Can Trump Still Win?

There are so many people who don't closely follow politics. There are so many people who don't bother to fact check the claims made over this election and over the lifetime of each candidate. Its amazing how these same people, with such little basis for their opinions, still chime in and even scold people who actually have done their homework.

Here is a very articulate editorial endorsement of Hillary by the Republican leaning Columbus Dispatch. This really shows the difference between educated decisions and gut reflex decisions:

"Like millions of Americans, The Dispatch editorial board has asked this question more than once: How, in a nation of more than 300 million people, did we end up with two such disliked and distrusted presidential candidates?

At the same time, we worry that this dismaying choice will cause some voters to throw up their hands and pass on this election. We urge voters to do their homework, cut through the half-truths and lies, and go to the polls with facts.

For us, the choice between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump is not pleasant, but it isn’t difficult. Republican candidate Donald Trump is unfit to be president of the United States. Democrat Hillary Clinton, despite her flaws, is well-equipped for the job.

The Dispatch traditionally has endorsed Republican presidential candidates, but Trump does not espouse or support traditional Republican values, such as fiscal prudence, limited government and free trade, not to mention civility and decency. We are disappointed that so many Republican leaders have accommodated a narcissistic, morally bankrupt candidate who is so clearly out of step with those values.

While third parties offer a tempting way out of the dilemma, votes cast for the Libertarian or Green Party tickets could have the effect of helping Trump win the White House.

Clinton has spent a career spanning decades in politics as First Lady, U.S. senator and U.S. secretary of state, and has a long record of service to families, women and children.

The art of compromise, which once was respected by Republicans and Democrats in Congress, and which allowed for progress rather than gridlock, is one that Clinton understands and practices. She demonstrated that not only in the Senate, but as the nation’s chief diplomat.

She is well-known to foreign leaders and understands that world order depends upon a U.S. foreign policy that is committed to its international obligations. The United States is the most stabilizing force in a world prone to chaos, and she knows that role is not something to be trifled with on a whim, as Trump’s reckless pronouncements would do.

Yes, Clinton has faced controversy: These include allegations of corruption; convenient memory lapses, particularly while being questioned during investigations; lies such as the one about coming under sniper fire in Bosnia; and difficulty in admitting when she is wrong. Her use of a private email server that exposed secret State Department communications to interception was reckless, and her attempts to minimize and cover up the scandal damaged her further.

Preferring Clinton to Trump does not mean the Dispatch embraces all elements of her platform. Her calls for higher taxes, unsustainable spending and the likelihood that she will try to stack the U.S. Supreme Court with a left-leaning majority are unwelcome.

But her negatives pale when measured against the dangers posed by Trump.

He has proved himself a liar of epic proportion. He is a bigot, a braggart and an admirer of foreign thugs such as Russia’s Vladimir Putin. He is reckless and thin-skinned. He has demeaned Mexicans, demonized Muslims, insulted women and mocked the disabled.

His economic policies, to the extent that they can be analyzed, would at least double the national debt. His call for punishing tariffs on foreign goods would trigger retaliation and ignite a trade war with disastrous results for employment and the standard of living in the United States.

The stakes are too high to sit out this election and risk letting Trump misuse the awesome power of the presidency. The Dispatch urges voters to elect Hillary Clinton."

Listen to the tape carefully. They are joking. They're not being serious. For anyone to listen to a couple of guys kidding and making up stories and saying the most outrageous things they can think of and take it seriously it stupid. Being intelligent means having the ability to make distinctions. To listen to the words alone and not take into consideration that they were just kidding is dumb. Originally Posted by pussycat

Then why hasn't Trump said what you just said? He admits saying it. He has never said he was kidding when he said it. What he said is absolutely true in that people like him who are considered to be very powerful (politicians, movie stars, rock stars, etc) put themselves in position to use others, usually women. With that as fact, the question is whether or not Trump actually did use that power to seduce women? Trump says he has proof that the women who have accused him of sexual improprieties are lying. Right now, despite how honest the women in question sound, I am giving Trump the benefit of the doubt. But if Trump can't prove it like he says he can. . . . .

I still don't get why anyone here supports republicans. Their christian conservatism is a direct threat to our hobby. If you're rich and just want more tax cuts, support the libertarians instead. Originally Posted by goobersnotch

LOL. Voted L in '04 and '08. Did absolutely nothing. This 5% battle cry is a mirage. As soon as someone reaches it, it will go up to 10%. The Trump movement is pretty much putting the Evangelicals to the back of the bus. For once, the GOP agenda is not being driven by them. We have a political revolution happening right now within one of the two major parties. Why more people aren't jumping on board, given everything we are now finding out about the Democratic party is mind-boggling.

Wonder if they would still be singing this same song, if they knew HRC takes money from the Saudis and the Saudis fund ISIS.

Wikileaks dropped that these past few days, BTW.

