Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

[Karl Henning]

Couldn't agree more. At any rate, it will be all over in a little more than two weeks, if there is no need for a recount.

Hear, hear.

[Gurn Blanston]

More of the same Career Politician vs. Highly Successful Private Sector Billionaire Businessman

I often ask myself why would someone in Trump's position in life want to go thru all of this aggravation .. he's already got it all. He's living the dream.

Not MY dream...

[Brian]

I took a look at redstate.com for the first time to see what the other side was thinking/saying.  Boy was I shocked to see the level of vitriol directed against Trump!

redstate.com has always been strongly anti-Trump - it's run by Erick Erickson, who actually received death threats for his anti-Trumpism. He also had creepy strangers visit his house, and when the Erickson family went to the grocery store, somebody told Erick's son, "Your father is killing America," or something similar.

[Brian]

Not MY dream...

What, you don't dream of a penthouse with a living room big enough to put your old house in, a 50-foot dining table, secretly limited cashflow, endless litigation, and unlimited license to molest supermodels?

[Karl Henning]

Anyone seen snypsss?  As whatever-it-was wears off, and he awakes to the likelihood of a Clinton presidency . . . well, I just worry a little about him, is all.

[Parsifal]

This video is a collection of Trump statements compiled by a conservative PAC.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qu8VippicnA

Just a few years ago he was far more liberal than Hillary.

[Karl Henning]

This video is a collection of Trump statements compiled by a conservative PAC.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qu8VippicnA

Just a few years ago he was far more liberal than Hillary.

Well, that's sort of The El Tupé Story, really.  About 50% of the time, he rambles incoherently, and 25% of the time he says stuff which contradicts what he said the remaining 25% of the time.

[Madiel]

Well, that's sort of The El Tupé Story, really.  About 50% of the time, he rambles incoherently, and 25% of the time he says stuff which contradicts what he said the remaining 25% of the time.

That's "balance" for you.

[San Antone]

Well, that's sort of The El Tupé Story, really.  About 50% of the time, he rambles incoherently, and 25% of the time he says stuff which contradicts what he said the remaining 25% of the time.

Actually, that was part of his appeal, to me at least.  He was not one of the Republican social issue dinosaurs.  His pandering to the evangelicals was a mistake, imo.  I keep hoping for a new Conservative coalition to emerge based on individual liberties (including the right to choose an abortion) small government, low taxes, economic strength and reduced global footprint for the US.  And nothing about the religious right's agenda.

[Zeus]

redstate.com has always been strongly anti-Trump - it's run by Erick Erickson, who actually received death threats for his anti-Trumpism. He also had creepy strangers visit his house, and when the Erickson family went to the grocery store, somebody told Erick's son, "Your father is killing America," or something similar.

Thanks. I remember reading something about Erick Erickson recently. You've helped me connect the dots.

[Karl Henning]

Actually, that was part of his appeal, to me at least.  He was not one of the Republican social issue dinosaurs.  His pandering to the evangelicals was a mistake, imo.  I keep hoping for a new Conservative coalition to emerge based on individual liberties (including the right to choose an abortion) small government, low taxes, economic strength and reduced global footprint for the US.  And nothing about the religious right's agenda.

All well taken;  there has to be a better political party of the right.

[Parsifal]

Actually, that was part of his appeal, to me at least.  He was not one of the Republican social issue dinosaurs.  His pandering to the evangelicals was a mistake, imo.  I keep hoping for a new Conservative coalition to emerge based on individual liberties (including the right to choose an abortion) small government, low taxes, economic strength and reduced global footprint for the US.  And nothing about the religious right's agenda.

In the video, mostly compiled from his previous bid for president, he gives strong support for stronger gun control, universal single-payer health care, a large tax increase that will raise 5 trillion dollars of revenue, Obama's economic stimulus and a nuclear deal with Iran negotiated by Hillary. He calls the Republican economic policy advocated by conservative Republicans "too crazy." If you support Trump you must have loved Bernie Sanders!

[San Antone]

In the video, mostly compiled from his previous bid for president, he gives strong support for stronger gun control, universal single-payer health care, a large tax increase that will raise 5 trillion dollars of revenue, Obama's economic stimulus and a nuclear deal with Iran negotiated by Hillary. He calls the Republican economic policy advocated by conservative Republicans "too crazy." If you support Trump you must have loved Bernie Sanders!

I didn't watch the video and didn't know he had a previous bid for president.  There was some agreement with Trump and Sanders on some issues, e.g. trade deals and corporate influence.

I've seen videos of Hillary Clinton where she advocated using nuclear weapons, not taking that option off the table - something she has said now is one of Trump's reckless policies.  It happens, people say different things at different moments depending on what they think will play well.

As I said, the fact that Trump's conservatism was tempered by his being a New York moderate was a plus in his column.

[Parsifal]

I've seen videos of Hillary Clinton where she advocated using nuclear weapons, not taking that option off the table - something she has said now is one of Trump's reckless policies.  It happens, people say different things at different moments depending on what they think will play well.

Every President, including Obama, has supported a defense policy in which the U.S. does not rule out a nuclear "first strike." There is nothing remotely controversial or hypocritical about it.

From the New York Times:

Obama Unlikely to Vow No First Use of Nuclear Weapons

President Obama, who has weighed ruling out a first use of a nuclear weapon in a conflict, appears likely to abandon the proposal after top national security advisers argued that it could undermine allies and embolden Russia and China, according to several senior administration officials.

...

Full article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/06/science/obama-unlikely-to-vow-no-first-use-of-nuclear-weapons.html?_r=0

The issue with Trump was that national security advisors who briefed Trump after his nomination said that they were shocked that he seemed willing to use Nuclear Weapons in contexts that would conventionally be considered unthinkable. He said, for instance, that he might attack ISIS with nuclear weapons.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/04/world/donald-trump-nuclear-weapons.html

[Rinaldo]

I often ask myself why would someone in Trump's position in life want to go thru all of this aggravation .. he's already got it all. He's living the dream.

A quote from a book I've read recently comes to mind.

"James, there is never a moment in a life when a selfish heart is satisfied."

[Karl Henning]

It might be unwise as a POTUS to announce, "We will never use nuclear weapons." (It would also invite the follow-up query, Why don't you dismantle your stockpile, then?)

But, face it, talk of "nuking ISIS" is roughly equal parts ridiculous and reckless.

[Karl Henning]

A quote from a book I've read recently comes to mind.

"James, there is never a moment in a life when a selfish heart is satisfied."

Sadly true.

[San Antone]

It might be unwise as a POTUS to announce, "We will never use nuclear weapons." (It would also invite the follow-up query, Why don't you dismantle your stockpile, then?)

But, face it, talk of "nuking ISIS" is roughly equal parts ridiculous and reckless.

It is also disingenuous for Clinton to call him reckless in the debates for having a less nuanced position than hers.

[Karl Henning]

Not sure I agree.  Lack of nuance is so often sheer recklessness.

I know: nuance is easy to scoff at these days.

[Karl Henning]

The one thing that might have saved El Tupé in the third debate could be:  Auto-tune.

http://www.youtube.com/v/FdBF6h7oH5I