patrick.net

tatupu70 says

My lord--can you ever discuss Trump without mentioning Clinton?

Can you ever say something positive about Clinton, because she's the alternative to Trump. What good things will she accomplish on Economic and Foreign Policy grounds?

tatupu70 says

Is he looking for an endorsement from Dems?? Raising taxes on the rich won't get many endorsements from Republicans...

Who cares? He's gotten most of the endorsements he's going to get. Trump is depending on the Reagan Democrat and Nationalist Independent vote to win. Let the Cruzbots and the Country Club Ben Shaprio/Eric Erickson crowd pull for the Constitution or Libertarian Party.

tatupu70 says

I'd hate to see him negotiating with the Saudis or Chinese or Russians.

I'd hate to see her negotiating with the Saudis or the Wall Street Backed Chinese Outsourcers like Walmart, her former employer. Wayyyyyyy to in hoc to those entities for support to pursue America's raw self-interest.

tatupu70 says

Because he is the anti-politician. I thought he was the one who could get shit done and change everything in Washington.

He's, like, transcendent. Even when he does what all politicians do, he's not doing what they do.

He's stickin' it to the man.

After he's elected, he could do exactly what the rest of them do, but it's okay: he cares about me.

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/05/08/trump-taxes-will-go-up-on-wealthy-once-i-negotiate-with-dems/

Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” likely presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump said once he negotiates his tax plan with Democrats, “the taxes for the rich will go up some what.

HydroCabron says

After he's elected, he could do exactly what the rest of them do, but it's okay: he cares about me.

Nothing compared to all the reforms Hillary will accomplish with a Ryan-led Congress. Will be the next FDR.

Look at her track record of bravely fighting for the middle and working classes in the Senate, and her agreement with Bernie to reject big donations and PAC money.

It would be a nice change from Obama's strategy of proposing a plan and then threatening to veto anything else. Trump is a negotiator, I'd think he'd be better at hammering out a deal that folks could live with, unless of course they are a special interest oligarch. Those guys are pissed because they've got their way in the past by buying votes and Trump can't be bought.
I really don't see any reason for him to be POTUS unless he actually intends to make America great again, and fix the things that are broken. He's already filthy rich, why would more money tempt him? At 70, he's looking to legacy and what he's leaving behind for his kids and grandkids. Will it be a failed democracy or a vibrant one?

He isn't walking back his plan, he is negotiating already. Something Obama didn't know how to do.

tatupu70 says

"By the time it gets negotiated, it's going to be a different plan," Trump told George Stephanopoulos on ABC News' "This Week."

Trumps a realist.

thunderlips11 says

Nothing compared to all the reforms Hillary will accomplish with a Ryan-led Congress. Will be the next FDR.

We'll see who is actually leading Congress. If the GOPe sits this election out, it will be a split Congress.

Quigley says

It would be a nice change from Obama's strategy of proposing a plan and then threatening to veto anything else

That's how negotiating works. You project a position of strength BEFORE and a willingness to die before compromising. If you go in acknowledging that you will give up parts of your plan--that is weakness. As much as I like to make fun of Trump--he knows this. The only explanation is that he is telling independents that he really didn't mean the stuff he said to win the Rep. primary.

Quigley says

Trump is a negotiator

FortWayne says

He isn't walking back his plan, he is negotiating already. Something Obama didn't know how to do.

lol. Obama is the consummate negotiator. Everything he did was a compromise. But, he always projected strength. He never went into a negotiation giving up stuff before the talks even began.

If Trump is really a negotiator--he knows this.

Again--Trump isn't President. He isn't negotiating anything with anyone right now. He's just playing politics with voters.

Anyone/thing remotely connected to politics knows this is SOP.
Every news outlet has been bleating this would happen with all candidates for the past 6 months.
The real surprise is that you felt the need to re-re-re-re-re-re-hash old news.

tatupu70 says

If you weren't such a rube, you'd understand what he's really doing. It's called pivoting to the middle and giving up conservative values.

Why wouldn't he?
How else is he supposed to reclaim some of the lost hispanic vote?
The bigger question is why you are all worked up over plain vanilla political positioning...

tatupu70 says

Next, he'll start saying that maybe the wall isn't that important.

tatupu70 says

lol. Obama is the consummate negotiator. Everything he did was a compromise. But, he always projected strength. He never went into a negotiation giving up stuff before the talks even began.

son you don't know what you are talking about.

Xanthidae says

The bigger question is why you are all worked up over plain vanilla political positioning...

I told you already. I'm fine with it as long as everyone agrees that he's just another politician.

Both parties are the same, after all!

FortWayne says

son you don't know what you are talking about.

Are you kidding me? Everything has to be negotiated--Obamacare, budgets, taxes, etc.

Obama is the consummate negotiator.

If Trump is really a negotiator

Settle down, Clinton voter/supporter

errc says

Settle down, Clinton voter/supporter

I hope you're not referring to me? I'm no Clinton supporter, that's for damn sure.

But he's not another politician.
He is an amateur wannabe politician, never holding public office before.
So what he actually votes for and against is unknown at this time.
And let me cut your next argument off by stating that you can't judge how he will rule based on his political contributions of the past, as those were made from a business approach.

tatupu70 says

I told you already. I'm fine with it as long as everyone agrees that he's just another politician.

I hope you're not referring to me? I'm no Clinton supporter, that's for damn sure.

What is your ratio of posts critical of Trump, compared to the posts critical of Clinton?

I know you have said that you support Bernie, and that if it comes down to trump v. Clinton, you will have a tough choice to make. However, you're posting pattern doesn't seem to jive with that claim. I would expect other Bernie supporters to expend all energy exposing Clinton, being that she is the only opposition we have. And being that Bernie will trounce Trump so handidly, that you'd either leave Trump alone, or root him home, no?

errc says

What is your ratio of posts critical of Trump, compared to the posts critical of Clinton?

There's no need. Show me the hundreds of incorrect threads about how great Clinton is and how she is the only one who can fix America like you see on here about Trump. If there were, I would post on there too. But Trump is a narcissistic idiot that lies every time he opens his mouth, and he would be a disaster in the White House.

Further, you never see my going on the many, many anti Clinton threads defending her.

I wish it weren't so, but the Dem race is over unless Clinton gets indicted. And my posting here won't help that case. It's going to be Clinton vs. Trump.

This is a non-topic. Has any political candidate ever kept a single campaign promise in the history of politics? I only know of one, Ron Paul.

tatupu70 says

Further, you never see my going on the many, many anti Clinton threads defending her.

This is where we disagree. I'll take my chances with Trump, to keep (much less grow) a multibillion dollar enterprise he can't be a complete moron. With Hillary, I know I'm going to get exactly what I don't want.

thunderlips11 says

This is where we disagree. I'll take my chances with Trump, to keep (much less grow) a multibillion dollar enterprise he can't be a complete moron. With Hillary, I know I'm going to get exactly what I don't want

I'm just not sure about that. How self unaware do you have to be to send out the taco bowl tweet? This is the guy you want handling foreign relations?

The "you're fired"/"the wall just got 10 feet higher" schtick isn't going to work as well with foreign leaders as it does with the CIC crowd.

tatupu70 says

The "you're fired"/"the wall just got 10 feet higher" schtick isn't going to work as well with foreign leaders as it does with the CIC crowd.

We hear that all the time from Neoliberals. First it was big promises, then it was give it more time. Now it's you suck, you're lazy, and you're getting the unemployment and misery you deserve.

I'm absolutely intent on socking it to the man this year, whether that is Trump or Bernie or best of all Both running with no establishment controlled opposition candidate at all.

Somebody can write in Bernie, or vote Jill Stein or John McAfee or Huntsman, that's great. But a vote for Hillary is a vote for the 1%er Establishment, period.

I like the idea of voting anti-establishment, but couldn't we have found a better choice than Trump?

We got who we got. Is he perfect, no. I can't think of anybody else.

The Establishment absolutely depends on fear-mongering over change. It's amazing what crappy situations -far worse than ours- people will put up with and still heed the "Avoid Risk, Avoid Danger, Stay with the Experienced and Level Headed Status Quo - ignore our mistakes" line. This isn't aimed at you but a general observation about the current marketing by the Establishment.

We did have a guy once who didn't rip on Mexicans, was far less bellicose, but who also talked about Trade and Jobs for the Working Class. The Establishment pulled the same "Dangerous, Stay the course with Us." with him (along with Napoleon height references - possible despot, you see?). His name was Ross Perot, and he was 110% correct about NAFTA.

Same tactics, different year.

thunderlips11 says

We did have a guy once who didn't rip on Mexicans, was far less bellicose, but who also talked about Trade and Jobs for the Working Class. The Establishment pulled the same "Dangerous, Stay the Source with Us." with him (along with Napoleon height references - possible despot, you see?). His name was Ross Perot, and he was 110% correct about NAFTA.

Yep--I voted for him. Twice.

I wish it weren't so, but the Dem race is over unless Clinton gets indicted. And my posting here won't help that case. It's going to be Clinton vs. Trump.

-----------

Well, you've been wrong before. The Dem race is far from over. Bernie is

errc says

Well, you've been wrong before. The Dem race is far from over. Bernie is

I certainly have been--hopefully I'm wrong again.

The media narrative with Bernie hasn't been all that great. While one can argue Trump is sucking out a lot of the air, well, you know what I'm going to say... only one candidate, very progressive, not a household name, still hasn't been able to decisively beat him in the primaries.

Point is since April Cruz was so far behind Trump, and the upcoming schedule was all NE states he couldn't possibly win like NY and RI and DE, most of the MSM kept talking like it was a possibility.

Truth is Bernie is not far behind Hillary in elected delegates, and if he ever matched her, it would shake up the Superdelegates. Trump winning Indiana and Cruz suspending was the big story, but the equally big news that Bernie won another big primary surprise victory against Hillary got the short end of the stick.

Not that Hillary's Private Prison Lobbyists like Bill Shaheen would ditch her at first opportunity, but it would cause a "democratic vote" crisis in the Democratic party.

Enthusiasm Matters, take a look at the Indiana and Michigan polling for Hillary v Bernie. In both cases Hillary was supposed to win by a comfortable margin; the average of all polls in Indiana was just shy of 7% margin of victory, a clear victory, for Hillary. Sanders won by 5 points. Michigan was even worse, the average of polls had her 20 points ahead, she lost by 1.5%.

"The Blacks" weren't enthusiastic. But the white progressives were.

Hillary is lucky to get a few hundred at an event; Trump packs them in - as does Bernie - by the many thousands.