![Posted Image](http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/57295f8e52bcd020008c08fd-702-846/chk9muhwuaagvwy.jpg-large.jpeg)
Has U.S. Democracy Been Trumped? Bernie Sanders wants to know who owns America?
#1301
Posted 2016-May-04, 05:45
![Posted Image](http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/57295f8e52bcd020008c08fd-702-846/chk9muhwuaagvwy.jpg-large.jpeg)
#1302
Posted 2016-May-04, 07:58
This is not going to go well.
Perhaps Republicans, as they struggle with whether to support their "presumptive nominee", should start by asking themselves if they support the above comments of Trump. Are they willing to be part of this? There is nowhere to hide, they will have to choose.
#1303
Posted 2016-May-04, 08:47
#1304
Posted 2016-May-04, 15:29
#1305
Posted 2016-May-04, 16:20
Winstonm, on 2016-May-04, 15:29, said:
They committed something. I think it could be premature to plan the burial. I never got around to seeing any of the Nightmares on Elm Street, but maybe this is what they were like.
#1306
Posted 2016-May-04, 19:58
billw55, on 2016-May-03, 07:49, said:
Hm. How much experience as an elected official did George Washington have, or D.D. Eisenhower?
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
#1307
Posted 2016-May-04, 20:42
From the wik:
Quote
I was pretty sure Hoover had not held elected office, I didn't know one way or the other about Taft.
I suppose I would not make a no exceptions rule here. But. Generally I am skeptical when the claim is made that a good businessman could come in and fix Washington. Ask Michael Jordan about whether someone who can excel at X can also excel at Y. And X and Y both involved balls. It is not impossible, but I think such claims often don't hold up well when tested.
Trump is a special case, whatever one thinks of business people in politics. I wouldn't go into business with him either. Nor would he with me, to be totally fair here. It is difficult to talk about DT without repeating myself and collapsing in frustration.
#1308
Posted 2016-May-04, 22:11
blackshoe, on 2016-May-04, 19:58, said:
Eisenhower had great political experience...more than 99.999%
Washington had as much or more national political experience than anyone
Hoover had more national political experience than roughly 99.99%
---------
Trump has more political experience than the vast majority of us...not sure he has had much or any national political leadership experience which is what the job is all about. Clearly he does have leadership experience....the issue has always been how will that translate and how much do voters care?
-------
The vast majority of posters seem to feel that this will be landslide of epic history for Clinton.
#1309
Posted 2016-May-05, 03:59
mike777, on 2016-May-04, 22:11, said:
Which posters have written this? Certainly not me!
#1310
Posted 2016-May-05, 05:55
As for the election campaign, Hil won't be able to attack him on his political stances while she is an open book, so to speak. If they go into past history, DT will have lots of ammunition to use against Hil.
All that Hil can hope for is a reasoned, practical exposition of policy stances.
I am sure that this will appeal to the average voter.....riiiiiiight....
#1311
Posted 2016-May-05, 06:55
mike777, on 2016-May-04, 22:11, said:
Hardly.
I think it is fair to say that if the next president were to be determined by a vote of frequent WC posters the winner would be Sanders if the European vote were counted, and either Sanders or Clinton, I am not sure which, if we counted only the vote of American WC posters. Possibly we could start a movement to give undocumented WC posters the right to vote in American elections. I might support that, I have had worse ideas.
What I would like to see is a major effort by the Democratic Party to include everyday working people who once were the backbone of the party but were long ago conceded to the Republican Party. There must be a lot of people out there who have been voting R but who are having trouble seeing DT as the answer to their dreams. Simply put, the man is a huckster. Some people give their money, or in this case their votes, to a huckster. Some don't.
In the 1930s there were Americans who thought Hitler had the right approach in Germany and there were Americans who thought Stalin had the right approach in Russia. And Mussolini made the trains run on time which, as I understand it, he actually didn't. It was a time of turmoil. The Democratic Party at the time was successful in convincing Americans that we should keep the government we have but we should also make it do better for those who work for a living. This worked as a electoral strategy, and it seems to have worked pretty well for the country. I am hoping that we can take that approach again. Who knows, maybe I could go back to my old neighborhood and not feel like a political stranger in a strange land. So maybe this could be epic history. One can dream.
#1312
Posted 2016-May-05, 07:02
blackshoe, on 2016-May-04, 19:58, said:
I think that the issue of holding political office is a distraction from the real issues.
