Buttload of Faith: the 2016 Presidential Primary Thread (Pt 2)

i don't really find trump amusing anymore, if i ever did. at this point if he just said "we should fry 'em all in ovens" would his poll numbers drop at all?

probably not

he needs to be trashed creatively, toss some cream pies or shoes at him at close range

I never paid any attention to the views of reality show host Donald Trump before. Was he always this much of a racist fuck?

yes

he's been well known as an asshole since the 80s

frankly I'm surprised no oppo-research has turned up anything criminal

network tv execs and corporate advertisers think openly racist remarks are bad for business, so trump never got to indulge in them during his reality shows to the extent he can now that he's a presidential candidate. tv execs and corporate advertisers are poised to do some rethinking of their position if he wins in iowa and nh.

Trump has been great for click$ though.

at this point Aerican journalism deserves as much condemnation. Publishing his remarks has done wonders for the white right's sense of aggrievement.

John Dean's 2006 book _Conservatives Without Conscience_ points out the work of Dr Bob Altemeyer, who studied American responses to authoritarianism. Dr Bob's take is that any time from the 20th Century on, you always get about 1 out of 4 or 5 people who'd happier walk into full-on fascism and think everything better for it. It helps to explain why Presidential approval ratings will never drop below a certain number, and even Nixon's was at like 19% the day resigned.

We've had both fascists and full -on Nazis thru the 30s & 40s as large movements.

well, sure, but i can't seem to remember a time in my life (i'm in my mid 30s) when someone this openly authoritarian was leading the polls for more than a few weeks.

my girlfriend wondered if this is how some people felt when goldwater was running. i would guess no -- although many in the GOP were terrified of goldwater (and correctly assumed he'd be trounced in the general election), he wasn't nearly so much of a demagogue as trump, no?

https://twitter.com/KFaulders/status/668868071524712448?lang=en

.@RealBenCarson tells me he "saw the film" of American Muslims cheering as the towers fell in New Jersey on 9/11.

Ben Carson also saw the film of Washington crossing the Delaware, and he has forty eyes and a talking dog named Jellybeans. Doesn't really mean much, considering the source.

I would ask the Republicans, again and again: how many thousands of your potential voters do you think are going to hold their nose and pull the lever for Hillary (or sit this round out entirely) rather than support either of these two maniacs?

My dad was a dyed-in-the-wool republican, and I know for a fact that he could've never voted for either in good conscience. I have to imagine there are scores of people in the same position.

he wasn't nearly so much of a demagogue as trump, no?

I was quite young during that election, but Goldwater was much more careful in his rhetoric and far less blatant than Trump. Barry wished to come across as a statesman. He wrapped himself in the flag of patriotism and states' rights and struck a noble pose. Trump really doesn't gaf.

so, to sum up, you're a person alive during the presidential election of 1964 and you're using the word "gaf"

;)

re "I wonder if Trump has plans for monetizing the atmosphere of hate he's whipped up after he fails to become president."

I'm sure he'll be happy to be interviewed saying "See? I told you so, you idiots should have elected me" every time something goes wrong.

xp When the gaf train left the station, I was barely able to grab the caboose and pulled myself aboard. I owe it all to ilxor.com.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/45291_We_Found_Where_Donald_Trumps_Black_Crimes_Graphic_Came_From

Equal parts unsurprising and fucking wow.

hey it's INFORMATION, who CARES where it comes from

- 2 hrs from now

That little tidbit honestly can't be disseminated enough: Trump is spreading racist propaganda created by a neo-Nazi and attempting to pass it off as fact.

xpost So many of the replies to Trump's tweet were all "how can numbers be racist?!". As if those turds wouldn't have balked mightily at stats that opposed their fucked up worldview

"Non Dildo'd Goyim" is gonna be Trump's veep

was hoping for uncle shavedlongcock, RIP

Watching the Sunday shows yesterday, a) I was surprised that Trump's lead was still steady around 25%, at both the state level and nationally (three months ago, almost no one thought that was going to last; I definitely didn't), but b) Rubio would be my pick right now--he's had a steady climb, and, watching him on Meet the Press, I don't think he's going to scare anyone away. Rubio and Cruz sometimes get grouped together, but I can't see that; Cruz is just too bizarre.

bizarre is the fashion of the day

I guess, putting myself in a pair of Republican shoes at the moment, that I would be hard-pressed to say who I favored among the nominees. So you have the lunatics who are excitedly throwing out Trump's and Carson's names when polled and very likely a whole host of Republicans who can't muster enthusiasm about any of the other inhabitants of the clown car for the sake of the pollsters but will probably half-heartedly back whichever non-insane candidate eventually rises above the froth.

