What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Official Donald Trump for President thread (3 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
It is a two edge sword.  Once the media got used to the higher ratings, they will do anything to keep it up there.
They're doing the same thing.  They haven't changed.  

It's a double-edged sword for Trump, because he has gotten to this place because of the media, and now they are pointing out flaws, and he doesn't like it. 

This bears repeating:  He has gotten this far because of the media.  He owes his fame, and his current position as GOP nominee, to the media he is complaining about. And they know it, they know they created him, they aren't complete morons.  

America loves a winner, loves a champion, and also really loves to knock down a front-runner.  It's rare that a front-runner gives them so much ammo, but this one has.  

 
Many people told him this was happening.  

He's heard from a lot of people that this is happening.  He doesn't know for sure, this is the first he's hearing of it, but it probably is happening.  
What is happening?  I think this is way underused in both threads.

:tfp:

 
Sure reading only FOX or Huffpo all day long is probably not a good idea.

A guy whose schtick is to say outrageous stuff and love reading about yourself then cry about when they cover your lies is not going to come across well. 
You're giving him too much credit. He doesn't read. He gets all his news from TV.

 
Why isn't Donald talking about poll numbers anymore. That used to be like the first 10 minutes of every speech :lol:
That's so Spring 2016 along with Stolen Nomination. 2015 was The Wall & The Establishment. 

Now it's Skewed Polls, Corrupt Media and Rigged Election. 

Rarely do you see a player giving excuses why he's going to lose the game before it's played but that's where it is and that's where it will likely end.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
They're doing the same thing.  They haven't changed.  

It's a double-edged sword for Trump, because he has gotten to this place because of the media, and now they are pointing out flaws, and he doesn't like it. 

This bears repeating:  He has gotten this far because of the media.  He owes his fame, and his current position as GOP nominee, to the media he is complaining about. And they know it, they know they created him, they aren't complete morons.  

America loves a winner, loves a champion, and also really loves to knock down a front-runner.  It's rare that a front-runner gives them so much ammo, but this one has.  
Yes, that's what I mean.  A double edge sword for Trump.

 
What is happening?  I think this is way underused in both threads.

:tfp:
Hey, The Donald's campaign might be a trainwreck, but this thread is cetainly far from that.

I would be enjoying the Hillary takedowns in her thread, I enjoy a good dogpile on Tim, but conservatives have no sense of humor.  

 
How much 'fervent' support does Hillary have outside of women, especially black women?  I'm a reluctant supporter who realizes she's 'ol reliable as a politician - nothing major is going to change with her.
You know what to expect when they say she is "the most qualified" and have little accomplishments to highlight after all the time she spent in government.

With Trump, you will always be on the edge of your seat.
I want that when I am watching a magician in Vegas, not The President of the United States.

 
That's so Spring 2016 along with Stolen Nomination. 2015 was The Wall & The Establishment. 

Now it's Skewed Polls, Corrupt Media and Rigged Election. 

Rarely do you see a player giving excuses why he's going to lose the game before it's played but that's where it is and that's where it will likely end.
I'm not naive to think neither party had tried to rig elections before.  Trump just likes to talk about it in the open.

 
Trump is going to be talking about rigged elections in November, no matter the result.  Which could be hilarious, if not so dangerous.  

It's going to look like the girl who finished 2nd behind Katie Ledecky challenging the outcome.  

 
I expected you to take it as a compliment.
It's not a compliment that I educated myself in general and on the issues in both this election and local elections. That's what everybody should be doing. 

Also, stop acting like there aren't dumb, ignorant people in this country and that I'm being patronizing for saying there are. The republican candidate for president is a birther and his press lady thinks 9/11 was an inside job. Now imagine his supporters. 

 
- American elections are rigged, just like all dictatorships.

- America created Isis, the world's most notorious genocidists since WW2.

- NATO is obsolete and its members are leaches.

:>Things America's Enemies Would Say<:

 
- American elections are rigged, just like all dictatorships.

- America created Isis, the world's most notorious genocidists since WW2.

- NATO is obsolete and its members are leaches.

:>Things America's Enemies Would Say<:
America didn't create Isis. Obama did. Get your facts straight. 

