Donald Trump to launch exploratory committee for a potenital 2016 run

[Jamie_B]

1 hour ago, westside bengal said:

I am 65 and I have voted Democrat in every election since I was 21.  There is no doubt that Trump is a tainted candidate.

I would be in denial to think that Hillary is any less tainted.

Between those two it comes down to which "sins" you decide to live with.

I might have to give Johnson or Stein a look.

I'm going with Stein

[Go Skins]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/17/politics/trump-campaign-overhaul/index.html

Donald Trump's campaign is undergoing a major staff shake-up with less than three months to Election Day, adding two officials to top posts overseeing his struggling campaign and signaling a shift in campaign leadership toward a more aggressive style willing to go scorched earth in order to win.

Trump has named Steve Bannon, the executive chairman of Breitbart News and a former investment banker, to the post of chief executive and promoted Kellyanne Conway, a senior adviser and pollster to his campaign, to the position of campaign manager, Conway confirmed to CNN early Wednesday morning.

The addition of Bannon -- known for his brass-knuckled demeanor and his website's sharp tone -- came hours after reports surfaced that Roger Ailes, the recently ousted head of Fox News, will begin to advise Trump as he prepares for the presidential debates. The influence of both men lays the groundwork for unleashing Trump this fall from the more traditional presidential candidate framework, which Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort's leadership was brought on to create.

[|Lucid|]

Trump is doing significant damage to our democracy just as a candidate. I shudder to think of the train wreck it would become under a Trump presidency. Hillary has her warts, but she is basically status quo as far as candidates go. It's pretty easy for me to choose "which I can decide to live with" when the alternative is a mentally unstable frothing at the mouth bigot who is attempting to ride a wave of fear and hate into the most powerful position in the world.

I am no Hillary fan, but Trump is quite simply the most terrifying candidate I have seen in my lifetime, and I have absolutely no doubt that a Trump presidency would usher in an era of American Neo-Fascism complete with all the repercussions this comes with, war, violence, hate, bigotry and the undermining of our peaceful democratic system which has served as a beacon of hope to the rest of the world for the last 100 years.

[|Lucid|]

On 8/15/2016 at 8:59 PM, Jamie_B said:

I'm going with Stein

I'm going to have to side with Noam Chomsky in that "voting should not be seen as a form of self expression, and rather should be judged on it's likely consequences."

If you are in a state that is going to be even remotely close, and your vote makes it more likely that Trump wins, then the ramifications of a Trump presidency, it's consequences on the most helpless and disenfranchised people in this country, as well as those around the world, falls squarely on your shoulders.

[Jamie_B]

6 minutes ago, Lucid said:

I'm going to have to side with Noam Chomsky in that "voting should not be seen as a form of self expression, and rather should be judged on it's likely consequences."

If you are in a state that is going to be even remotely close, and your vote makes it more likely that Trump wins, then the ramifications of a Trump presidency, it's consequences on the most helpless and disenfranchised people in this country, as well as those around the world, falls squarely on your shoulders.

And I am going to agree with Dr. Cornell West and say it's time for the Neoliberal era to come to and end.

[|Lucid|]

Just now, Jamie_B said:

And I am going to agree with Dr. Cornell West and say it's time for the Neoliberal era to come to and end.

Sadly, I think you are foolishly allowing your sour grapes from the democratic nominee process to blind you to the terrifying reality of the ramifications of your choice. I can only hope a rational majority makes it irrelevant.

[Jamie_B]

Going to put this here - https://medium.com/@discomfiting/debunking-the-bullshit-claim-youre-privileged-if-you-don-t-vote-for-clinton-3f38f7de737b#.so7v41ec0

[T-Dub]

18 hours ago, Jamie_B said:

Going to put this here - https://medium.com/@discomfiting/debunking-the-bullshit-claim-youre-privileged-if-you-don-t-vote-for-clinton-3f38f7de737b#.so7v41ec0

 

Is it bullshit to claim that only Trump and Hillary have any chance at all of winning the election?  Because that is the issue.  "Fuck the sham Electoral College" or "The Two-Party System is Corrupt" are not candidates for office.

[Go Skins]

On 8/15/2016 at 8:59 PM, Jamie_B said:

I'm going with Stein

No you're not, you are going with Bob Dole (inside joke between Jamie and I). 

[Jamie_B]

2 hours ago, T-Dub said:

 

Is it bullshit to claim that only Trump and Hillary have any chance at all of winning the election?  Because that is the issue.  "Fuck the sham Electoral College" or "The Two-Party System is Corrupt" are not candidates for office.

Maybe read the article

[T-Dub]

21 hours ago, Jamie_B said:

Maybe read the article

 

Y'know I started to, but about 2/3rds of the way through a rambling spiel about how Obama didn't usher in a new golden age & Hillary = not that great really, I lost focus.  It sure seems like their point, if indeed they had one as this mostly seems like a laundry list, was that it doesn't matter which you vote for anyway.  Or that neither Obama nor Hillary were/are likely to deviate much from status quo.  Well, no shit.

 

Maybe you can elucidate for me what bearing this unfocused rant has on the fact that one of two people are going to be the next President of the United States?  All I'm getting is more "well Hillary kinda sucks too though!"  Yeah, we know.  The question remains; How does voting for a no-hope 3rd party candidate affect this outcome in any fundamental sense?  (and less face it, both the top also-ran candidates have warts of their own. Would we be better off with either, or even a random name drawn from a hat? Maybe, I might even go so far as to say probably. That's not happening, though. Yeah that sucks but neither the RNC nor DNC give a tupenny fuck about your throw-away protest vote - beyond the likelihood of it weakening their opponent.)