When does the commode flow over so much that these "she has so much more experience" arguments go by the wayside, in favor of someone who is not evil.

Here is a very articulate editorial endorsement of Hillary by the Republican leaning Columbus Dispatch. This really shows the difference between educated decisions and gut reflex decisions:

"Like millions of Americans, The Dispatch editorial board has asked this question more than once: How, in a nation of more than 300 million people, did we end up with two such disliked and distrusted presidential candidates?

At the same time, we worry that this dismaying choice will cause some voters to throw up their hands and pass on this election. We urge voters to do their homework, cut through the half-truths and lies, and go to the polls with facts.

For us, the choice between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump is not pleasant, but it isn’t difficult. Republican candidate Donald Trump is unfit to be president of the United States. Democrat Hillary Clinton, despite her flaws, is well-equipped for the job.

The Dispatch traditionally has endorsed Republican presidential candidates, but Trump does not espouse or support traditional Republican values, such as fiscal prudence, limited government and free trade, not to mention civility and decency. We are disappointed that so many Republican leaders have accommodated a narcissistic, morally bankrupt candidate who is so clearly out of step with those values.

While third parties offer a tempting way out of the dilemma, votes cast for the Libertarian or Green Party tickets could have the effect of helping Trump win the White House.

Clinton has spent a career spanning decades in politics as First Lady, U.S. senator and U.S. secretary of state, and has a long record of service to families, women and children.

The art of compromise, which once was respected by Republicans and Democrats in Congress, and which allowed for progress rather than gridlock, is one that Clinton understands and practices. She demonstrated that not only in the Senate, but as the nation’s chief diplomat.

She is well-known to foreign leaders and understands that world order depends upon a U.S. foreign policy that is committed to its international obligations. The United States is the most stabilizing force in a world prone to chaos, and she knows that role is not something to be trifled with on a whim, as Trump’s reckless pronouncements would do.

Yes, Clinton has faced controversy: These include allegations of corruption; convenient memory lapses, particularly while being questioned during investigations; lies such as the one about coming under sniper fire in Bosnia; and difficulty in admitting when she is wrong. Her use of a private email server that exposed secret State Department communications to interception was reckless, and her attempts to minimize and cover up the scandal damaged her further.

Preferring Clinton to Trump does not mean the Dispatch embraces all elements of her platform. Her calls for higher taxes, unsustainable spending and the likelihood that she will try to stack the U.S. Supreme Court with a left-leaning majority are unwelcome.

But her negatives pale when measured against the dangers posed by Trump.

He has proved himself a liar of epic proportion. He is a bigot, a braggart and an admirer of foreign thugs such as Russia’s Vladimir Putin. He is reckless and thin-skinned. He has demeaned Mexicans, demonized Muslims, insulted women and mocked the disabled.

His economic policies, to the extent that they can be analyzed, would at least double the national debt. His call for punishing tariffs on foreign goods would trigger retaliation and ignite a trade war with disastrous results for employment and the standard of living in the United States.

The stakes are too high to sit out this election and risk letting Trump misuse the awesome power of the presidency. The Dispatch urges voters to elect Hillary Clinton." Originally Posted by Cap'n Crunch

Then why hasn't Trump said what you just said? He admits saying it. He has never said he was kidding when he said it. What he said is absolutely true in that people like him who are considered to be very powerful (politicians, movie stars, rock stars, etc) put themselves in position to use others, usually women. With that as fact, the question is whether or not Trump actually did use that power to seduce women? Trump says he has proof that the women who have accused him of sexual improprieties are lying. Right now, despite how honest the women in question sound, I am giving Trump the benefit of the doubt. But if Trump can't prove it like he says he can. . . . . Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

C'mon, man! Laik ol' Donaldt sez, jus' take a good look att'em. They's too fugly ta beat off ta, let alone work up a boner an' vio-mah-late!!! Ah'd ratha diddle a compost heap!

With trump, it depends on how much traction the rape allegation gets. It's just been put on the table, from the past.. It's just sad these two are the only "recognized" options. Sanders is still an option.. Originally Posted by nuglet

I have a few friends who want to write him in. Even though I think he was a fool to "sell-out" to HRC in exchange for words in the DNC platform, at least with him, you aren't getting a scumbag.

Woah, gonna have to cut you off - too much kool-aid for you... honestly, you can't believe half that crap you just said lol Originally Posted by endurance

Yeah you're right man, I made all that up out of thin air. And the rest of it I got off that evil liberal media who just loves to pick on poor Trump


seriously, that's the best you can come up with. I will be happy to pull up literature on every point I have made, then you can go on ahead and give the blanket "liberal media Biased" reply if you like.

One example of the erosion of civil liberties = The Patriot Act

Very True, and the Patriot Act was a Bush/Republican legislative agenda

I do believe you hit that nail on the head with you statement "alienate yourself from the very party you are representing". Trump is representative of the interests of "the people". He isn't cowering to a party or towing the party line. The artificial line between Rs and Ds has been exposed. They are one and the same. Neither of which cares about anything other than protecting their position of perceived authority.

