racism...but it is ludicrous That's the point, he got the nomination despite getting hit with these attacks. Krugman is falling into the same trap thinking that there's enough nevertrump momentum in the general election to anoint Hillary, while totally ignoring that her weakness is playing right into Trump's strength. And, btw Trump has had stronger showings in open primaries, which basically blows up the entire premise that he's feeding on a divided GOP. There's a strong portion of GOP that are nevertrump, but apparently there's a larger portion of non-affiliated or Dem leaning voters who like him a lot. Sucks for your party of real racists, doesn't it. Edited May 19, 2016 by GG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 And yet he got the nomination...pretty much showing that there does not exist an organized GOP right now...not sure T campaign is based on racism...but it is ludicrous http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/white_house_watch Donald Trump has now grown his lead over Hillary Clinton in Rasmussen Reports’ first weekly White House Watch survey.Trump earns 42% support to Clinton’s 37% when Likely U.S. Voters are asked whom they would vote for if the presidential election were held today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 "First, he’s running a campaign fundamentally based on racism" I stopped reading right there. Trump was not my top choice but this is utter rubbish but predictable rubbish. Liberals just can't help themselves on race, constantly bringing it up when it has no relevance. As with you, Trump was far, far from my first choice...............not even in the top five really But one has to laugh at the tortured way that lefties here and there have just accepted the narrative on Trump's brash statements. Here is what he said QUOTE: "When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." - June 16, 2015 Any intelligent reading of this shows that he is being (overly) blunt about illegal immigration, and certainly not on the Mexican people. But all hail the narrative.................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 That's the point, he got the nomination despite getting hit with these attacks. Krugman is falling into the same trap thinking that there's enough nevertrump momentum in the general election to anoint Hillary, while totally ignoring that her weakness is playing right into Trump's strength. And, btw Trump has had stronger showings in open primaries, which basically blows up the entire premise that he's feeding on a divided GOP. There's a strong portion of GOP that are nevertrump, but apparently there's a larger portion of non-affiliated or Dem leaning voters who like him a lot. Sucks for your party of real racists, doesn't it. I find this unconvincing. The GOP primary neverTrump is nothing compared to the general election nevertrump. You want to talk about playing into someone eles's strengths? How about Trump and Hillary's strengths? Minorities, Women and smart people. The media will do all it can to make this race close, but I seriously do not see the country electing that clown Trump President. Bush was really, really stupid, but at least he knew to shut up when he was suppose to. Trump has diarrhea of the mouth and it inflames people. The Dems already have a mountain of sound bits to play of this idiot and tons of money to remind everyone over and over again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 I find this unconvincing. The GOP primary neverTrump is nothing compared to the general election nevertrump. You want to talk about playing into someone eles's strengths? How about Trump and Hillary's strengths? Minorities, Women and smart people. The media will do all it can to make this race close, but I seriously do not see the country electing that clown Trump President. Bush was really, really stupid, but at least he knew to shut up when he was suppose to. Trump has diarrhea of the mouth and it inflames people. The Dems already have a mountain of sound bits to play of this idiot and tons of money to remind everyone over and over again And yet trump is now leading Hillary and she's getting trounced by a 70-yr old socialist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 And yet trump is now leading Hillary and she's getting trounced by a 70-yr old socialist. Details. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 And yet trump is now leading Hillary and she's getting trounced by a 70-yr old socialist. I'll believe that when I see it. The general election has not even begun yet. A couple of BS polls mean nothing now And Sander's is way behind, actually thanks to people voting for Hillary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 I'll believe that when I see it. The general election has not even begun yet. A couple of BS polls mean nothing now And Sander's is way behind, actually thanks to people voting for Hillary If BS polls mean nothing now, why have you been hanging your hat on the earlier polls that showed the numbers you liked? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 If BS polls mean nothing now, why have you been hanging your hat on the earlier polls that showed the numbers you liked? The recent polls I have seen were online polls, basically worthless. The media outlets are pushing those terrified that we won't have a decent race for them to cover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted May 19, 2016 Share Posted May 19, 2016 http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/white_house_watch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts