Trump Revives The Clinton Revolution


#1

I have been listening to the smear campaign of Ted Cruz this week and realizing some things about my own paradigm of thought in regards to American Politics, I have been wrong on several counts.

I remember back in 1992 how outraged I was at the way Bill Clinton seemed to lie with impunity, he would say opposite things sometimes just…

Click here to view the article.


#2

While the record on Trump’s and Rubio’s positions are different from the record to which Ted Cruz points, they immediately claim that Ted Cruz is lying, the media repeats it 24//7, and the lemmings assume that its the truth. The same media gives Cruz no time to counter these false claims against him.

I think that the electorate is in for a rude awakening when their honeymoon feeling with Trump or Rubio fades.


#3

Keep in mind, Cruz has few friends. In college, in the senate, etc. Most people don’t like him. When people don’t like you, they’re much quicker to believe bad things about you.

Ben Carson could probably start lying with regularity, and get away with it for a looong time, just because he comes across as a nice, honest gentleman. It’s hard to overcome gut perceptions.

Anyone wanting to understand this(and most) elections, should skim through Malcom Gladwell’s “Blink”. It’s been one of the three books responsible for my track record on election predictions these past ten years.

I don’t really agree with your premise of voting for people with strong character. W. Bush was a good man. So too, I would argue was Jimmy Carter. Neither was fit to be president. Nixon and Clinton may have had few to no morals, but both were significantly better presidents than the honest bumblers. Sure, sometimes you get Reagan who happens to be both, but the competence is what matters the most.


#4

Honest men have no place in a pit of snakes. I would argue that both Carter and Bush(43) would have made great Presidents if you take corruption out of government. I also find that I am much more forgiving of honest people. I will tell anyone who ask that Bush was a terrible President but I can forgive his mistakes far easier than say Clinton of even his father Bush Sr.


#5

Carter? No way.


#6

Bush was a good President, not as Conservative as I like but overall a very good President.

Carters character was deplorable and Carter was an awful President, an Anti Semite baby killing liar who claimed god as his inspiration.

Clintons character was deplorable and Clinton was an awful President, the GOP Congress made him look better domestically than the clear path he was heading down in his first two years before he got the entire Congress of his Party thrown out of office.

Reagan and Bush 41 were both good men but only one was a Conservative, both were remarkable foreign policy/Trade/National Security Presidents and Reagan was great domestically as well in spite of a Congress populated by his opposition.

Nixon had deplorable character and was a Liberal, the only President that could give Obama a run for his money on disregarding the Constitution and setting long term destructive forces in place that continue their legacy of destruction long after they leave.

Johnson was as big a Racist and a liar as Obama and sentenced whole demographics to permanent poverty, a horrible President indeed.

Kennedy was unique, A Conservative with a mix of honorable to poor character depending on the vice; he was on track to be a one termer when he was assassinated with a record low approval rating of 25%

On balance I would say that strong character matters more than ideology, but nonetheless that was not the point of the piece. The point of the piece was that there are lines that some will cross which should disqualify them from service in the mind of anyone who values character.

A Habitual Liar with no conscience regarding who he attacks is one of those lines, Trump has blown past that line without ever tapping the brakes so his popularity serves as an accurate testament to the character of the Republican Party rank and file.

So I was wrong for many years, the GOP Base does not need a new Conservative Party; they are members of the perfect Party for them right now.


#7

[quote=“RET423, post:6, topic:48333”]
Kennedy was unique, A Conservative with a mix of honorable to poor character depending on the vice; he was on track to be a one termer when he was assassinated with a record low approval rating of 25%
[/quote]When he died, it was just below %60. His *disapproval *was about %30.

[quote=“RET423, post:6, topic:48333”]
On balance I would say that strong character matters more than ideology, but nonetheless that was not the point of the piece. The point of the piece was that there are lines that some will cross which should disqualify them from service in the mind of anyone who values character.
[/quote]Trump has a background in sports. He was scouted for two major league teams in high school.
When you’re out on the field, you talk all sorts of trash to and about the other team. You say things to try to get into their head. Make them doubt themselves. You play to the crowd, to keep them going if they’re on your side, or shut them up if they’re hostile.
No one is under the understanding that what you say is meant to be taken literally. When the game is over, everything is friendly, and you put it all behind you.

But right up until then, you guys are locked in a battle and you do and say things that aren’t “gentlemanly”. It’s not a fancy man’s game. Maybe politics was before, but it’s not anymore. I don’t consider trash talk to be an indication of someone’s character. It’s all part of the game.

