Are Trump's Attacks on Clinton Working?

[Chomsky]

You know that's the thing. The more nasty this primary got the more favorable Washington and President Obama appealed to me

Scary, isn't it?

i was just thinking the same thing.

 

[Frank Apisa]

I would agree that the tone/choice of rhetoric utilized by Trump is often poor, but it is at least as often poorly reported/misconstrued. The media, so quick to attempt to destroy him, often implies meanings that Trump himself simply did not. He is bad enough on his own, but with media making stuff up it gives his words, dramatically not politically correct, more strength to those who at least occasionally follow with some interest... and the general populace, now onto the fact that mainstream media too often slants things to favor one side or the other, so that we, the people, know to take what they say with a grain of salt and skepticism.

Add to that the Occupy, Black Lives Matter, anti-Trump violent protesters, etc... movements that have been either psychically or vocally attempting to keep other Americans from expressing their opinions...well , you end up with a person like Trump willing to throw out all the rules. He understands that if he plays by the rules, with the referees virtually under the thumb/controlled by an amorphous "establishment", a thing that he cannot specifically attack since it is so so nebulous...if he plays by their rules, he necessarily will lose. This Janus faced establishment will see to that becoming fact.

So, a lot of us are forced, by dint of two terrible candidates, into a willingness to take a chance on the outsider on the outside chance that he may actually break the hold that the ruling classes, that back both sides because they control both sides, have over the rest of us.

Now that we have actually arrived at the point of looking at what the choices are, this has to be one of the most "lesser of two evils" elections in living memory.

I only have hope that Trump will change us back to being more like what and how we were pre GWBush-pre BHObama. Hard to believe that a conservative might yearn for, however maladjusted a person he was, the pragmatic Bill Clinton administration days ... Over the Hillary, though having the name Clinton, has no intention of accomplishing that. She will be a continuation of the multiple poor paths taken by Obama domestically and she and Obama's shared weak decisions in the foreign policy realm.

Btw, I appreciate your generally even handed approach replying to opposing posts. I try, but when the other side gets smarmy, I am more apt to swing at/swat such annoying mosquitoes with a sledge hammer. Guess my ration of tolerance we Americans have traditonally been taught to extend to others was used up by the end of the GW beginning of the BO era.

Sorry you conceive of this as a "lesser of two evils", G.

I certainly do not. Hillary Clinton is head and shoulders a better choice than Donald Trump for the office...and neither actually comes across as "evil" to me.

Lots of the kind of exasperation you seem to be feeling out there.

Gotta get past that.

The "good old days" is an illusion...just like the "snow used to pile up much higher when I was a kid" is an illusion.

Even if the winner (I expect it will be Hillary Clinton) turns out to be a dud...we will survive.

 

[Frank Apisa]

Surely you know that Trump mostly uses twitter as an outlet to get into petty arguments with people. Hillary uses twitter for campaigning. Big difference


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm amazed there are Trump supporters (or Hillary haters) who talk as though the call to delete his Twitter account is as debasing, crass, and classless as the crap Donald Trump has been spewing...

...but the real amazement comes from seeing that it was Hillary who called for it.

The people who SHOULD BE TELLING HIM TO DELETE HIS TWITTER ACCOUNT...are Paul Ryan, Newt Gingrich, Reince Priebus, Mitch McConnell...and the rest of the Republican "leadership."

 

[countryboy]

He made the birther movement into what it is today and just went from there. Pretty easy to connect the dots


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ah, so basically it's just your opinion.

What does the birther movement have to do with the tea party?

 

[beefheart]

Trump speaks at nearly empty arena in Richmond last night.

 

[CanadaJohn]

Trump's personal attacks on Clinton have little or no effect on Clinton, who is shameless, nor on most Clinton supporters because they are shameless and love how shameless she is. It is possible that Trump could have some effect on Independents and uncommitted voters, but not if his attacks remain petty and personal - they have to have some serious, policy related meat to be of any consequence. So far, Trump remains the mean spirited buffoon he started his campaign as and if you can't grow as a candidate during the primary process, you've got no hope of growing during the actual election.

 

[NeverTrump]

Ah, so basically it's just your opinion.

What does the birther movement have to do with the tea party?

As I said, it's pretty easy to connect the dots. But to answers your stupid question, what brings them together is and has been one man TRUMP!!!!!

