Political Predictions 2016

[Philip]

I just wish that Trump would cut the juvenile NY BS! Really, how many times can you avoid intelligent criticisms by just calling every opponent a "loser" or stereotyping them with some lowbrow comment? Really, you'd think he never got out of high school. He'd actually do considerably better if he'd just show some maturity. It just shows you how bad Hillary and co. are - as people so despise her that they are willing to overlook all of Trump's juvenile crap. Conservatives feel they have little choice but to hope Trump isn't a complete moron, as he has tapped into many legitimate concerns. And so either he really is an idiot who thinks on the level of a drunk frat boy, or he thinks that is how most Americans (those who agree with many things he has said) think. And his success with the immature approach has only massively encouraged him. If he continues this kind of crap, he'll not be a very effective president. And if he's a dismal failure, in four years, the left will just dress us someone new who re-packages progressivism into the latest attractive package - you know, more "hope and change" crap. I blame Trump's rise (as opposed to a smarter, more mature, TRUE conservative) on a vacuum in Republican leadership AND millions of voters who have so long not supported good candidates when they COULD have, until this is what we've ended up with.

I can tell you this, if Trump turns out to be a complete moron and failure, that will be the end of conservative hopes at the presidential level. The methodical destruction of America by Obama and Democratic leadership will only pick up right were it left off - that is, IN ADDITION TO ANY MESS TRUMP GETS US INTO. IF Trump becomes president, TRUE conservatives better relentlessly hold his feet to the fire, and call him on it if he tries a runaround of intelligent discourse with more dumbo stuff! I can see him demonizing ANY smart conservative who challenges his usual dimwit tactics! What may well get him elected is highly unlikely to make him a good leader. Just continuing to play to your die-hard constituents without trying to convince those across the spectrum of your good and innovative ideas will leave the country no better off that we've been the last eight years. Millions of people need to be encouraged and challenged to change how they think about issues and approaches. Just trying to politically dominate without changing minds and hearts won't really leave America any better off. I hope Trump realizes the tremendous opportunity he has, and to leave his ego out of it (fat chance!). The backroom, NY boardroom BS approach will end up a disaster, if that remains his tactic. We've had the sexual deviate and his demented enabling wife, the radical community organizer, we don't need a gameshow host, pseudo-conservative to lead us to equally bad places. Evil often brilliantly uses both the right and the left - it's an equal opportunity destroyer!

Whether anyone here agrees with me or not, we ALL need to be in constant prayer for America to seek God, because, otherwise, the latest political flavor of the moment will just be another disaster. This world is in terrible trouble, and righteous anger will only take us so far, because there are vast millions of voters who have terrible sensibilities about God, morality, and their own personal responsibilities. Mere politics won't cut it, no matter how "brilliantly" executed. And instead of demonizing everyone we disagree with, we better be trying to reach their hearts and minds with the spiritual FIRST. That means we better start caring about people that disagree with us (and SHOWING it!) - else they'll NEVER listen to us. If we change our nation spiritually, and begin getting THAT right, the politics will begin to take care of itself. Too many wrongly think the answer is to put the political cart before the spiritual horse.

OK, sorry for the rant! On second thought, NO I'm NOT!

[Jac3510]

*yawn*

For a more substantive remark, phil, you're just wrong. He would be doing far worse if he took your suggestions. Look, I hate the fact that this is where I politics have come, but it is. People are pissed as all get out, and they want someone who will call people losers and stupid, because that's what they think government bureaucrats are: stupid losers.

Like it or not, Trump crushed his opposition doing exactly what you are saying you don't want him to do. And he'll win in the general by doing it, too. I don't like it, but that's reality. And for us to sit around and whine about tone and language when lives and livelihoods are at stake strikes me as more than a bit naive. I bet you could imagine how Trump would respond to that.

Trump is no savior. That's only Christ. But he's ten million times better than Clinton and ten million times ten million times better than Romney, and maybe only a few hundred times better than McCain. He could improve a lot, sure. But he's the man for the times. We can both hate it, but that's less about hating the man than it is hating the times. Fuss about that all you like, but better just be honest about it and deal with reality as it is rather than throw a temper tantrum and insist we pretend things aren't like they really are. In other words, I'm politely trying to tell you to open your eyes, get over yourself, and deal with it. Of all the things to fuss about Trump (particularly when he's facing Clinton), complaining that he acts like a high schooler strikes me as, well . . . a little middle-schoolish.

