TRUMP. NOTHING BUT TRUMP

[cannongal]

West Viginia's kinda pretty. I liked visiting there. What about Florida?

[Duchess]

This could change (it's doubtful), but Florida doesn't want him either. I'll check the map to see who finds him acceptable and I'll get back to you.

[Duchess]

Idaho looks good for Trump and his supporters, so does Oklahoma and Alabama, Texas is a maybe.

[cannongal]

Alabama is a scary place. Too many spiders & snakes to deal with....




I'll stick with my daddy long legs & garden snakes.

[Carsman]

Still terrified of his most rabid followers though.

We all should be. In general, they are angry & violent. Quite a bit of that has do do with them believing everything thing they are told, they tend to not fact check and they are easily manipulated.

Yesterday in the news, witnesses say attackers (Maybe Hillary's supporters?) targeted Trump supporters, including elderly women, with punches and garbage. Many Trump supporter's had to make a run for it trying to avoid being punched. WTF, what ever happened to peaceful protests?

[BigMark]

Idaho is really nice when it is not two feet deep of snow. This is pillar falls on the Snake River right by where Evel Knievel tried to jump it.






This is a view from the Perrine right around the corner downstream, the only legal base jumping bridge in the USA.

[Duchess]

That is fricken glorious! I particularly like the first picture. *sigh* Wishin' I had something like that around here. Coastal plains are boring unless you're into surf & sand and I'm not, I'd prefer more nature, as in mountains and trails.

[HairOfTheDog]

I'm just curious, like when trump said muslim immigration should stop until there is a better way to separate the bad ones better. It went into the ears of Dems as "trump hates muslims" and that's where it stopped.

I'm not a Dem, and wouldn't claim to know what all Dems heard even if I was.

But, since you're curious and I know exactly what Trump said, I'll fill you in. Your ears and eyes are definitely playing tricks on you with this issue, Mags.

Donald Trump said that he, Donald J. Trump, proposed a ban on all Muslims entering the country until the government figures out what the hell is going on. He proposed banning hundreds of millions of people from all over the world from traveling into the U.S., based solely on their religion. It was not an "immigration" ban proposal as you claim, and it did not stop with Dems' reaction as you insist.

After widespread negative reaction from those outside of what you would call 'Trumpbot world' -- particularly from elected Republican leaders across the country -- Trump's campaign issued a statement indicating that what he REALLY meant was a ban on Muslims who weren't American citizens already living in the U.S. There's been exactly one Muslim in that category who's committed a terror attack since 9 / 11; the San Bernadino killer's wife.

If Trump would have simply proposed an immediate review and tightening of spouse/family visas to lower the risk of more bad apples getting through, I think he likely would have garnered some credible support. But, that's not what he did. And, the backlash from Republicans, Democrats and Independents did not prompt Trump to stop there. Trump continued with his narrative that Muslim immigrants are killing people left and right and illegal Mexican immigrants are being sent over by the Mexican government to rape and kill Americans -- pandering to the fearful and ignorant.

After he secured the majority of the extremely fearful and ignorant (which is the minority of the general population) along with the anti-Hillary camp, Trump changed his position again heading into the general election. Now, he says he is no longer proposing a religious ban, he's instead proposing a ban on all people coming from countries with terror problems (though he doesn't provide specifics). On its face, this latest ban proposal would forbid people from some of our closest ally countries in the west and the east from entering the country. Then, last week, Trump proposed adding a written ideological test which he calls "extreme vetting" to the already extensive immigration screening process.

[Maggot]

Just wondering if you may have looked at the European countries that have allowed refugees in and the "screening process"



President Obama’s goal in bringing in at least 10,000 additional Syrian refugees to the U.S. this year the Obama administration has opened up a new resettlement center and has shortened the processing time from around 18-24 months down to just three months.
The new refugee resettlement center located in Amman, Jordan was opened in February and will run until April 28^th, 2016. The center interviews around 600 people every day. 1,000 Syrian refugees have already been resettled in the U.S. since October 2015.
According to the regional refugee coordinator at the U.S. Embassy in Amman, Gina Kassem, Pres. Obama’s “10,000 (figure) is a floor and not a ceiling, and it is possible to increase the number."
Kassem also told reporters that once they receive the refugee case from the UN Refugee Agency that, "we do not have exclusions or look for families with certain education background, language skills or other socio-economic factors, and we do not cut family sizes."
After the Paris and Brussels terrorist attacks many are concerned that ISIS agents may pose as refugees as a way to enter the U.S. Last year FBI Director, James Comey, expressed concern that the U.S. does not have the ability to thoroughly screen the Syrian refugees for terrorist ties even through the lengthy 18-24-month process.
The Administration has yet to comment on how a vetting process that took on average 18-24 months could be condensed into a three-month period.

link

[HairOfTheDog]

Yes, Maggot, I have read regularly about the issues surrounding refugee influx to Europe.

