Can someone please explain Trump to me?

[NeverTrump]

Okay, I don't get it. How is it possible that someone like Trump even has a remote chance of winning the Presidential elections in America?

From my outside perspective, that looks totally absurd.

A man who has no political experience whatsoever but is an entertainer, and a particularly tasteless one at that, who is a huge blabbermouth without any substance whatsoever, enters the stage. He threws a few temper tantrums, mocks and offends everybody who gets in his way, spews hate, hate and hate ... and suddenly wins the Republican nomination and now has a good chance of being elected President. And this it has never been as clear before that there really is no substance whatsoever in this man, and he's an empty bag full of hot air.

His blabbermouth went so far even making the most irresponsible claims, because he apparently felt offending people to attract media attention is more important than evoking the impression he's fit for the duty.

If he wins, I can't help but seriously consider the possibility that the republican system of government has proven to be a failure, because the people is not just too stupid to take decisions, but even way too stupid to choose representatives making decisions for them.


So what's going on? And what has happend to the FGOP (formerly Grand Old Party)? Have they no dignity left whatsoever to allow such a clown to represent them?

Or is the explanation for Trump's relative success that his opponent, Hillary Clinton, is so unpopular or even hated, that many people just switch off their brains and vote "anybody but her"?

Though Clinton at least obviously has the experience for office: First Lady, Senator, Secretary of State. She knows how the game is played. Perhaps she's indeed very much "establishment", and certainly there are many reasons to dislike her -- but when facing the choice between an experienced person like her and an empty bag full of hot air without any experience -- how can anybody in his right mind even consider voting for the empty bag?

Please explain.

The rise of Trump is three things in my mind.

1. The last cry of a generation of white people who don't want the country to turn brown. (it's gonna happen while Trump's in office anyway even if he wins)
2. People want change at any costs and they are willing to throw democracy and optimism out the window to see that dream happen. (They will be really disappointed when change doesn't happen, remember Obama?)
3. Trump really, really, really, really, really didn't want Jeb Bush to be President due to his hatred of his brother.

 

[reinoe]

On the other hand, they've had enough experience with absolutely horrific leaders to know when somebody else is making a terrible mistake.

Considering Angela Merkel is a doofus, no they haven't learned a thing.

 

[cabse5]

The rise of Trump is three things in my mind.

1. The last cry of a generation of white people who don't want the country to turn brown. (it's gonna happen while Trump's in office anyway even if he wins)
2. People want change at any costs and they are willing to throw democracy and optimism out the window to see that dream happen. (They will be really disappointed when change doesn't happen, remember Obama?)
3. Trump really, really, really, really, really didn't want Jeb Bush to be President due to his hatred of his brother.

3A. Isn't the reason why BO was elected in 2008 because the majority of the electorate really, really, really, really didn't want anyone resembling Jeb's brother to be in the White House? I mean, what qualifications did BO have?

To anyone: maybe the 2016 election should be about removing all 'royalty' from the White House. There would be a nice start... the White House.

 

[jonny5]

Okay, I don't get it. How is it possible that someone like Trump even has a remote chance of winning the Presidential elections in America?

From my outside perspective, that looks totally absurd.

A man who has no political experience whatsoever but is an entertainer, and a particularly tasteless one at that, who is a huge blabbermouth without any substance whatsoever, enters the stage. He threws a few temper tantrums, mocks and offends everybody who gets in his way, spews hate, hate and hate ... and suddenly wins the Republican nomination and now has a good chance of being elected President. And this it has never been as clear before that there really is no substance whatsoever in this man, and he's an empty bag full of hot air.

His blabbermouth went so far even making the most irresponsible claims, because he apparently felt offending people to attract media attention is more important than evoking the impression he's fit for the duty.

If he wins, I can't help but seriously consider the possibility that the republican system of government has proven to be a failure, because the people is not just too stupid to take decisions, but even way too stupid to choose representatives making decisions for them.


So what's going on? And what has happend to the FGOP (formerly Grand Old Party)? Have they no dignity left whatsoever to allow such a clown to represent them?

Or is the explanation for Trump's relative success that his opponent, Hillary Clinton, is so unpopular or even hated, that many people just switch off their brains and vote "anybody but her"?

Though Clinton at least obviously has the experience for office: First Lady, Senator, Secretary of State. She knows how the game is played. Perhaps she's indeed very much "establishment", and certainly there are many reasons to dislike her -- but when facing the choice between an experienced person like her and an empty bag full of hot air without any experience -- how can anybody in his right mind even consider voting for the empty bag?

Please explain.