[Philip]

So, Jac, just because the opposition is so bad, that makes Trump beyond reasonable criticism? He has a both a big and loose mouth. I just hope he is a lot smarter than he seems? Really, Jac, you are seem rather inconsistent when it comes to Trump. You and Abel must be drinking from the same punchbowl. The guy is unnecessarily offensive to millions he should be trying to win over to his ideas. So you think just deliberately pissing everybody off is a smart tactic? You think it is NECESSARY? Listen, I despise the values of the opposition. Believe me, his massive ego is very dangerous. But, hopefully, not as dangerous as Bubba and HILL II. I've spent 25 years in the rough and tough corporate jungle with wealthy, highly aggressive, impulsive, ego-driven narcissists just like him - I know his type only too well. Which is why he worries me. But the other "horse" appears to be far more dangerous, but in different ways. We'll see, eh? But I can tell you anyone who doesn't have significant concerns about Trump isn't paying much attention! It has to do with far more than a supposed need to play nice and civil! No, we don't need a NICE guy. But we DO need a thoughtful, intelligent, and prudently cautious one.

[abelcainsbrother]

I just wish that Trump would cut the juvenile NY BS! Really, how many times can you avoid intelligent criticisms by just calling every opponent a "loser" or stereotyping them with some lowbrow comment? Really, you'd think he never got out of high school. He'd actually do considerably better if he'd just show some maturity. It just shows you how bad Hillary and co. are - as people so despise her that they are willing to overlook all of Trump's juvenile crap. Conservatives feel they have little choice but to hope Trump isn't a complete moron, as he has tapped into many legitimate concerns. And so either he really is an idiot who thinks on the level of a drunk frat boy, or he thinks that is how most Americans (those who agree with many things he has said) think. And his success with the immature approach has only massively encouraged him. If he continues this kind of crap, he'll not be a very effective president. And if he's a dismal failure, in four years, the left will just dress us someone new who re-packages progressivism into the latest attractive package - you know, more "hope and change" crap. I blame Trump's rise (as opposed to a smarter, more mature, TRUE conservative) on a vacuum in Republican leadership AND millions of voters who have so long not supported good candidates when they COULD have, until this is what we've ended up with.

I can tell you this, if Trump turns out to be a complete moron and failure, that will be the end of conservative hopes at the presidential level. The methodical destruction of America by Obama and Democratic leadership will only pick up right were it left off - that is, IN ADDITION TO ANY MESS TRUMP GETS US INTO. IF Trump becomes president, TRUE conservatives better relentlessly hold his feet to the fire, and call him on it if he tries a runaround of intelligent discourse with more dumbo stuff! I can see him demonizing ANY smart conservative who challenges his usual dimwit tactics! What may well get him elected is highly unlikely to make him a good leader. Just continuing to play to your die-hard constituents without trying to convince those across the spectrum of your good and innovative ideas will leave the country no better off that we've been the last eight years. Millions of people need to be encouraged and challenged to change how they think about issues and approaches. Just trying to politically dominate without changing minds and hearts won't really leave America any better off. I hope Trump realizes the tremendous opportunity he has, and to leave his ego out of it (fat chance!). The backroom, NY boardroom BS approach will end up a disaster, if that remains his tactic. We've had the sexual deviate and his demented enabling wife, the radical community organizer, we don't need a gameshow host, pseudo-conservative to lead us to equally bad places. Evil often brilliantly uses both the right and the left - it's an equal opportunity destroyer!

Whether anyone here agrees with me or not, we ALL need to be in constant prayer for America to seek God, because, otherwise, the latest political flavor of the moment will just be another disaster. This world is in terrible trouble, and righteous anger will only take us so far, because there are vast millions of voters who have terrible sensibilities about God, morality, and their own personal responsibilities. Mere politics won't cut it, no matter how "brilliantly" executed. And instead of demonizing everyone we disagree with, we better be trying to reach their hearts and minds with the spiritual FIRST. That means we better start caring about people that disagree with us (and SHOWING it!) - else they'll NEVER listen to us. If we change our nation spiritually, and begin getting THAT right, the politics will begin to take care of itself. Too many wrongly think the answer is to put the political cart before the spiritual horse.

