<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">FYI: About 80 or 90% of conventions produce discernible convention bounces, Trump's was in maybe the 30th or 40th percentile of those.</p>— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) <a href="https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/758514668050718720">July 28, 2016</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Trump is a man who despises the middle class and people who are not powerful. He likes "winners" - to him a coal miner out of a job is a "loser". Middle America is a bunch of losers to him. He won't put America first, he puts himself first and America will be a distant last. This guy is way too cozy to Putin to be comfortable with it. He's bragged about being buds with Putan, his son brags about how Russian assets make up a lof of their investments. And all the other things. Apparently Russia treated Trump very well when he visited. If we think Hillary lying about emails is bad, I mean, what the heck do you do with this.
2 things. First, to complain about Trump being "win first" when you support the ultimate "ME" candidate "Hilllary Clinton", is pretty hypocritical. Second, for either Trump or Clinton to accomplish their primary goal (becoming President) win first is kinda obvious right?
It's very strange that you are calling Hillary the "ME" candidate. Trump is the one that has said that He and he alone could fix all of the problems there are. Trump can not claim to be America First. Or he can, but only people who willfully ignore his words, will believe it.
She absolutely is a "ME" candidate. Trump can also be characterized that way. I never stated otherwise. I was calling out hypocrisy. What's your point?
I think I misunderstood your point. I didn't realize you were calling Hillary a "ME" candidate. I thought you were calling her the "Me" candidate. I believe it's fair to call Hillary a "Me" candidate. Pretty much anyone who runs for President will be. However, I think Trump's whole message and convention were about him as the "Me" candidate. Hillary's convention has been about the opposite. But I like I said, despite the message, I believe that Hillary is a "Me" candidate. But not on the same level as Donald Trump.
Whats funny is if you watched the primary debates Hillary said either "Me or I" almost every time she spoke while Trump said "We or Us" almost every time he spoke. There was a video that showed this contrast but I dont feel like searching for it
Do you honestly think such a video, which I'm sure exists, proves anything beyond the existence of confirmation bias?
The last time that the GOP won a Presidential election without Nixon or a member of the Bush family attached to the ticket was in 1928. 88 years ago. Trump 2016: No. You. Can't.
She has a career of helping others. Who has Donald Trump helped that wasn't part of his family or inner circle? No one.
Do you still think it's ridiculous that people were worried about Trump a year ago winning the election?
This election makes me feel like I'm taking crazy pills, the fact that this buffoon act is actually being considered for the Presidency of the United States is disorienting, like I'm stuck in the Twilight Zone.
Reagan? Regardless of the fact that you are wrong, how stupid of a stat is that? The Democrats have lost every presidential election of the past 36 years where they didn't have a Clinton or an Obama. LOL
Who was Reagan's VP? It's not a stupid stat, and I'm not wrong. Furthermore, it goes to show that the GOP is currently floundering around without having their usual consensus mainstays at their core. It's why there was the clown show of McCain/Palin in 2008, the uninspiring yawn inducing Romney bid in 2012, and the Trump fiasco of 2016. The GOP went nearly a century with a focused core. And now that it's gone... Well, just look at the results.
As much of a total buffoon as Mein Trumpf is, you would think the Democratic nominee would be wiping the floor with him in the polls right now, but instead it's basically a dead heat. I can't help but wonder how things would be different if the Republicans would have been forward-thinking enough (yeah right) to nominate a reasonable, electable candidate like Kasich. Post convention bump not withstanding, Kasich would probably have a 5 point lead right now. Seriously, go back to the first page of this thread and remember how stupid the idea of a serious Trump candidacy sounded at the time. Now realize that it's actually happening. It'll make your head spin. It was all there for the Republicans....and instead they dun ****ed it up. OPPORTUNITY LOST
I believe if Hillary did not run and Elizabeth Warren ran, she would have won and be wiping the floor with Trump right now.