1. celebrity worship
2. uninformed voters
3. Obama and Democrats

Interestingly: very similar to why Clinton also has a good chance!

 

[Tigerace117]

Considering Angela Merkel is a doofus, no they haven't learned a thing.

Angela Merkel is pretty mild compared to the ****ty-ness of Hitler or Walter Ulbricht or Erich Honecker.

The shrieks of outrage coming from the far right just proves they don't know how good they have it.

 

[Mycroft]

Okay, I don't get it. How is it possible that someone like Trump even has a remote chance of winning the Presidential elections in America?

From my outside perspective, that looks totally absurd.

A man who has no political experience whatsoever but is an entertainer, and a particularly tasteless one at that, who is a huge blabbermouth without any substance whatsoever, enters the stage. He threws a few temper tantrums, mocks and offends everybody who gets in his way, spews hate, hate and hate ... and suddenly wins the Republican nomination and now has a good chance of being elected President. And this it has never been as clear before that there really is no substance whatsoever in this man, and he's an empty bag full of hot air.

His blabbermouth went so far even making the most irresponsible claims, because he apparently felt offending people to attract media attention is more important than evoking the impression he's fit for the duty.

If he wins, I can't help but seriously consider the possibility that the republican system of government has proven to be a failure, because the people is not just too stupid to take decisions, but even way too stupid to choose representatives making decisions for them.


So what's going on? And what has happend to the FGOP (formerly Grand Old Party)? Have they no dignity left whatsoever to allow such a clown to represent them?

Or is the explanation for Trump's relative success that his opponent, Hillary Clinton, is so unpopular or even hated, that many people just switch off their brains and vote "anybody but her"?

Though Clinton at least obviously has the experience for office: First Lady, Senator, Secretary of State. She knows how the game is played. Perhaps she's indeed very much "establishment", and certainly there are many reasons to dislike her -- but when facing the choice between an experienced person like her and an empty bag full of hot air without any experience -- how can anybody in his right mind even consider voting for the empty bag?

Please explain.

Simple...

Despite all the spinning, hyperbolic and...let's face it...over the top characterizations you've assigned to him, he's the lesser of evils.

 

[Excon]

You're just mad the only reason people are voting for your god emperor is Hillary Clinton.

You again show you have no clue as to what you speak.

 

[Ikari]

Simple...

Despite all the spinning, hyperbolic and...let's face it...over the top characterizations you've assigned to him, he's the lesser of evils.

Why vote evil when you can vote Johnson?

 

[Fletch]

Okay, I don't get it. How is it possible that someone like Trump even has a remote chance of winning the Presidential elections in America?

From my outside perspective, that looks totally absurd.

A man who has no political experience whatsoever but is an entertainer, and a particularly tasteless one at that, who is a huge blabbermouth without any substance whatsoever, enters the stage. He threws a few temper tantrums, mocks and offends everybody who gets in his way, spews hate, hate and hate ... and suddenly wins the Republican nomination and now has a good chance of being elected President. And this it has never been as clear before that there really is no substance whatsoever in this man, and he's an empty bag full of hot air.

His blabbermouth went so far even making the most irresponsible claims, because he apparently felt offending people to attract media attention is more important than evoking the impression he's fit for the duty.

If he wins, I can't help but seriously consider the possibility that the republican system of government has proven to be a failure, because the people is not just too stupid to take decisions, but even way too stupid to choose representatives making decisions for them.


So what's going on? And what has happend to the FGOP (formerly Grand Old Party)? Have they no dignity left whatsoever to allow such a clown to represent them?

Or is the explanation for Trump's relative success that his opponent, Hillary Clinton, is so unpopular or even hated, that many people just switch off their brains and vote "anybody but her"?

Though Clinton at least obviously has the experience for office: First Lady, Senator, Secretary of State. She knows how the game is played. Perhaps she's indeed very much "establishment", and certainly there are many reasons to dislike her -- but when facing the choice between an experienced person like her and an empty bag full of hot air without any experience -- how can anybody in his right mind even consider voting for the empty bag?

Please explain.

Its not complicated. He has the best message. What did Jeb offer? Or Rubio? Or Kasich? Or Cruz? What was their theme? Their rationale for running? I have no idea and neither did the voters. The same applies to Sanders--he had a message, a theme and a rationale for running. What is Hillarys message, theme or rationale? Shes a woman? She next in line?

An outsider not beholden to special interests running on a pro-American, pro-growth agenda who wants to strengthen the military, secure our boarders, defeat our enemies, and bring back our jobs is a shoe in for the nomination on the republican side. Now, that said, Trump is a horrible messenger and would likely make a horrible president, but the idea of Trump is what won him the nomination. The reason liberals struggle so much with Trump is that they focus on the stupid things he says while his supporters tend to ignore those things and focus on what they believe is his overarching message.