OK, sorry for the rant! On second thought, NO I'm NOT!

I think you just do not like Trump's style and the way he responds and to you it seems childish. I see it differently first off Trump is a nice man until you are mean to him,but even then he let's it go after it is over. I think you have somehow forgot how many conservatives have been smeared by the liberal political machine,it seems to me that all of these people who have been smeared by liberals has been forgotten. I have paid attention to politics for years and I have seen how mean liberals can and have been and yet it worked.Liberals overtime have gotten everything they've wanted because of their tactics. Somehow during this election it seems like it has all been forgotten about. You claim Trump is like a high school bully,yet were you this appalled at how liberals smeared Sara Palin? Because nothing Trump has said this whole campaign even comes closes to the mean things that were said about Sara Palin and yet you see Trump as a bully? No! It is the other way around.

I realize politically we need a fighter like Trump,someone who will fight for the things he wants to do. We have seen the nice Republican approach before and it does not work. So Trump is like a breath of fresh air. We need change and nothing Trump wants to do would hurt America. Sometimes righteous anger is needed to change things,but Trump is not an angry man. I have not seen him angry this whole campaign,but I have seen anger from others. Trump is in a lot of ways doing what Reagan did just in his own style. Reagan was known as " The Great Communicator" Reagan knew how to speak directly to the American people and over the heads of all of the political pundits and Trump is doing the same thing just in a different way. No candidate ever lays out in detail what he/she wants to do like Trump is expected to. Hillary has not explained in detail how she will do the things she is running on,yet Trump is expected to?

The fact that things need to change politically is more important than Trump's gruff style. We cannot go on with status quo politics and so it is a no brainer for me. I'm tired of liberals getting everything they want politically because they fight for it unlike Republicans.Just because a President does what he says he's going to do is not necessarily good unless conservatism is moving forward and it is'nt and has not been moving forward for years. It is not the other good Republicans fault that we do not trust the Republican party. Had Trump not ran? Ted Cruz would probably be the nominee but we cannot trust the Republican party to a one term Senater who we do not really know politically or any of the other ones that could actually win.We need change and Trump is the answer this election.

I think the question is what are you holding our for that is so good with the Republican Party?They are part of the problem,not the solution.Trump's gruff style should not appall you as much as the lies of the Republican Party.So you've got to figure out what bothers you more their broken promises or Trump attacking back against political enemies?For me it is an easy choice. I am and have been more angry at Republicans for years than liberals and nothing Rush Limbaugh,Sean Hannity,etc says changes anything politically so that they become just a big ol conservative loop that plays over and over while our country is being destroyed by liberalism.,change is needed.

[RickD]

It warms the cockles of my heart to see that Jac and ACB have found something to bring them together. Even if it is kissing Trump's behind.

[Philip]

It warms the cockles of my heart to see that Jac and ACB have found something to bring them together. Even if it is kissing Trump's behind.

Anytime people fail to reasonably criticize their own candidate shows their extreme bias! Making excuses for whatever glaring issues their own have, merely due to how terrible the opposition is, is how this happens. Remember when ACB tried to defend Trump's supposed Christianity - EVEN THOUGH his own statements and history reveal that to be highly unlikely? Suddenly, anyone who has problems with Trump are supposedly clueless about how bad his opposition is, or that they don't understand that we need a tough guy to really take it to them. Failure to acknowledge the problems with your own favored candidates shows me a willingness to gloss over their serious potential problems. And when the masses do this, it gives that candidate a perceived mandate that they are above criticism, to operate without a sense of responsibility or concern for the opinions of reasonable people.

Funny, if Jac ever encountered someone on the forum that acted as Trump did, he'd despise him and have nothing to do with him - of course, with some witty, disparaging put-downs to show his contempt for his stupidity and cluelessness, while contrasting his own superior intellect. Ah, but the same fellow with such sensibilities runs for president against a very despicable opponent - and well, the enemy of your enemy becomes your great hope and friend. That's what I call being very inconsistent.