 

[countryboy]

As I said, it's pretty easy to connect the dots. But to answers your stupid question, what brings them together is and has been one man TRUMP!!!!!

Now you're just making **** up, there are no dots. You have nothing more than your own wild speculation that tea party patriots are supporting Trump in any significant numbers. Not to mention the moronic false connection between birthers and the tea party. :roll:

 

[NeverTrump]

Now you're just making **** up. You have nothing more than your own wild speculation that tea party patriots are supporting Trump in any significant numbers. Not to mention the moronic false connection between birthers and the tea party. :roll:

So you think the brithers are not connected to the tea party and vice versa? You don't think Trump had anything to do with either of those two groups? And you don't think the tea party supports Trump??? Where is your evidence.

 

[countryboy]

So you think the brithers are not connected to the tea party and vice versa? You don't think Trump had anything to do with either of those two groups? And you don't think the tea party supports Trump??? Where is your evidence.

No, I know there is no connection of consequence between the tea party and birthers. Don't be silly. Nice dodge, where is YOUR evidence?

 

[NeverTrump]

I'm amazed there are Trump supporters (or Hillary haters) who talk as though the call to delete his Twitter account is as debasing, crass, and classless as the crap Donald Trump has been spewing...

...but the real amazement comes from seeing that it was Hillary who called for it.

The people who SHOULD BE TELLING HIM TO DELETE HIS TWITTER ACCOUNT...are Paul Ryan, Newt Gingrich, Reince Priebus, Mitch McConnell...and the rest of the Republican "leadership."

The call to ban Trump from twitter has been ongoing for awhile. It used to be just a little side joke. I wish Trump would just shut up. Now because Clinton said it, it is apparently a really bad insult and not to mention a way to take Trump's freedom's away... Trump supporters are just as thin skinned as Trump is.

The GOP are calling him racist so that's good enough for me. They don't have to play the same book the Democrats are playing but it would be fun if they did.

 

[NeverTrump]

No, I know there is no connection of consequence between the tea party and birthers. Don't be silly. Nice dodge, where is YOUR evidence?

What the heck is a connection of consequence??? Don't just throw words together to try to change what I was asking for.
My evidence is Donald Trump. This is what I've said all along. He has captured that market like the GREAT businessman that he is. I already answered your question. You made the claim that you said you knew there was no connection. So Donald Trump doesn't exist huh? Well, I wish that was true

 

[countryboy]

What the heck is a connection of consequence??? Don't just throw words together to try to change what I was asking for.
My evidence is Donald Trump. This is what I've said all along. He has captured that market like the GREAT businessman that he is. I already answered your question. You made the claim that you said you knew there was no connection. So Donald Trump doesn't exist huh? Well, I wish that was true

You've literally got nothing.

 

[NeverTrump]

You've literally got nothing.

Um, I've got the connection already countryboy. I say it's Donald Trump. You obviously don't agree. I want to know why you don't agree.
So in a typical debate, if you don't agree, why not back it up with your own theories or evidence or....something???

 

[Frank Apisa]

Trump's personal attacks on Clinton have little or no effect on Clinton, who is shameless, nor on most Clinton supporters because they are shameless and love how shameless she is. It is possible that Trump could have some effect on Independents and uncommitted voters, but not if his attacks remain petty and personal - they have to have some serious, policy related meat to be of any consequence. So far, Trump remains the mean spirited buffoon he started his campaign as and if you can't grow as a candidate during the primary process, you've got no hope of growing during the actual election.

Ahhh...so as a Hillary Clinton supporter...I am "shameless" in your estimation.

Interesting!

 

[countryboy]

Um, I've got the connection already countryboy. I say it's Donald Trump. You obviously don't agree. I want to know why you don't agree.
So in a typical debate, if you don't agree, why not back it up with your own theories or evidence or....something???

Your evidence is merely typing the name of Donald Trump? Seriously?

 

[jpn]

Trump's personal attacks on Clinton have little or no effect on Clinton, who is shameless, nor on most Clinton supporters because they are shameless and love how shameless she is.