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

For 8 years the Obama hating Republicans have called Obama a 'thin skinned narcissist with little government experience'.

So of course those same people are now telling us how great of a Prez Trump will be even though Trump is more thin skinned, more narcissistic and he has absolutely NO government experience.

If there wasn't so much at stake it would actually be kind of funny.

 

[eohrnberger]

Why vote evil when you can vote Johnson?

Because that's like being a Don Quixote?

Sure, not many like Trump as a candidate, that'd be me included.

However, in risk management you have to look at what you can do to prevent the risk, the impact and cost of the risk should it occur.

The risk of Hillary as president, setting the direction of SCOTUS for the next 30 years with her appointments, as well as more of her bad judgements which already have ample examples impacting the entire nation, is such a high impact and such a high cost, the best and only risk remediation is to back the most likely candidate to beat her.

So that'd have to be a major party candidate, not a 3rd party candidate, and that, by process of elimination, leaves Trump.

 

[cabse5]

For 8 years the Obama hating Republicans have called Obama a 'thin skinned narcissist with little government experience'.

So of course those same people are now telling us how great of a Prez Trump will be even though Trump is more thin skinned, more narcissistic and he has absolutely NO government experience.

If there wasn't so much at stake it would actually be kind of funny.

It's called change (and hope). You fell for it, most likely, in 2008. The Republican-Democrats fell for it in 1800 when they ousted the Federalists with Jefferson's election.

 

[jonny5]

Its not complicated. He has the best message. What did Jeb offer? Or Rubio? Or Kasich? Or Cruz? What was their theme? Their rationale for running? I have no idea and neither did the voters. The same applies to Sanders--he had a message, a theme and a rationale for running. What is Hillarys message, theme or rationale? Shes a woman? She next in line?

An outsider not beholden to special interests running on a pro-American, pro-growth agenda who wants to strengthen the military, secure our boarders, defeat our enemies, and bring back our jobs is a shoe in for the nomination on the republican side. Now, that said, Trump is a horrible messenger and would likely make a horrible president, but the idea of Trump is what won him the nomination. The reason liberals struggle so much with Trump is that they focus on the stupid things he says while his supporters tend to ignore those things and focus on what they believe is his overarching message.

He had the most easily understood message, designed for low info voters. Much like when Dems says 'free stuff'. Thats easy to understand.

 

[shades]

Wow, three pages in in a "political" forum and no one can answer the mans question.

Allow me,
Let's start at the very best argument a liberal can make. And that is that Americans are simply voting for the lesser of two evils when they vote Trump. Well maybe if the dems would have given us more choices than ONE, the "ANOINTED ONE" no less , because have no illusion other than Bernie was, at the beginning supposed to be nothing more than a sounding board for Hillary's bullsH!t at the debates. Her despicable character flaws had her fighting tooth and nail to defeat a friggin socialist for crying out loud, and there is now a good argument that she didn't actually defeat him.
At least the republicans rolled out 17 people, each one different views, different backgrounds, different races, different visions. And more voters than EVER turned out to say "Trump".

And to hear cries that Trump is not qualified, from a party who elected Obama 8 years ago with exactly zero business being President is part of the liberal hypocrisy that makes many cringe.
Hillary is where she is at right now for a whole host of reasons, none of which have anything to do with her being "qualified". She's a crook, 70% of Americans think so, including democrats that will still vote for her.

At least Trump hasn't lied to us, with consequence, yet maybe. But Hillary on the other hand can't stop lying, on our dime and time.

Her foreign policy to fight terror, like Obama's is hard to understand, because there isn't one. Her plan to stimulate our economy is harder to understand, because it doesn't exist either. It's all smoke and mirrors.
If you can not see through your own bias what liberal progressive policy will do to this great country if allowed to continue on it's current path, that's your problem. I happen to believe there are still enough honest hard working, self made, self respecting Americans left that will choose not to let you sink us.
Removing God from our children's daily thoughts, removing allegiance to our flag, allowing pourous borders to destroy our rule of law, our system of order, allowing political correctness to put my family in danger is going to be over our dead bodies. Obama, and Hillary by extension have divided this country racially, economically, and most damaging in patriotism.
. Speaking for myself Trump may just be a patch for the leak, until we can find solid ground again rather than the permanent damage underway now. I don't even think it's going to be close, especially after Hillary tries to go one on one on a live debated stage, her refusal to answer questions, her refusal to take any responsibility for anything is about to be exposed, with a spotlight.
So bring it on

 

[Fletch]

He had the most easily understood message, designed for low info voters. Much like when Dems says 'free stuff'. Thats easy to understand.