Realize, however, I do not say these criticisms of Trump while asserting I will not vote for him - as I think I have no choice, as I very well understand just how terribly despicable, dangerous and destructive his opposition is while also seeing some great positives in how he has framed many of the issues and highlighted the sins of the far left. But that also doesn't mean I see him as some anointed one who should be above criticism.

[Byblos]

It warms the cockles of my heart to see that Jac and ACB have found something to bring them together. Even if it is kissing Trump's behind.

Well count me in too. I honestly could not care less about Trump's style or mannerism or whatever else everyone else especially the left criticize him by. What I do care about is substance, agenda, tactical and strategic planning, economics, immigration, foreign policy, etc etc. I'll be honest further I wasn't sold on Trump either and was firmly in the lesser-of-two-evils camp. Until, that is, Trump's acceptance speech at the convention. I know, I know, it was the speech writers and all that and the guy is not exactly a Ronald Reagan type oratorian but again, whatever. The substance of his speech constitutes a broad outline of his policy and THAT is what I'm interested in and what gets my vote, period. The rest is simply exposing Hillary to what she truly is in the only manner she deserves.

So to summarize, here you have a gappist, a YECer, and an TE Catholic agreeing on something. Armageddon indeed!

[RickD]

I'm disappointed in you guys. You call yourself Christians, yet you can vote for Trump.

I need to live with my conscience. That's why I'm voting Hillary.

[Hortator]

It warms the cockles of my heart

[Jac3510]

So, Jac, just because the opposition is so bad, that makes Trump beyond reasonable criticism? He has a both a big and loose mouth. I just hope he is a lot smarter than he seems? Really, Jac, you are seem rather inconsistent when it comes to Trump. You and Abel must be drinking from the same punchbowl. The guy is unnecessarily offensive to millions he should be trying to win over to his ideas. So you think just deliberately pissing everybody off is a smart tactic? You think it is NECESSARY? Listen, I despise the values of the opposition. Believe me, his massive ego is very dangerous. But, hopefully, not as dangerous as Bubba and HILL II. I've spent 25 years in the rough and tough corporate jungle with wealthy, highly aggressive, impulsive, ego-driven narcissists just like him - I know his type only too well. Which is why he worries me. But the other "horse" appears to be far more dangerous, but in different ways. We'll see, eh? But I can tell you anyone who doesn't have significant concerns about Trump isn't paying much attention! It has to do with far more than a supposed need to play nice and civil! No, we don't need a NICE guy. But we DO need a thoughtful, intelligent, and prudently cautious one.

Of course he isn't beyond reasonable criticism. I've offered quite a bit of it. I'm waiting on any from you. Your "rant" comes across to me as little more than a temper tantrum. I'm not campaigning for Trump. I'm offering an analysis on reality: what is happening and why it is happening. I'm not offering any comment as to why I like or dislike the guy, because that is completely and totally irrelevant. Your comments on the other hand, philip, reduce to, "I think he's a meanie so there!" You've reduced yourself to name calling, which makes you no better than a libtard leftist (or, than Trump himself, whom you so despise for doing the exact same thing you are doing here).

In any case, yes, Trump is smarter than he seems. And no, you have never worked with "rough and tough corporate jungle with wealthy, highly aggressive, impulsive, ego-driven narcissists just like him." Trump's worth anywhere from $4-10 billion. I have no doubt you've worked with corporate CEOs. I expect we all have. And I expect we've all seen that they tend to be cut throat if not sociopaths. But don't make a mockery of yourself and tell me that you've worked with people like Trump. That's like somebody whose played catch with a single A minor league player saying, "Hey, I understand how Major League Baseball superstars play -- I've played with people just like them!" Of course, maybe I'm wrong, and you have worked with Larry Ellison, Michael Bloomberg, Sheldon Adelson, Jeff Bezos, Carl Icahn, George Soros, Steve Ballhmer, Phil Knight, Ronald Perelman, Harold Hamm, Rupert Murdoch, or any of the other more than 500 billionaires in the USA. But I seriously doubt it. I seriously doubt the people you've worked with have even been at Romney's tiny little (by comparison) $250 million net worth.