 
Sounds like you guys are not looking to elect the greatest president in history.
You know, the Democrats effed up by essentially coronating Hillary, what, 4 years ago?  It was a foregone conclusion that she was the nominee, and if they had been a bit more willing to let the process play out, they would have a better candidate.  

Here's a point:  If the liberal media had covered Bernie Sanders better, the Dems might have a candidate right now that is essentially bulletproof, from a character standpoint.  

 
Sounds like you guys are not looking to elect the greatest President in history.

Why don't we take a look at some bad choices in the past to see how we can avoid the same mistake.  Do you think Hillary or Trump may bump one of these guys off the list?

http://www.usnews.com/news/special-reports/the-worst-presidents/slideshows/the-10-worst-presidents
I don't know but IIRC these are the worst presidential campaigns of all time:

- James Cox (D) 1920

- Horace Greeley (D) 1872

- Alf Landon (R) 1936

Trump's got a decent shot at matching those guys and maybe exceeding them.

eta - Greeley 1872 may turn out to be the best historical comp for Trump when all is said and done.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Both parties just try to kill the other side. That would have been hilarious with donald because he doesn't care about much except himself. Would have spent 24/7 on that. 

One thing everyone should agree on is that Clinton is used to working under these conditions - it's her milieu. She never looked better than when she was swatting around those dopes in the Benghazi hearings.

 
Both parties just try to kill the other side. That would have been hilarious with donald because he doesn't care about much except himself. Would have spent 24/7 on that. 

One thing everyone should agree on is that Clinton is used to working under these conditions - it's her milieu. She never looked better than when she was swatting around those dopes in the Benghazi hearings.
I kinda want the FBI to publish the 302s to see how she answered questions about her email server.

 
Both parties just try to kill the other side. That would have been hilarious with donald because he doesn't care about much except himself. Would have spent 24/7 on that. 

One thing everyone should agree on is that Clinton is used to working under these conditions - it's her milieu. She never looked better than when she was swatting around those dopes in the Benghazi hearings.
Promoting her own book was pretty bad ###. That was well played. 

 
randall146 said:
Here's an honest question for Trump supporters: Trump gets caught daily telling lies. Some big and some small. And that's not a new thing - there are mountains of evidence over decades showing consistent dishonesty, usually to benefit himself. 

Given that he is a proven self-serving liar, why do you believe what he says? And, if you don't believe everything, how do you choose? Can you give any reason that a rational person should believe him now?

To be clear - this is not a question that can be answered by comparing him to Hillary, or mentioning her lies. I'm asking how and why you believe Trump, not disbelieve her. 
Fortunately, Johnson supporters realize that both lie like a rug and can't be trusted.

 
Best thing that could've happened to the Republicans was for them to throw a lame duck out there months ago to lose to Hillary and just suck it up for four years and prepare a strong candidate to beat her in 2020. Now they face the real possibility of their party being taken down in flames by Trump and his madness all because too many of their top dogs refuse to step away from him. 

Sometimes punting is your best option.  
I'd agree that this is what should have happened but then February rolled around. Scalia's death shook the whole Supreme Court process on its head. Then people like jon_mx rolls in talking about the flipping of the court and the crazies turned out big time. Welcome in Trump. 

 
Why isn't Donald talking about poll numbers anymore. That used to be like the first 10 minutes of every speech :lol:
Yes, I'm sure he doesn't remember his pimping the poll numbers during the primaries, but other people do.

And this is simply another thing the that Trump can have thrown back in his face.  Everyone he beats is a loser, he's happy to tell you. Most obnoxious frontrunner ever.  

He possibly might be losing, and he cries rigged election.  It's embarrassing. 

That's my personal pet peeve.  My least favorite emotion or feeling, is being embarrassed for someone.  It drives me nuts.  I can handle my own embarrassment.  But when someone else is making me uncomfortable, I literally cannot stand still.  My ex-girlfriend has phone videos of me watching her reality shows with her.  She laughed at it, but I could not physically stomach them.  

Trump pulls something twice a week that makes me physically uncomfortable, because I actually empathize with him.  I cannot stand that he is being so dumb, so obnoxious.  I couldn't watch his RNC speech.  

