Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

[Brian]

I didn't think there was any gaffe that could kill Trump. I thought the guy was gaffe-proof. I really thought he could say any and every insane thought he had, and nobody would ever complain.

But calling mass shooters "geniuses in a certain way" might be it. I really think that might be it.

[Karl Henning]

I didn't think there was any gaffe that could kill Trump. I thought the guy was gaffe-proof. I really thought he could say any and every insane thought he had, and nobody would ever complain.

But calling mass shooters "geniuses in a certain way" might be it. I really think that might be it.

Time will tell ....

[(poco) Sforzando]

I didn't think there was any gaffe that could kill Trump. I thought the guy was gaffe-proof. I really thought he could say any and every insane thought he had, and nobody would ever complain.

But calling mass shooters "geniuses in a certain way" might be it. I really think that might be it.

Reminds me of Stockhausen's "the greatest work of art imaginable for the whole cosmos."

But: When the reporter noted his use of the phrase "stuff happens" in describing a massacre, Jeb!, obviously annoyed, quickly added, "Things happen. 'Things.' Is that better?" Yes, Jeb! Much better.

[Todd]

I didn't think there was any gaffe that could kill Trump. I thought the guy was gaffe-proof. I really thought he could say any and every insane thought he had, and nobody would ever complain.

But calling mass shooters "geniuses in a certain way" might be it. I really think that might be it.

You sure it was a gaffe?

Trump's numbers have been sliding since the second debate.  The trend is your friend.

[drogulus]

It's also worth remembering Hillary's past performance.  Remember this October 2007 CBS poll: Hillary Clinton 45%, Barack Obama 16%, John Edwards 7%?  She was well known and pretty much invincible then, the prohibitive front-runner, etc.

     The situation will be quite different if Hillary gets the nomination. She'll be running against a Republican, who either runs on his party's platform and record and is therefore slaughtered, or runs away from said platform and record, an alternative path to annihilation. What's the win for them? Keep in mind that these Repubs have broken all records for public spite, resentment and stupidity. What once were their own people are ashamed of them.

[Daverz]

I have been telling friends all along Hillary is not a lock for the nomination.  Biden seems to agree.  I think Biden would be a stronger candidate.  He seems dim but decent. I can think of several dems who would be stronger than she.  Webb most likely.

Webb is barely a Democrat and could not make it through the primaries.

[Karl Henning]

Reminds me of Stockhausen's "the greatest work of art imaginable for the whole cosmos."

It was decided that Karlheinz the Great was regrettably misconstrued there, wasn't it?  (Oh, I kid, I kid . . . .)

[Todd]

Keep in mind that these Repubs have broken all records for public spite, resentment and stupidity.

What records do you write of and where can I see the list of current record holders?

[Daverz]

What records do you write of and where can I see the list of current record holders?

Somewhere in the bowels of the Richard Nixon library, I'm sure.

[Pat B]

It was decided that Karlheinz the Great was regrettably misconstrued there, wasn't it?  (Oh, I kid, I kid . . . .)

Definitely the press's fault.

[Karl Henning]

Definitely the press's fault.

Danged Mainstream Media!

[Todd]

The Trans-Pacific Partnership deal is done!

For 2016 purposes, is it A.) Capitulation to elites running transnational corporations whose very goal is the impoverishment of workers and exploitation of the rural poor everywhere, or B.) The largest trade deal in history that will lower a record number of tariffs and benefit consumers the world over on a scale heretofore unimagined?  (snyprrr, you reading this?)  Even more important for the purposes of this thread, will candidates come out strongly in support or strongly opposed before being briefed on the details, oversimplifying and distorting an exceptionally long and complex agreement? 

[Ken B]

Webb is barely a Democrat and could not make it through the primaries.

Oh I agree with that completely. But I think he could win. I think right-side-of-the-democrats would win easily. I think Gephardt or someone like him would have beat Bush soundly in 2004. They just cannot get nominated.

[Brian]

The Trans-Pacific Partnership deal is done!

For 2016 purposes, is it A.) Capitulation to elites running transnational corporations whose very goal is the impoverishment of workers and exploitation of the rural poor everywhere, or B.) The largest trade deal in history that will lower a record number of tariffs and benefit consumers the world over on a scale heretofore unimagined?  (snyprrr, you reading this?)  Even more important for the purposes of this thread, will candidates come out strongly in support or strongly opposed before being briefed on the details, oversimplifying and distorting an exceptionally long and complex agreement?

Well Trump and Sanders are already opposed, so there's your question answered.

Personally I think the deal sounds fantastic.

[Todd]

Well Trump and Sanders are already opposed, so there's your question answered.

Well, in Trump's defense, he is, like, a really smart person, and he no doubt has really great people who filled him in on all the details already.  (It was probably Bret Michaels.)

[Karl Henning]

Well, in Trump's defense, he is, like, a really smart person, and he no doubt has really great people who filled him in on all the details already.  (It was probably Bret Michaels.)

His administration will be winning so much, you'll get bored with winning.

[drogulus]

What records do you write of and where can I see the list of current record holders?

     Go back and look yourself, see if you can find anything since the Know Nothings to compare with the current bunch. Have you been following events the last few years?

     Supposing for a moment that anything can be debated, just to keep ones skills up, say, this would have to fall under "parties disagree on the shape of the Earth, Thos. Friedman calls for an end to partisan bickering".

[Todd]

Go back and look yourself, see if you can find anything since the Know Nothings to compare with the current bunch. Have you been following events the last few years?

Yep.  And I know US history.  That's why when I see someone complaining about just how "bad" things are now, I know it's either meaningless puffery or ignorance in the form of complaint.  Congressional leaders today could take lessons in obstruction from Uncle Joe Cannon and Henry Cabot Lodge, for instance.  Those men knew how to kill legislation dead.  Bless them.

[Brian]

A friend of mine likes to point out that political discourse could hardly be getting worse by the year, if we started with the Vice President literally murdering his political rival.

[Daverz]

Yep.  And I know US history.  That's why when I see someone complaining about just how "bad" things are now, I know it's either meaningless puffery or ignorance in the form of complaint.  Congressional leaders today could take lessons in obstruction from Uncle Joe Cannon and Henry Cabot Lodge, for instance.  Those men knew how to kill legislation dead.  Bless them.

Have to agree with Droggy.  Sure, it was worse in 1860, but the Republican Party has definitely been losing it's grip on reality over the past 30 years, and the trend has really accelerated over the last 5 years.  Hopefully we won't need another William Tecumseh Sherman.