And that's an important point, Phil. You DON'T know people like Donald Trump. You don't make billions of dollars by being an idiot. The guys you have worked with and for are small timers. Their egos far outstrip their net worth. They think they are something when the REAL heavy weights could buy them ten, twenty, or a hundred times over. Real heavyweights destroy people like the guys you work with at the negotiating table every single day. That's why the guys you work with are lucky to be millionaires, but the people Trump is talking about are worth BILLIONS.

None of that, by the way, is an endorsement of Trump. I'm just stating facts that you need to deal with if you want to have a reasonable discussion about this. You really expect people to believe that Trump is some orangutan who just got lucky and accidentally fell into billions? How gullible can you be, Phil? You've bought into the leftist spin. You've been sold a bill of goods. You've bought snake oil. And that's easy to do because your emotional revulsion to the man inclines you to believe the worst things people can say about him. But step back and just look at the facts.

He is not a racist. He has never made a single disparaging comment about race.
He is not a sexist. Not only has he never made a disparaging comment about women for being women, but his own organization has more women in leadership positions than men.
He is not a xenophobe. He goal is to put Americans first, and that regardless of their background.

Now, does he insult people? Yes he does. Is he offensive? Yes, but not for being a racist or sexist. Is he arrogant? One of the most arrogant I have ever seen. Does he deserve to be POTUS? Absolutely not. Was he my first choice? Of course not--in fact, of all Republicans I would have voted for, he was literally the last, beating out ONLY those Republicans who I would never vote for. But do I think people should vote for him? Yes, yes I do. And ridiculous commentary/assertions like you've provided offer no reasons not to.

All the more, yes, his offensive approach WAS and continues to BE necessary. There is a reason that he won and that the people who followed the model you wanted followed lost, and lost badly. You have to understand that, Phil, if you want to understand what is going on in this country. If he had followed the typical, be-nice-and-politically-correct-and-don't-offend playbook, he wouldn't have attracted the attention he did from the media or from angry whites (who have a voice, too, whether you like it or not). He would have just been another politician and he would have been absolutely destroyed by Rubio or Christie or Bush. They would have shredded him if he played that game. Just like Hillary will shred him if he tries to play it with her. But he didn't. He decided to bring a gun to a knife fight, and he eviscerated everyone. He knows what he is doing, and he is doing it very well. He recognizes that people vote based on emotions. Trump is, above all, a salesman, and he is selling himself. He is selling an idea: the idea is that America needs to come first, that Americans need to come first, and that he is going to put them first. But it would have been tactically and strategically impossible to make that case using normal political, non-offensive speech. The free media and the anger he's channeling is part and parcel with the nature of the message.

So, complain all you like. Fuss and whine. But, to be very blunt, if you don't agree with me on this, then you simply have no idea what you are talking about. You don't understand politics. You don't understand the American electorate. You've been sold a bill of goods by leftist idiots in the media, you are playing into their hands. Open your eyes. See the world like it really is and quit complaining that your poor sensibilities were hurt by Trump's mean words.

--------------------

To be clear yet again, I do not endorse Trump. He was not my pick. I will begrudgingly vote for him over and against Clinton. None of this is fan-boy speak. It's just me being resigned to recognize the facts as they are and to stop living in a fantasy land.

[RickD]

Jac,

You actually made some good arguments. But then you just ruined it with this:

jac wrote:
So, complain all you like. Fuss and whine. But, to be very blunt, if you don't agree with me on this, then you simply have no idea what you are talking about. You don't understand politics. You don't understand the American electorate. You've been sold a bill of goods by leftist idiots in the media, you are playing into their hands. Open your eyes. See the world like it really is and quit complaining that your poor sensibilities were hurt by Trump's mean words.

[Jac3510]

*shrug* Don't really care, dude. It's actually a substantive part of the discussion, but ignore it if you like.

Related to the ruining part:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl ... ition.html

[Jac3510]

You also might want to read this and related posts on that blog:

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/1411465892 ... rsus-trump

[Philip]

Yep, Jac is rather contradictory in that he apparently agrees with much of what I said.