Trump is doing some cheap attack ads on his Instagram, which seems like a smart and slightly inconspicuous way to do them:

https://www.instagram.com/p/-bz5HWGhXZ/?taken-by=realdonaldtrump

b) Rubio would be my pick right now--he's had a steady climb, and, watching him on Meet the Press, I don't think he's going to scare anyone away.

if you dig into that recent WashPo/ABC poll, Rubio was also the top "second choice" with 17%, as in, "if you couldn't vote for candidate X, who would be your next choice?". Carson and Trump were just behind him on that, though - 16% and 14%, respectively.

also interesting in that poll was a question about how much attention people are paying to the election at this point. the net (VERY interested + somewhat interested) was 75% of those polled. that may not sound like a lot, but it's higher than previous election cycles. in november '11, for example, it was 65%, in november '07 it was 67%, and in late october '03 it was 54%. there's the conventional wisdom that polling doesn't matter at this point because no one's paying attention and of course that will still hold true to a degree, but more and more people are paying attention earlier and earlier. it's somewhat surprising because you'd think an effect of the endless campaign of perpetuity and despair would end up alienating people from the process altogether, but i guess the magnetic fascism of Trumpism is enough to outweigh the nausea of the infinite campaign.

http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/politics/washington-post-abc-news-poll-nov-15-19-2015/1880/

And the number of wingnuts who really really hate Obama.

I missed if this was already posted, but here's Matt Taibbi following around the clown car in NH:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-gop-clown-car-rolls-on-20151117

So let me get this straight: New Hampshire voters prefer the most destructive antiestablishment candidate in 50 years by 22 percent.

But if Mitt Romney, perhaps the most establishment candidate there could be in this race, was running, he would have 31 percent compared to what would then only be 15 percent for Trump.

I know there's likely some regional bias in these numbers, but what?

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/11/21/gop-voters-would-prefer-romney/WiU9f86jd19UkXYQfb2yxM/story.html

most destructive antiestablishment candidate

Should've said "frontrunner" instead of "candidate"

other western countries with parliamentary systems have shown a steady ~10% of the populace goes for nationalist and xenophobic parties (with a weird smattering of nonconservatives liking it too) so trump's support doesn't seem exceptional. we're right in line.

But he's polling at over 40% nationwide in head-to-head general election match-ups.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

xpost So many of the replies to Trump's tweet were all "how can numbers be racist?!". As if those turds wouldn't have balked mightily at stats that opposed their fucked up worldview

Seriously, fuck this country, we deserve the Chump

i'd be shocked if trump was the next potus. by contrast would anyone be shocked if marie le pen was the next pm of france? so we have it pretty good i think.

tim that's in a constrained 1on1 q vs hillary

like, here's another tab from that same page:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_fiorina_vs_clinton-5470.html

every head to head matchup has numbers in the 40s

yeah it broadly reflects party support rather than candidate support

xp

Yeah, exactly! I thought in the post I quoted that you were comparing him to European far-right party popularity based on the idea that his 25-30% or whatever it is nationwide in the primary field amounts to something like 10% of support nationwide. But I think the head-to-head match-ups are more troubling!

xp

Yes to Shakey but nevertheless over 40% of the people surveyed in every one of the polls said they would actually vote for him specifically.

I think you're misreading that

I mean you're right in that if the question was phrased "who would you vote for, Hillary or Trump", 40% said Trump but that does not mean that those people would vote for Trump under any circumstances

your first sentence is exactly what i meant, yeah. but no i think the h2h matchups are not that illustrative of anything because they're all about the same no matter which candidate you're talking about!

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/sanders_vs._republicans.html

No repub is going to be elected president in 2016. I'll bet one person on here $10

i think that's a safe bet but tbh who knows what could happen. a major terrorist attack in the US coupled with another economic downturn could put prez donald in the white house