Donald Trump is unacceptable because all of his wealth was made stealing money from those who entrusted him with their savings.
He is unacceptable because he has made a deliberate choice to campaign as a fascist and a demagogue.
He is unacceptable because he is astoundingly ignorant and has nothing to offer other than hatred of the other.
(FWIW, I am expecting a decisive Clinton victory)
#1313
Posted 2016-May-05, 08:56
From a Charles Lane column to day:
Quote
Ok, this can be explained for those hoping for an explanation. These are Republican voters. This is a primary. He was running against Cruz. Or, particularly misguided, these are Indiana voters. Let's hope the Clinton campaign does not decide to write off Indiana. Or the usual explanation. These people are stupid.
If I am sure of anything, I am sure that this campaign will be the ugliest and most personal campaign of my lifetime. I was around for the LBJ ad showing a little girl picking daisies and then being blown away by a nuclear attack. I was around when McCarthy was calling Stevenson a communist. And of course there was Willie Horton. This will be worse. Be prepared.
#1314
Posted 2016-May-05, 09:52
#1315
Posted 2016-May-06, 12:32
barmar, on 2016-May-05, 09:52, said:
I REALLY hope that Clinton refrains from doing anything of the sort, there are millions of people who wouldn't realize that she was being sarcastic. There are already far too many men who secretly believe that "a woman's place is in the stove", as Lenny Bruce (I think) used to say, who would grab onto any hint of playing dumb as a sign of actually BEING dumb and probably most of them are voters.
Just watched a video which purported to explain some of Trump's success resting on one word in his slogan. "again" That holds a whole lot of implications..that America was once great, that it isn't now and that it can be "again". On some unconscious level that may resonate with a lot of people who then don't go on to the further step of asking if Trump is the one who is going to make it so. They may have a sort of instinctual reaction that he is acknowledging that what has been going down for a while isn't working very well for a whole lot of people, he hasn't been part of it, so he must be on their side in terms of intending to fix things. A truly heroic leap of faith but people react out of emotion, not logic.
Perhaps unfortunately for her, Clinton is seen as very much a part of the establishment so that is going to be a difficult thing for her overcome if she allows Trump to determine the discussion. Probably Sander's strongest pull is his willingness to act on what the voters want when what they want is opposed by big business, something that is highly unlikely to get anywhere near crossing Trump's mind and is certainly up for question with Clinton. So if it ends up being Clinton and Trump it will be a fine example of how Clinton copes with difficult people..it's already pretty clear how Trump does, although how that would translate into presidential action is ...scary to contemplate.
#1316
Posted 2016-May-06, 14:20
Quote
This is all daunting and complicated. Many people have a financial interest in keeping conservatives angry and invested in bad causes. Ignore them. The scorecards are meaningless, the CPAC straw poll is nonsense and the talk radio audiences are entirely unrepresentative of the country or even the party as a whole.
The undertaking begins with stopping Trump. Beyond that, people of good will and common sense can work either within the old Republican Party or in a new (Hamiltonian? Reform? Opportunity?) Party. Unless conservatives get their act together, we will become a one-party, ever left-drifting, country, at least at the national level.
I've been in business all my life. I would always prefer to see the republicans put up a candidate who won't be an impossible choice for a reasonable voter, but that won't be the case this election either. IMO Rubin is on the right track, but I don't expect the republicans to change, in the near term anyway. Paul Ryan has pleasant personality, for example, but his ideas about economics are just nuts.
![:(](http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/sad.gif)
The infliction of cruelty with a good conscience is a delight to moralists — that is why they invented hell. — Bertrand Russell
#1317
Posted 2016-May-06, 14:35
Hill will get 95% of the Democratic party.
She will also get a substantial portion of Republican voters that cannot stand the thought of this buffoon as our CIC.
I'd predict delegates will go 60 40 although the popular vote will be more like 52 48.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#1318
Posted 2016-May-06, 16:35
Quote
Hillary Clinton has begun reaching out to Republicans alienated by Mr. Trump, and her campaign expects to assemble a “Republicans for Hillary” group. “Let’s get off the red or the blue team,” she said this week. “Let’s get on the American team.” There was no sign of tensions easing between Mr. Trump and the House speaker, Paul Ryan.
#1319
Posted 2016-May-06, 23:23
If Clinton wins big she wins big
if dEMS WIN THE house and senate ...they win control and blame for the government
It seems for the vast majority of the forums that is a good thing.
All I mean all of this seems to be a historic victory for the vast members of the forum