Jac: "I think he's a meanie so there!"

NO! I think he has cheapened the political discourse even further. And while he COULD have meaningful, nuanced explanations, he'd rather reduce things to a cartoonish level - which is basically what he is - a rich cartoon character for which the presidency is just one more triumph! As for being a conservative - he's most certainly not.

Jac: And no, you have never worked with "rough and tough corporate jungle with wealthy, highly aggressive, impulsive, ego-driven narcissists just like him." Trump's worth anywhere from $4-10 billion.

No, Jac, I've not worked with cutthroat BILLIONAIRES. But I can guarantee you that the mentality of those of inherited and immense wealth, that the ONLY real difference is the number of zeros at the end of their net worth. But I most definitely have worked for people worth many millions (say $50-100 million). The point is that they are so similar - aggressive, arrogant off the scale, think rules are for the "little people." All they know is charge ahead, damn the torpedoes. They often care little for others outside of their orbit. But to say I've bought into the left is just a self-justifying comment to deflect legitimate criticism. You surprise me Jac, I didn't know you wrote commentary for Rush Limbaugh!

I really despise when people justify the actions of one because of what they are up against is so terribly bad. Trump doesn't hurt my sensitive feelings - what he does is insult my intelligence - or at least that of vast millions of conservatives who, like myself, admittedly appreciate much of what he's done in showing the leftist lies people have bought into. But it's not just an EITHER/OR: "If you seriously dislike some of Trump's tactics, you've bought into leftist lies" - what a strawman! He could have an intelligent approach without the lowbrow NY BS. And those so-called conservatives that he has overcome failed to stand up for truth and continued to play it safe (playing to the center, like McCain, Romney). But that doesn't mean only a moronic approach is preferable.

Jac, if Trump had not humbled so many liberals and progressives, if the Democrats and the progressives were not so terrible, and if there were far more intelligent true conservatives available, you would despise Trump. But just because intelligent people recognize that there is a lot of good that he has produced, and as they realize that there is NO other present alternative, doesn't mean we'd wouldn't rather see a more intelligent (did you catch that I didn't use the words "sensitive" or "more polite") framing of people and their issues. Really, Trump is baboon - if a very rich one who has been very successful at recognizing hypocrisy and lies from the left. I revel as well at how Trump has re-framed much of the discussion. But I think he could also not come across so one-dimensional and deliberately determined to take great delight at just pissing people off. Anyone who thinks that is a good idea isn't very smart. Again, what works well in the short term, that plays to people's understandable anger and fears, doesn't mean it will work as a nation's chief executive. And it won't help the people closer to the center, who might just begin to recognize the merit in his ideas and approach, move toward them. Why? Because many won't be able to see past the immense arrogance and mean-spirited nastiness. But I guess some think that's all justified, due to the depraved severity of the opposition.

[Jac3510]

NO! I think he has cheapened the political discourse even further. And while he COULD have meaningful, nuanced explanations, he'd rather reduce things to a cartoonish level - which is basically what he is - a rich cartoon character for which the presidency is just one more triumph!

Again, this is what you don't understand. He isn't cheapning the political discourse. He's talking at the level it is already at and has been at for some time. He is speaking the way the vast swaths of Americans talk. Once again, you are free to not like that, but your emotional reaction is not a substitute for analysis. The point is, the REASON he is winning is because of the way he talks. Put differently, he's not winning in spite of his rhetoric and language, but because of it.

As for being a conservative - he's most certainly not.

I don't think anyone thinks of him as a conservative in the modern sense of the word, i.e., a neocon. And I don't think his supporters are terribly concerned with the label, either. Ted Cruz talked a lot about being conservative. Bush talked a lot about being conservative. Huckabee did. So did Paul, Graham, Perry, Rubio, and others, and where did it get them? I grant there is an intellectual snobbery composed of people like George Will, Bill Krystal, Michael Medved, Eric Erickson who think that if they say it that it's true, that they get to define "conservative," blah, blah, blah.