So by "shameless," do you mean her shameless support for a woman's right to choose?
Her shameless acknowledgement that human-caused global warming is real?
He shameless support for increasing the minimum wage?
Her shameless support for the Affordable Care Act?
Her shameless support for early childhood education?
Her shameless support to invest in infrastructure, education and scientific research?
Her shameless support for labor?
Her shameless belief that we should make voting easier, not harder?

Hillary will be great. The USA is on a roll despite everything conservatives do to try to block our economic and social progress.

 

[Frank Apisa]

So by "shameless," do you mean her shameless support for a woman's right to choose?
Her shameless acknowledgement that human-caused global warming is real?
He shameless support for increasing the minimum wage?
Her shameless support for the Affordable Care Act?
Her shameless support for early childhood education?
Her shameless support to invest in infrastructure, education and scientific research?
Her shameless support for labor?
Her shameless belief that we should make voting easier, not harder?

Hillary will be great. The USA is on a roll despite everything conservatives do to try to block our economic and social progress.

Hear, hear!

Great post, jpn.

 

[NeverTrump]

Your evidence is merely typing the name of Donald Trump? Seriously?

It's a connection. Do you not agree? Why not?

 

[Hawkeye10]

Are you serious? Just about anything with substance that comes out of Trump's mouth these days are attacks on Hillary or other democrats, but they don't stick. Trump is still dealing with the GOP thanks to his own mouth. If he knew what to say and when, he wouldn't be dealing with the GOP and he would be able to get them to back him more easily. He just says whatever he thinks the tea party wants to hear and you guys are falling for it. What makes you think Trump will change his ways? What makes you think Trump has more attacks that we don't know of yet? Just because he says so?? The Clintons have been in the public spotlight for years and sticking with his attacks on Bill or attacking Clinton's wealth is going to fall on deaf ears. Got anything else?

Ya I am serious, he figured out how he will go after the Clintons long ago and is putting some of that in place but for the most part dealing with the GOP is sucking up his attention. Well that and finding a VP.

 

[NeverTrump]

Ya I am serious, he figured out how he will go after the Clintons long ago and is putting some of that in place but for the most part dealing with the GOP is sucking up his attention. Well that and finding a VP.

Does not bode well for a president if he has to spend most of the time forcing his own party to like him and leaving no time to actually focus on what he said he would. So he knew how he would attack Clinton but somehow the GOP is stopping him from doing even that??? Wow that must be very powerful.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hawkeye10]

Does not bode well for a president if he has to spend most of the time forcing his own party to like him and leaving no time to actually focus on what he said he would. So he knew how he would attack Clinton but somehow the GOP is stopping him from doing even that??? Wow that must be very powerful.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It looks to me like the R elite are going to "Goldwater" Trump, which is not what he wanted, but it is not a shocker either. He needs to deal with that at the moment, and figure out his best path to the chair. I dont expect to see much out of Trump till the convention. The elite will continue to spin the narrative that this means he is dying, but that is only so if he is not clicking a month after the convention. We are also seeing again the story that he does not want to win, which had gone away for a few months.

We will see, and keep in mind that I dont have a need for Trump to get the chair, my agenda is to do a tune up on the elite and get Washington working again, and Trump has already been a successful warrior in that fight.

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

Sorry you conceive of this as a "lesser of two evils", G.

I certainly do not. Hillary Clinton is head and shoulders a better choice than Donald Trump for the office...and neither actually comes across as "evil" to me.

Lots of the kind of exasperation you seem to be feeling out there.

Gotta get past that.

The "good old days" is an illusion...just like the "snow used to pile up much higher when I was a kid" is an illusion.

Even if the winner (I expect it will be Hillary Clinton) turns out to be a dud...we will survive.

Frank, while I appreciate your view, I do not agree with it. I have lived long enough to know whether the good old days are illusion or not. And, having studied history and politics, I have an understanding of the system, its strengths and weaknesses. What it will withstand is hard to determine exactly, but it will not be good to have another 4, and worse 8, years of someone anywhere close to as bad for the republic, our society and values as has been Barrack Obama. Capitalism and our form of democracy are resilient, no doubt, but they are certainly not unbreakable.

I totally disagree with you about Hillary Clinton. Besides holding various positions from First Lady to Secy of State, can you tell me an accomplishment of hers that establishes her credentials besides being a well known face? Name 3 great things she did as a Senator... three major foreign policy accomplishments? I see her more the poster-woman of do much of nothing. Add to that a great potential that she was/is mixed up in a lot of corruption, a proven liar on things both great and small...