 

 

[oldschooler]

Not safe for work. Or any place else for that matter... hahahahaha

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[T-Dub]

I would've gone with a pose from when he was mocking the disabled reporter.  That episode would've been shameful from a 5-year old, let alone an adult. And a presidential candidate? I guess that's him "not being politically correct" though. Sorry, I seem to have a problem telling the difference between that and total asshole lately.

[Jamie_B]

2 hours ago, T-Dub said:

 

Y'know I started to, but about 2/3rds of the way through a rambling spiel about how Obama didn't usher in a new golden age & Hillary = not that great really, I lost focus.  It sure seems like their point, if indeed they had one as this mostly seems like a laundry list, was that it doesn't matter which you vote for anyway.  Or that neither Obama nor Hillary were/are likely to deviate much from status quo.  Well, no shit.

 

Maybe you can elucidate for me what bearing this unfocused rant has on the fact that one of two people are going to be the next President of the United States?  All I'm getting is more "well Hillary kinda sucks too though!"  Yeah, we know.  The question remains; How does voting for a no-hope 3rd party candidate affect this outcome in any fundamental sense?  (and less face it, both the top also-ran candidates have warts of their own. Would we be better off with either, or even a random name drawn from a hat? Maybe, I might even go so far as to say probably. That's not happening, though. Yeah that sucks but neither the RNC nor DNC give a tupenny fuck about your throw-away protest vote - beyond the likelihood of it weakening their opponent.)

 

 

Kind of disappointed, of all people who would appreciate a good rant, i thought you would be at the top of that list.

[T-Dub]

10 hours ago, Jamie_B said:

Kind of disappointed, of all people who would appreciate a good rant, i thought you would be at the top of that list.

 

 

It wasn't a very good rant IMO.  Wordy as hell and I never did figure out quite what point they were trying to make beyond LOUD NOISES!!

 

So I'll ask again; what does 3rd party voting accomplish other than feels?

[Jamie_B]

14 minutes ago, T-Dub said:

 

 

It wasn't a very good rant IMO.  Wordy as hell and I never did figure out quite what point they were trying to make beyond LOUD NOISES!!

 

So I'll ask again; what does 3rd party voting accomplish other than feels?

Ironic.

I'll respond with my own question. What concern is it to you who I choose to vote for?

[T-Dub]

2 minutes ago, Jamie_B said:

Ironic.

I'll respond with my own question. What concern is it to you who I choose to vote for?

 

Why is it your concern who anyone votes for? You're happy enough to question everyone else & participate in the debate, champion Jill Stein & so on, but when the spotlight turns your way suddenly it's a matter of privacy?

Ok, then.  Enjoy your protest vote.

[Jamie_B]

 

Why is it your concern who anyone votes for? You're happy enough to question everyone else & participate in the debate, champion Jill Stein & so on, but when the spotlight turns your way suddenly it's a matter of privacy?

Ok, then.  Enjoy your protest vote.

No not privacy, more of a literal why do you care?

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

[T-Dub]

1 hour ago, Jamie_B said:

 

No not privacy, more of a literal why do you care?

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 

 

 

Because I have to live with the outcome?  Why do you think this is a topic at all? You seemed happy enough to take part in the discussion before I asked... 

[Jamie_B]

 

Because I have to live with the outcome?  You seemed happy enough to take part in the discussion before I asked...

So do all of us. What's your point? I'm happy to take part in the discussion.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

[T-Dub]

9 minutes ago, Jamie_B said:

 

So do all of us. What's your point?
 

 

 

Same as it was before you got defensive:  What does voting for a 3rd-party candidate accomplish?

[Jamie_B]

 

Same as it was before you got defensive:  What does voting for a 3rd-party candidate accomplish?

Well with any hope growth in other parties to the point that our only choices aren't a Neofacist or a Corrupt Neoliberal.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

[T-Dub]

9 minutes ago, Jamie_B said:

 

Well with any hope growth in other parties to the point that our only choices aren't a Neofacist or a Corrupt Neoliberal.
 

 

 

Fair enough. I think the Electoral College is going to prevent that, though.  Perot got almost 20% of the popular vote in '92 and still received no electoral votes.  The last 3rd party candidate to get any traction there was segregationist George Wallace in '68.  He got 46 electoral votes with only 13.5% of the popular vote - not very encouraging.

I suspect the best (if not only) hope for a 3rd party run is for one of the two major parties to split & take someone with serious name recognition along with them.

[Jamie_B]

I think Perot hurt himself when he dropped out and then came back with in.

Other possibility is growing a 3rd party up.

I know Robert Reich after he votes for Hillary has made mention of that. IE: If Clinton does show to be the crony many suspect. That work would be done to put up a viable 3rd. Whether thata Green or otherwise.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

[T-Dub]

1 minute ago, Jamie_B said:

I think Perot hurt himself when he dropped out and then came back with in.

Other possibility is growing a 3rd party up.

I know Robert Reich after he votes for Hillary has made mention of that. IE: If Clinton does show to be the crony many suspect

 

Interesting.  I haven't seen much evidence to suggest that she wouldn't be, so I'm not sure what he's waiting to see there? Is she going to have some sort of spiritual awakening during an epic DJ set at a Summer festival perhaps?  Donald Trump is the best thing she has going for her.  If she wasn't running against a total shit stain I don't think she'd have a prayer.  Trump's ties to the Clintons are suspect given the circumstances.