Phil, no one cares. That's not what this election is about. You're stuck almost twenty years ago. Romney didn't win the nomination because he was "conservative." Everyone knew he wasn't. McCain sure didn't win because he was "conservative." Bush won by redefining "conservative" as "compassionate conservative," which was a nice way of saying big-spending/big-government pro-life hawk. My point is the label doesn't mean anything and hasn't for a generation.

No, Jac, I've not worked with cutthroat BILLIONAIRES. But I can guarantee you that the mentality of those of inherited and immense wealth, that the ONLY real difference is the number of zeros at the end of their net worth. But I most definitely have worked for people worth many millions (say $50-100 million). The point is that they are so similar - aggressive, arrogant off the scale, think rules are for the "little people." All they know is charge ahead, damn the torpedoes. They often care little for others outside of their orbit. But to say I've bought into the left is just a self-justifying comment to deflect legitimate criticism. You surprise me Jac, I didn't know you wrote commentary for Rush Limbaugh!

Again, $50-100million folk are a dime a dozen. And I frankly don't believe you that you've worked with billionares, certainly not in the plural. I don't believe you've ever sat in a room with them, at the negotiating table, and worked out deals. I think, at best, you are trying to present something that just isn't true. And that goes to my point. You are simply, factually wrong that the only real difference is the number of zeros after their name. Again, you really want people to think that these people made BILLIONS by accident, by being buffoons? By being stupid? You strain credulity, phil.

And what the hell is a "little people"? The middle class? The poor? What does it mean "to care about" them? All you can do is look at a candidate's positions on matters that effect people like that. And on that level, I argue that the conservative snobs like Medved don't give two rips about "little people," because the policies they promote are bad for middle class families. On the other hand, if Ivanka Trump is to believed, a Trump administration would work do to things that would make it easier for working mothers to actually be able to pay the bills. That is caring about "little people." He says he's going to focus on caring for our vets. That is caring about "little people." He's made reworking trade deals so that American manufacturers especially benefit. That is caring about "little people." But because someone doesn't toe some line drawn by some intellectual corportist who votes Republican, you say they don't care and that they're stupid, and that when ALL the evidence is against you? You're being ridiculous.

I really despise when people justify the actions of one because of what they are up against is so terribly bad. Trump doesn't hurt my sensitive feelings - what he does is insult my intelligence - or at least that of vast millions of conservatives who, like myself, admittedly appreciate much of what he's done in showing the leftist lies people have bought into. But it's not just an EITHER/OR: "If you seriously dislike some of Trump's tactics, you've bought into leftist lies" - what a strawman! He could have an intelligent approach without the lowbrow NY BS. And those so-called conservatives that he has overcome failed to stand up for truth and continued to play it safe (playing to the center, like McCain, Romney). But that doesn't mean only a moronic approach is preferable.

No, it isn't a straw man. When you say he could have had an intelligent approach without the lowbrow NY BS, you're exactly missing the point. He could NOT do so. It is tactically and strategically impossible.

Here's the political reality: the electoral college naturally leans democratic. The white vote is shrinking, and the minority population--especially hispanics--are increasing. The traditional "conservative" playbook (which hasn't worked literally since Reagan when the white vote was much, much, much larger than they are now) doesn't work anymore. Romney and McCain didn't lose because they weren't sufficiently conservative. They lost because they played losing hands. It's the same hand that Rubio or Bush or Cruz would have played, and all would have lost for all the same reasons. Had Trump run the way you wantd, not only would he NOT have gotten the nomination, he would have lost very, very, very badly in the general--even worse than Cruz would have. And the reason is simple: not only would Republicans not have liked him anyway over his previous policy positions and "New York values," but leftists would have hated him all the same.

So what is Trump's play? It's brillliant, actually. He runs as an outsider, like many have done. But he does it in a way that he attacks the Republicans hard. He calls them all corrupt. And he does it with reality-TV-flare. That has two major advantages. First, he immediately gains the ear and vote of the many, many working class voters who absolutely HATE the Republican party but can't bring themselves to vote Democrat or who have been feeling increasingly left out by the Democrats. We all know that Tea Party folks have been FURIOUS with the Republicans for a long time. There is a reason Cantor became a verb! And using the language and attacking as he did, Trump immediately found friends with them. Here is a man saying what they have always been thinking, and saying it the way they have been thinking it. Note that if he doesn't speak that way, he doens't get their vote.