 
You say this as if it is a good thing
I often wonder how many people think this is like reality TV and that's why they're gonna vote for Trump. They just wanna see what he'll do next so they have something to talk about tomorrow.

"Did you see he Nuked Detroit?"

"I know. My father-in-law was from Detroit. I never liked him. That was awesome." 

 
I often wonder how many people think this is like reality TV and that's why they're gonna vote for Trump.
I don't think the people that got on board early and have stayed there are really looking at platforms, and issues and such.  They like the show, the yelling, the chanting.  ''Both sides are terrible, this guy tells it like it is!  Woooo!''  I think there is about 20 million people thinking that.  

In a completely unrelated thought, I believe pro wrestling still sells out arenas.  

 
Here's a fun article on one of the women Trump brought on to his economic advisory team:

Is Betsy McCaughey Too Perfect a Match for Donald Trump?


Ha! I guess Donald Trump showed the haters. When the Republican nominee announced his stable of economic advisers on August 5, he was promptly criticized for failing to include any women. This would be a boneheaded play for any presidential contender. For a guy whose popularity among women is slightly lower than that of a urinary tract infection, the situation could not stand. So on Thursday, Trump rolled out another batch of advisers, heavy on the ladies. Et voila! Problem solved.
Except. In his scramble to get some estrogen into the mix, Trump signed on Betsy McCaughey. A former lieutenant governor of New York, McCaughey (pronounced “McCoy”) is a veteran fixture among the conservative think-tank set. For decades, her specialty has been fighting against health-care reform—Hillarycare in the 1990s and Obamacare more recently. (She is the author of the book, Beating Obamacare.)

McCaughey’s fierce opposition to the ACA does not, of course, distinguish her from legions of other conservative wonks and activists. What does make her special, however, is McCaughey’s well-earned reputation—across the political spectrum—as one of the most dishonest, shameless, and irresponsible conservative thinkers on the scene today. Plus, she’s a famously narcissistic, self-promoting drama queen. In 2009, I wrote a long profile exploring some of the highlights, and lowlights, of McCaughey’s soap-operatic career. In many, many ways, she should make a glorious fit for Trump World—but not such a great choice for America.

McCaughey’s explosion onto the political scene was based on a lie (or extreme ignorance, if you want to be more generous). In 1994, she wrote a scathing, deep-dive takedown of Hillarycare for The New Republic. The piece turned out to be total bunk, and its central argument (that patients would be prohibited from independently paying for additional care not covered by the Clinton plan) thoroughly disproven—but not before McCaughey became the It Girl of the political right.

Brainy, attractive, and outspoken, McCaughey soon found herself tapped to run as New York Governor George Pataki’s lieutenant. To put it delicately, she did not play well with others. Pataki aides quickly pegged her as self-absorbed and self-promoting to the point of disloyalty. Before she was even sworn in, McCaughey used her own money to hire a personal publicist. Once in office, she issued reports and press releases and gave speeches that contradicted her boss’s positions. She was also notoriously rough on staff. One campaign story had her ordering an aide out of her van on the side of a highway. As lieutenant governor, she was accused of using the troopers assigned to her security detail to run her personal errands, prompting Pataki to pull her detail for a couple of weeks. Party leaders and Pataki staffers alike began publicly slamming McCaughey as “unstable,” “paranoid,” and “too bizarre to describe.” The governor cut her out of meetings. In 1996, Republican leaders refused to make her a delegate to the RNC’s presidential-nominating convention.

How did McCaughey handle the pressure? Not so well. She accused Pataki aides of “McCarthyism,” accused the governor of instructing her driver to make her late for official events, and publicly feuded with other members of the administration. When the party refused her credentials to the convention, she tried to go as a member of the media. Word on the street was that she was in talks to become a Democrat and run for Senator Al D’Amato’s seat.