Rather than looking at theater to determine someone’s character, I’d rather look at the company they keep, and(most importantly) their children. Trump’s children seem to be very well put together, and that is not common among children from privileged backgrounds. Maybe Trump is a good father and a terrible person. Maybe his kids all turned out well, despite what a terrible father he is. Anything is possible. But I tend to think Trump is someone who does the right thing, based on outcomes. I do believe that he views the world through a “The ends always justify the means” perspective. I share this view, but I understand many other people do not.


#8

I am not trying to convince anyone who finds Donald Trump’s character acceptable to change their mind, I never tried to get anyone who was an apologist for Bill Clinton to change their mind either; there is no limit to the justification that those who do not value good character can apply to any action regardless of how despicable.

Support whoever you want and be happy that there are two political party’s that embrace your standards, my observations of what has occurred in the GOP rank and file are designed to shame those who know better and point out that the awful character that was once almost universally condemned by Republicans has now been embraced by Republicans.

If you consider that a positive change then you must be feeling quite optimistic about now, but I will not be sharing your optimism.


#9

No one should ever have been fooled by Carter’s sweater wearing demeanor. George W. Bush is a man made of character and ruled by his faith. Carter is of the belief that if the church doesn’t follow the moral trends of the day then he is obligated to leave said church. In other words he chooses his backwards liberal religion over his God. This was the man that decided during the malaise of the 70’s that the order of the day was to wear sweaters, and carry empty suitcases in public in order to appear as if he was hard at work. He also continuously sought to undermine every single one of his successors in foreign countries. Drove Clinton absolutely crazy at one point.

So George has more character.
Jimmy should have stayed with the peanuts.

The Constitution does not support an “ends justify the means” perspective in governing. That is what we have now in government within the parties. That is the corruption Trump fans supposedly voice their frustration about. That perspective is dangerous and is found in authoritarian, tyrannical regimes. In other words…it is effectively breaking a few eggs in order to make the omelet. Only the “eggs” are lives, rights, and liberties.


#10

I generally don’t put much weight on endorsements but Donald Trump is the only candidate with (negative) endorsements from El Chapo ($100 million bounty), the Socialist Pontiff, and now the Red Chinese.

China Warns U.S. After Trump Wins Nevada Caucus


#11

When we have the number of qualified candidates this nation has and we select Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump to be the nominees, I think it high time we stop pointing fingers elsewhere and acknowledge the role regular citizens play in the selection process and begin questioning our character as a people.


#12

[quote=“MDMikeB, post:11, topic:48333”]
When we have the number of qualified candidates this nation has and we select Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump to be the nominees, I think it high time we stop pointing fingers elsewhere and acknowledge the role regular citizens play in the selection process and begin questioning our character as a people.
[/quote]I didn’t see a lot of quality options over on the Dem side.

I’ve always said that people have plenty of options, and our candidates match our level of engagement. Of course we could do better, but that would require voters pay some attention to stuff. Most of them are more concerned about Vampire Diaries than trade deals.

That said, I am personally more pleased with Trump as a candidate than anyone that’s run in my lifetime.


#13

I wasn’t implying quality on the Dem side - although they have folks better suited to run than Hillary Clinton. That is not to be taken as an endorsement of ANY DEMOCRAT - it appears I need to point that out.

As for Trump pleasing you as a candidate, let us both hope the level of your current euphoria matches the quality of his presidency.


#14

He’ll either be a great president, or a terrible one.
I’m willing to gamble.


#15

CW - I think it’s clear a lot of people agree with you.


#16

:yeahthat:

All the alternatives are either terrible or unelectable.


#17

And the result will be the same as those who gamble on State Lottery’s, every shred of information and reason points to the statistical impossibility of winning with this bet but many people still buy the tickets.


#18

WHAT “number of qualified candidates?” Outside of Cruz, WHO, outside of Trump, was so wonderfully qualified to take us out and away from having the same slop wash, rinse, repeat that we’ve had shoved down our throats for the last 2 decades? (Actually, far more, but why quibble?)

In case you hadn’t noticed, a whole LOT of us “regular citizens” are MORE than fried out tired of being taken for granted, and USED - time and again - as useful idiot tools by the elite who consider us no more than the unwashed masses, thoroughly absorbed by nothing else than retaining their POWER.

To HELL with them! They NEED TO GET A MESSAGES, ONCE AND FOR ALL!

I think! I am reasonably intelligent. I can see right straight through their shenanigans. I’m sick to death of it!


#19

[quote=“RET423, post:17, topic:48333”]
And the result will be the same as those who gamble on State Lottery’s, every shred of information and reason points to the statistical impossibility of winning with this bet but many people still buy the tickets.
[/quote]I’d liken it to having a pair of 10s, a jack, queen, and king. Then deciding to toss one of the 10s back, and hope for an ace, or at least a higher pair.

I win most of my bets :cowboy:


#20

What gamble? Every other conceivable GOP nominee sucks or is unelectable.