Second, when he gets the Republican nomination and all the votes and resources that immediatly comes with it, he can't be automatically associated by the Democrats with Republicans of the past--read, George Bush. How many times have you heard them bring up his name? Almost never. Yeah, they're running against him as a bully, yada, yada. But that's easy to shoot down. In fact, it's very, very easy to shoot down. In '08, Romney actually almost won when Obama had tried to paint him as an out-of-touch millionare who loved firing people, an ogre, if you will. And in the first debate that Romney won so handily, the public saw the opposite for the first time. It totally killed that narrative. And had Romney not been STUPID and made his 47% comment and fed back into that narrative, he might have actually won! Now Trump is doing the same thing. All Clinton can do is paint him as risky and dangerous. All he has to do is not do something crazy like say he's going to nuke Germany. Don't have a 47% moment, and Clinton's narrative fails. And she doesn't have the Bush narrative to tie him to. So what's she left with? Nothing. And worse, she is stuck being "crooked Hillary." How does she fight that perception? She can't. You can't win people's trust back in six months, and when your actions only reinforce (or can be reinterpreted to reinforce) that storyline, she does to herself what Obama did to Romney: proves the story accurate. So when Clinton nominates Kaine who is ethically challenged, when she immediately hires DWS as a campaign surrogate, when she says she doesn't know anything about the DNC emails, she just continues to prove that she is crooked.

Again, none of that is possible if Trump doesn't use the language that he does. If he does NOT attack and dismember the Republicans, them he is just "one of them." So now Trump has done an amazing thing: he gets to run as an independent on the Republican ticket. This lets him, literally, attack Clinton from both the left and the right at the same time. On national security, on economics, on social issues--he attacks her from both sides, all while he occupies the center. Trump gets, then, to run in all three lanes: the left, the center, and the right. He's no ideologue, and that makes you mad, but it is why he will win.

That, for the last time, cannot be done if he doesn't adopt the approach that he did. That you won't accept that reality just shows that you're emotional reaction to the man is clouding your ability to think clearly.

Jac, if Trump had not humbled so many liberals and progressives, if the Democrats and the progressives were not so terrible, and if there were far more intelligent true conservatives available, you would despise Trump. But just because intelligent people recognize that there is a lot of good that he has produced, and as they realize that there is NO other present alternative, doesn't mean we'd wouldn't rather see a more intelligent (did you catch that I didn't use the words "sensitive" or "more polite") framing of people and their issues. Really, Trump is baboon - if a very rich one who has been very successful at recognizing hypocrisy and lies from the left. I revel as well at how Trump has re-framed much of the discussion. But I think he could also not come across so one-dimensional and deliberately determined to take great delight at just pissing people off. Anyone who thinks that is a good idea isn't very smart. Again, what works well in the short term, that plays to people's understandable anger and fears, doesn't mean it will work as a nation's chief executive. And it won't help the people closer to the center, who might just begin to recognize the merit in his ideas and approach, move toward them. Why? Because many won't be able to see past the immense arrogance and mean-spirited nastiness. But I guess some think that's all justified, due to the depraved severity of the opposition.

I do despite Trump, Phil. The difference in me and you is that I'm willing to be honest about reality.

Trump is not a baboon. I wish he were. If he were, he wouldn't have won the nomination. No, he's actually an extremely gifted politician and businessman. How many billions do you have in the bank, Phil? How many elections have you won? I tell you what: when you demonstrate with your actions that you have even a piece of the political and business skills that he does, I'll give your opinion some weight. But for now, you're just a guy who doesn't like Trump calling him stupid. Well, if the stupid guy is winning, what does that make the guys he's beating? Think about that, Phil. If Trump reallyy is so terribly stupid, then what about all the others? What about all the political commentators who got EVERYTHING wrong? Is it just so hard for you to humble yourself and admit that you got him wrong, that he's a great salesman who knew exactly what he was doing? For anybody paying attention, it's as obvious as can possibly be. But you keep holding on to your delusion that Trump's a fool. So long as you think that, you'll continue to be frustrated, and you'll continue to get it wrong when talking about these things.