When Pataki dropped her from the ticket in 1997, McCaughey did indeed jump to the Democrats and promptly launched a gubernatorial challenge to Pataki, funded by her second husband, Wall Street financier Wilbur Ross. He was, at the time, still her boss. This is when things got really weird. A couple of months in, McCaughey became convinced Pataki was bugging her phones. She hired a counter-surveillance guy to sweep her home and office; when he didn’t find anything, she allegedly stiffed him his $3,000 fee. She continued to hemorrhage staff, and departing aides continued to trash her in the media. As one ex-staffer told the New York Daily News, “A lot of politicians are out for the limelight, but Betsy’s constant need 24 hours a day was something I’d never seen.

Sound like a certain presidential nominee?

As it turned out, McCaughey’s husband cut off funding for her campaign just before the 1998 primary election. (The couple split not long after. Two years later, McCaughey sued Ross for $40 million for supposedly breaking his promise to fund her campaign no matter what.)

By the time Barack Obama rolled into the White House, McCaughey had given up on electoral politics and was back to her health-care wonkery. As the ACA moved center stage, McCaughey became one of its toughest critics—well, not critic so much as truth-twisting, bomb-throwing, hysteria-promoting assassins. (It was McCaughey, for instance, who originally floated the bogus specter of death panels that Sarah Palin subsequently whipped into a national frenzy.) She would take the data, then crunch, twist, and warp it beyond recognition, and let loose with the most hyperbolic, alarmist interpretations imaginable. (During a radio interview with the now deceased Fred Thompson, McCaughey asserted, “Congress would make it mandatory, absolutely require, that every five years, people in Medicare have a required counseling session that will tell them how to end their life sooner.”) Any time anyone called her on what the head of the AARP called her “fraudulent scare tactics,” she would just insist that they needed to read, say, page 365, paragraph 3, footnote 16 of the Obamacare bill. And on those occasions when they did, and pointed out that the facts did not support her claim, McCaughey would just spout more twisted data and page numbers. Even conservative wonks expressed dismay at her rank dishonesty, including one of President George H.W. Bush’s former health-care advisers, Gail Wilensky, who groused that McCaughey’s dishonest scare tactics “give rational, knowledgeable, thoughtful conservatives a bad name.”

Through it all, McCaughey just shrugged off the attacks with her trademark smile and sunny assertion that she was the only one being straight with people. Never did she back down or admit being wrong or allow that she might be overstating her case just the teensiest bit. (Again, sound familiar?) Not even Jon Stewart could break through the woman’s impenetrable sheen of bull####.

Which makes you wonder if the denizens of Trumpworld should be a tad nervous about bringing McCaughey aboard. As Pataki learned all too well, McCaughey is not above trashing her entire team, most definitely including her boss, if she thinks it will gain her an inch. And she will do it with a smile and with the absolute certainty that she is in the right. With McCaughey, Team Trump may soon find out whether there is such a thing as too perfect a match.
 
I don't think the people that got on board early and have stayed there are really looking at platforms, and issues and such.  They like the show, the yelling, the chanting.  ''Both sides are terrible, this guy tells it like it is!  Woooo!''  I think there is about 20 million people thinking that.  

In a completely unrelated thought, I believe pro wrestling still sells out arenas.  
Your last sentence sums up my thoughts on Trump supporters...not to insult people who like pro wrestling since unlike politics it's not real.

 
I often wonder how many people think this is like reality TV and that's why they're gonna vote for Trump. They just wanna see what he'll do next so they have something to talk about tomorrow.

"Did you see he Nuked Detroit?"

"I know. My father-in-law was from Detroit. I never liked him. That was awesome." 
Was that in the Idiocracy director's cut?

 
Does anybody really give a #### who is on Trump's economic advisory team? Can't imagine that influencing a single voter.

 
Does anybody really give a #### who is on Trump's economic advisory team? Can't imagine that influencing a single voter.
Oh god no.  I'm just setting out folding chairs on the side of the road during the car accident. 

Tax returns wouldn't change any minds either. I still would love to see them.

 
I don't think the people that got on board early and have stayed there are really looking at platforms, and issues and such. They like the show, the yelling, the chanting. ''Both sides are terrible, this guy tells it like it is! Woooo!'' I think there is about 20 million people thinking that.

In a completely unrelated thought, I believe pro wrestling still sells out arenas.
You're glossing over the fact that bigotry is truly the glue that's holding this #### show together. 

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top