Years from now, when historians have a chance to take a broad look at today's happenings, I suspect the word "revolution" will be used. The citizens are sick and tired of being given the shit end of the stick and they want their country back. To hell with foreign interests, to hell with foreign wars, to hell with unabated immigration, to hell with corporate superiority. Viva la Revolucion! Originally Posted by veedub63

Veedub, believe it or not I honestly agree with a lot of what you have to say. And you honestly do come across an intelligent & informed individual. I have been saying it all through out this election that if I lived in a deep blue state like Cali or NY I would be voting for Jill Stein without hesitation. But here in Texas I have to vote democrat, I would love to see this state get taken away from the "Repugnicans"

Wonder if they would still be singing this same song, if they knew HRC takes money from the Saudis and the Saudis fund ISIS.

Wikileaks dropped that these past few days, BTW.

When does the commode flow over so much that these "she has so much more experience" arguments go by the wayside, in favor of someone who is not evil. Originally Posted by SecretE

Yeah, they would be singing the same song, cause they know the other candidate just takes money from hard working middle class people and just stiffs them in return...

I can't believe all the people who are shocked over Trump's behavior. I mean - come on now - we knew we weren't electing a Sunday school teacher nor do we want a Sunday school teacher. We want an alpha male in the White House not some pussy - no pun intended. It's him or that lying Hillary...and there's always this guy...... Originally Posted by Austin Ellen

And you're perfectly OK with him bragging on Stern about walking in on Miss Teen contestants (Minors) in the changing room simply because he could? These weren't strippers in some titty bar. These were kids.
Of course he gave equal time to the adults in their changing room as well.

I have a hard time imagining any hooker defending a guy who brags about forcing himself sexually upon non consenting women. These women coming forward merely confirms he was NOT merely exaggerating or joking.

You apparently don't care that this sends a clear signal to all males young and old that it's perfectly OK to take what you want from any women you see whether she agrees to it or not as long as you have the power to get away with it. Very odd stance for a mature veteran hooker.

Putting politics aside it appears you have absolutely no sense of right or wrong when it comes to basic human decency.

The man has absolutely no redeeming qualities as a human being unless of course your only measure of a man is by how much he can afford to pay for your time. If that's the case you're butt out of luck as we already know what he thinks of women who aren't young and hot.

It's like you've just gotten back from some other planet.
You probably think Obama's done a great job too.

"Eroding civil liberties" - as if that isn't a thing.

I love how you pin everything on Bush as if Obama and super neocon Sec State HRC haven't been in there for years wreaking their own havoc all over the world. If it wasn't ISIS, it would be another rebranded AlQueda - our national policies foreign and domestic depend on the never-ending war on terror so they can do whatever they want - and Obama has and Clinton will carry on with that. special ops in 147 countries - thanks bush! Obama couldn't have done that, he's too busy on the talk shows and looking cool for cameras - everyone eats that shit up...

There's so much more to talk about in your train wreck of an assessment, but the threads get too long if there's more than a couple things.

Yeah you're right man, I made all that up out of thin air. And the rest of it I got off that evil liberal media who just loves to pick on poor Trump


seriously, that's the best you can come up with. I will be happy to pull up literature on every point I have made, then you can go on ahead and give the blanket "liberal media Biased" reply if you like. Originally Posted by Little Monster

Trump can not win. Early vote starts in 10 days and he's still hurling insults and storming around like a schoolyard bully who won't get picked for Dodge Ball. Maybe he's simply avoiding any discussion of policy, or what he'll do to move our nation forward, which are the things we should be discussing,

He'd rather pick fights and tweet ugly tweets about himself. A bold strategy...

He's done.

Thank the God of your choice.

Trump can not win. Early vote starts in 10 days and he's still hurling insults and storming around like a schoolyard bully who won't get picked for Dodge Ball. Maybe he's simply avoiding any discussion of policy, or what he'll do to move our nation forward, which are the things we should be discussing,

He'd rather pick fights and tweet ugly tweets about himself. A bold strategy...

He's done.

Thank the God of your choice. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

His scorched earth campaign at this point isn't about winning votes. It is about getting voters so disgusted and fed up with the election that they won't even bother to go out and vote which will be to his advantage.

Video JUST released. Trump on an escalator behind an unknown TEN YEAR OLD girl. As he's checking her out he tells his companions that he will be dating this little girl in ten years.

We are fucked with both candidates make no mistake about it. People our time is over.
The important issue at this point is how the next leader will influence and shape future generations.

Yeah, they would be singing the same song, cause they know the other candidate just takes money from hard working middle class people and just stiffs them in return... Originally Posted by Little Monster

So, you're saying they are dyed-in-the-wool Dems who value party allegiance above the integrity of America? Good point.