And what sort of message do you 'high information' elitists prefer?

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

It's called change (and hope). You fell for it, most likely, in 2008. The Republican-Democrats fell for it in 1800 when they ousted the Federalists for Jefferson.

I'm all for changing how DC works. It beyond broken. But to vote for change for the sake change is ignorant and stupid. Trump's is the wrong person to pick. Can't sit there and criticize and complain about Obama's character flaws and lack of experience for 8 years then because you want 'change' hitch your wagon to someone who's 50x worse. There's much better people out there than Mr. Trump.

 

[cabse5]

I'm all for changing how DC works. It beyond broken. But to vote for change for the sake change is ignorant and stupid. Trump's is the wrong person to pick. Can't sit there and criticize and complain about Obama's character flaws and lack of experience for 8 years then because you want 'change' hitch your wagon to someone who's 50x worse. There's much better people out there than Mr. Trump.

OK for you, presumably in 2008, but not for me? For example, OK for the Republican-Democrats in 1800 when they voted in Jefferson but not for me?

 

[Ikari]

Because that's like being a Don Quixote?

Sure, not many like Trump as a candidate, that'd be me included.

However, in risk management you have to look at what you can do to prevent the risk, the impact and cost of the risk should it occur.

The risk of Hillary as president, setting the direction of SCOTUS for the next 30 years with her appointments, as well as more of her bad judgements which already have ample examples impacting the entire nation, is such a high impact and such a high cost, the best and only risk remediation is to back the most likely candidate to beat her.

So that'd have to be a major party candidate, not a 3rd party candidate, and that, by process of elimination, leaves Trump.

Yup, every election cycle this is the mantra that is paraded about to ensure people vote Republocrat. And every election cycle we vote Republocrat. Every election cycle things get worse and we're left with a terrible President.

But risk management...keep supporting the Republocrats and eventually the Republocrats will change :lamo

Tired of voting for evil. This isn't a one off, your side used this same logic last time and y'all will use it again next time. Same tired excuse as to why I have to endorse evil. The lesser of two evils is still evil, and year after year we have to vote evil because oh it's so much worse if that other evil gets in.

Nothing changes, and the next election cycle we find ourselves in the same damned spot. Vote this evil because the other evil is so much worse.

I say we don't have to vote evil. You want risk management, how's that? Don't vote for evil. Want to mitigate the risks? Stop voting for evil.

 

[chuckiechan]

I will give you one example:

Hillary's VP Tim Kaine says he will move to grant amnesty in the first 100 days.

In the 70's Reagan got a deal with the democrats to do the same thing with a promise of border security. He granted the amnesty. What happened was Ted (Hic) Kennedy stripped out the border enforcement language, but kept the amnesty.

The result was that black workers were pushed out of jobs and new citizens took them. At the same time, another wave of illegals came in to move in to the slots the "new legals" left. The blacks were left scratching their heads wondering "what just happened?" I tell them what happened: Mexicans don't hire blacks and prefer not to work with blacks, and drive them off and dare whitey to do anything about it.

The purpose of illegal labor is to keep wages down and dilute the middle class conservative vote.

"Republicans want illegals to work and not vote, Democrats want illegals to vote and not work".

The result here in California has been an erosion of our quality of life. "California: Poverty with a view".

I don't know if Trump will get a wall built, but you can be sure he will enforce the border.

 

[Howler63]

Okay, I don't get it. How is it possible that someone like Trump even has a remote chance of winning the Presidential elections in America?

From my outside perspective, that looks totally absurd.

A man who has no political experience whatsoever but is an entertainer, and a particularly tasteless one at that, who is a huge blabbermouth without any substance whatsoever, enters the stage. He threws a few temper tantrums, mocks and offends everybody who gets in his way, spews hate, hate and hate ... and suddenly wins the Republican nomination and now has a good chance of being elected President. And this it has never been as clear before that there really is no substance whatsoever in this man, and he's an empty bag full of hot air.

His blabbermouth went so far even making the most irresponsible claims, because he apparently felt offending people to attract media attention is more important than evoking the impression he's fit for the duty.

If he wins, I can't help but seriously consider the possibility that the republican system of government has proven to be a failure, because the people is not just too stupid to take decisions, but even way too stupid to choose representatives making decisions for them.


So what's going on? And what has happend to the FGOP (formerly Grand Old Party)? Have they no dignity left whatsoever to allow such a clown to represent them?

Or is the explanation for Trump's relative success that his opponent, Hillary Clinton, is so unpopular or even hated, that many people just switch off their brains and vote "anybody but her"?