All False statements involving Hillary Clinton | PolitiFact

those are just a few. Does not even get into her Benghazi or email deletion lies, her claims at being dead broke at the end of the Clinton presidency nor coming under sniper fire landing in Bosnia nor the silly claims at being named after Sir Edmund Hillary of Mt Everest fame.

I think she has hidden her email account and emails to hide her pay to play schemes, the quid pro quos for 'donations' and speaking fees made by foreign countries and other major entities and laundering the money through the Clinton foundation.

But I guess [ at least to you and her followers ] perhaps, what difference does it make, huh? No offense, I sure do not want someone like that leading me or my country.

 

[Frank Apisa]

Frank, while I appreciate your view, I do not agree with it. I have lived long enough to know whether the good old days are illusion or not. And, having studied history and politics, I have an understanding of the system, its strengths and weaknesses. What it will withstand is hard to determine exactly, but it will not be good to have another 4, and worse 8, years of someone anywhere close to as bad for the republic, our society and values as has been Barrack Obama. Capitalism and our form of democracy are resilient, no doubt, but they are certainly not unbreakable.

I totally disagree with you about Hillary Clinton. Besides holding various positions from First Lady to Secy of State, can you tell me an accomplishment of hers that establishes her credentials besides being a well known face? Name 3 great things she did as a Senator... three major foreign policy accomplishments? I see her more the poster-woman of do much of nothing. Add to that a great potential that she was/is mixed up in a lot of corruption, a proven liar on things both great and small...

All False statements involving Hillary Clinton | PolitiFact

those are just a few. Does not even get into her Benghazi or email deletion lies, her claims at being dead broke at the end of the Clinton presidency nor coming under sniper fire landing in Bosnia nor the silly claims at being named after Sir Edmund Hillary of Mt Everest fame.

I think she has hidden her email account and emails to hide her pay to play schemes, the quid pro quos for 'donations' and speaking fees made by foreign countries and other major entities and laundering the money through the Clinton foundation.

But I guess [ at least to you and her followers ] perhaps, what difference does it make, huh? No offense, I sure do not want someone like that leading me or my country.

You would rather have Donald Trump?

C'mon, G! Surely not.

I'm an optimist, but even I acknowledge that what this country might not survive is a move further to the right. American conservatism is an invasive cancer growing on the American body politic. It must be excised...or better, cut back to what it used to be...a much needed and effective loyal opposition.

Capitalism, the way American conservatives want it constituted...is dead. It just doesn't know it yet.

The era of the total dominance of society by white, males of European decent is also dead...but many white, males of European decent don't realize it yet.

Change is no longer coming...it is here.

Hillary Clinton will almost certainly be elected in November...and I am hoping she will bring the Senate with her. We will all be the better for it if it happens (when it happens.)

I understand it is difficult for some to see that...but it is so...and in any case, it IS what IS.

Thank you for discussing this with me without the rancor. I appreciate it.

 

[radcen]

I am surprised to see Trump failing at his own game. I half expected the Clinton political machine to destroy Trump, but not this quickly. I don't think there is much Trump can do to bring other people onto his train. Not in the direction he has taken recently anyway. He managed to capture the tea party market and that's about it. He kept on saying that during the primaries, he didn't focus on Clinton because he he wanted to save all his attacks on her for after he won the nomination. So now it's been a month in, and I don't think any of his attacks have stuck to it. She seems to wash them right off.

The reasons for this may be:
1. Trump has got HUGE secrets on Hillary that he hasn't let slip yet. (highly doubtful)
2. Democrat Unity.
3. The Clinton Staff and Political Campaign teams.
3. Republican queasiness about Trump himself.
4. His attacks are just really name-calling, full of fluff, and not much else.
5. He has no national network and his yes men are pretty bad at defending him.
6. Lack of central message.

So what do you think? Are Trump's attacks working?

Primarily #4 with a twinge of #6. (You have two #3s, btw)

He's already gotten the far-right-never-ever-vote-Dem people and the easily-led suckers with his schtick. To go beyond that, and attract more voters, he's going to need some actual substance... and I don't think he has it in him.

Hillary will do well for herself to remain above the idiocy.