Though Clinton at least obviously has the experience for office: First Lady, Senator, Secretary of State. She knows how the game is played. Perhaps she's indeed very much "establishment", and certainly there are many reasons to dislike her -- but when facing the choice between an experienced person like her and an empty bag full of hot air without any experience -- how can anybody in his right mind even consider voting for the empty bag?

Please explain.

Trump is a fear candidate and every so often, fear sells. Folks are afraid of crime, illegals, terrorists, etc. and Trump is promising to inoculate them from it. People like that he says what's on his mind...no matter how asinine or offensive because they're tired of walking on eggshells around minorities and social justice warriors. People are afraid....fear begets anger...and Trump is playing to both.

Let's not forget that Hillary is the most unpopular Democrat candidate in at least a generation.

 

[Mycroft]

Why vote evil when you can vote Johnson?

Because Johnson doesn't have a snowball's chance in an active volcano of being a blip on anybody's radar screen.

In other words, that would be a wasted vote.

 

[Ikari]

Because Johnson doesn't have a snowball's chance in an active volcano of being a blip on anybody's radar screen.

In other words, that would be a wasted vote.

He's already polling at 10%. He can't win if you don't vote for him. The lesser of two evils is still evil, stop supporting evil.

 

[Howler63]

Yup, every election cycle this is the mantra that is paraded about to ensure people vote Republocrat. And every election cycle we vote Republocrat. Every election cycle things get worse and we're left with a terrible President.

But risk management...keep supporting the Republocrats and eventually the Republocrats will change :lamo

Tired of voting for evil. This isn't a one off, your side used this same logic last time and y'all will use it again next time. Same tired excuse as to why I have to endorse evil. The lesser of two evils is still evil, and year after year we have to vote evil because oh it's so much worse if that other evil gets in.

Nothing changes, and the next election cycle we find ourselves in the same damned spot. Vote this evil because the other evil is so much worse.

I say we don't have to vote evil. You want risk management, how's that? Don't vote for evil. Want to mitigate the risks? Stop voting for evil.

The 'lesser of two evils' is still evil.

 

[Higgins86]

The man saw an obvious gap in the market which was created by Palin and took advantage. If you go back to that 2008 race you can see a lot of the same stuff as you do now. Palin was massively inexperienced, poor grasp of foreign policy and she had a habit of putting her foot in her mouth, However this didn't stop people supporting her and it actually gave McCain an initial boost in the polls.

You just can't underestimate the power of celebrity and sensationalism. Then you add a few million white voters that feel they are being left behind and boom you have Trump.

 

[X Factor]

Okay, I don't get it. How is it possible that someone like Trump even has a remote chance of winning the Presidential elections in America?

From my outside perspective, that looks totally absurd.

A man who has no political experience whatsoever but is an entertainer, and a particularly tasteless one at that, who is a huge blabbermouth without any substance whatsoever, enters the stage. He threws a few temper tantrums, mocks and offends everybody who gets in his way, spews hate, hate and hate ... and suddenly wins the Republican nomination and now has a good chance of being elected President. And this it has never been as clear before that there really is no substance whatsoever in this man, and he's an empty bag full of hot air.

His blabbermouth went so far even making the most irresponsible claims, because he apparently felt offending people to attract media attention is more important than evoking the impression he's fit for the duty.

If he wins, I can't help but seriously consider the possibility that the republican system of government has proven to be a failure, because the people is not just too stupid to take decisions, but even way too stupid to choose representatives making decisions for them.


So what's going on? And what has happend to the FGOP (formerly Grand Old Party)? Have they no dignity left whatsoever to allow such a clown to represent them?

Or is the explanation for Trump's relative success that his opponent, Hillary Clinton, is so unpopular or even hated, that many people just switch off their brains and vote "anybody but her"?

Though Clinton at least obviously has the experience for office: First Lady, Senator, Secretary of State. She knows how the game is played. Perhaps she's indeed very much "establishment", and certainly there are many reasons to dislike her -- but when facing the choice between an experienced person like her and an empty bag full of hot air without any experience -- how can anybody in his right mind even consider voting for the empty bag?

Please explain.

I do not understand why some righties like him so much, given Trump was, by all accounts, a lefty not long ago. I also do not understand why lefties hate and fear him so much for pretty much the same reasons.

What I did appreciate about his campaign was that he didn't follow the rules. Repub candidates are supposed to come off acting a little guilty for being Repubs. They'd supposed to walk as softly as possible and apologize immediately and profusely if they offend anyone. I think Trumps rise is a lot of negative reaction to that very thing.