In fact, you and I have discussed the differences between refugee migration to Europe vs. America several times here at Mock. However, I couldn't read your link above because it went to a blank page.

What does any of that have to do with your assertion that Trump's temporary ban on Muslims was stopped in its track because Democrats' ears heard it as "Trump hates Muslims"? That still makes no sense and is contradicted by reality.

[aussiefriend]

HoTD, just as a casual distant observer, what you are proposing from Trump is a softer, diplomatic approach, which makes sense. I think he has put his foot way too far into his mouth to take things back. You are not supposed to say what you really think in politics, isn't that the system?

[Maggot]

Yes, career politicians are expected to lie.

[Carsman]

Yes, career politicians are expected to lie.

Correct, and no one is more experienced at it, or does it better then the Hillary!

[HairOfTheDog]

HoTD, just as a casual distant observer, what you are proposing from Trump is a softer, diplomatic approach, which makes sense. I think he has put his foot way too far into his mouth to take things back. You are not supposed to say what you really think in politics, isn't that the system?

I'm not proposing anything from Trump, especially not a softer more diplomatic approach, aussie. Trump can say what he really thinks and he won the primaries doing just that as the "anti-PC" candidate.

Rather, I'm addressing Maggot's declaration. Maggot can of course say what he really thinks here in regards to politics and anything else; we all can. What I really think is that Maggot is full of shit on this one.

Part of Trump's strategy is to attack the Democratic nominee, Democratic policies, and Democratic rationale and position himself as a better option for the country. Trump takes it to new levels, but it's not an uncommon political tactic. It makes no sense that disapproval from the Democrats shut down Trump's Muslim ban proposal. And, neither Trump nor anyone from his camp ever suggested that it did -- that's Maggot bullshit.

However, strong negative response to the Muslim ban proposal by top Republican leaders, registered Republican voters, bi-partisan military and national security experts, Independents, world leaders, community leaders, religious leaders, constitutional experts, etc -- those whose support Trump will need to win the election and/or lead the country if he's elected -- did prompt Trump's spokespersons to respond with spin and backwalking of his oral and written statements on the matter.

Then, the proposal to ban Muslims was formally revised, on its face, after Trump won the Republican primaries and the loyalty of those who want to see all Muslims banned temporarily, undocumented residents deported en mass, giant walls built, and Hillary Clinton locked up or shot on a firing line for treason. Trump's camp knows that there aren't enough American citizens with that mindset to win the general election though, and he's lost the college-educated vote for the first time in modern Republican party history.

So, Trump's breaking some of his Republican primary promises (including banning all Muslims temporarily) in order to have a chance at winning back some traditional Republicans, attracting Independents, and getting some anti-Hillary Democrats to vote for him instead of staying home or voting for a third party.

Reality check -- blaming Democrats for Trump's inconsistencies and broken promises is funny, but ignorant.

[Duchess]

he's lost the college-educated vote for the first time in modern Republican party history.

Ahahaha! Go, Donald!

[HairOfTheDog]

he's lost the college-educated vote for the first time in modern Republican party history.

Ahahaha! Go, Donald!

Trump is now breaking his primary promise to establish a deportation force to forcibly remove the 11 million illegal Mexican immigrants from the U.S. if he's elected.

There's tons of video with Trump making that firm commitment to the press and to his followers at rallies, but he says he's not 'flip flopping' now that he's promising to instead establish a path to legal status.

Trump has less than 20% of the Hispanic vote at this point; a historic low for the Republican party. And, he's now trailing Clinton in the key battleground states.

Surely Trump wouldn't be trying to attract new voters in breaking his promise to his loyal base. Maybe he figures that his base will assume he only just discovered that his mass deportation rhetoric was offensive to some Democrats' ears and he's just trying to be nice/PC in order to appease the Democrats.

[Duchess]

HotD, do you think Kellyanne will hang in there until the election? I like to think she's already regretting her decision to work for his campaign. She's done nothing but spin.

[HairOfTheDog]

HotD, do you think Kellyanne will hang in there until the election? I like to think she's already regretting her decision to work for his campaign. She's done nothing but spin.

I have no idea whether she'll stay until election day. She started off strong in her media appearances and lent Trump some credibility, in my opinion.

But, now that she's being pushed for policy details, she's in a tricky spot. Trying to pivot away from the extreme positions Trump has taken over the last 15 months would be a huge challenge for any campaign manager and spokesperson.

More people, in the general population and in the electoral college, disagree than agree with Trump's positions and he's alienated a significant percentage of voters. More people than not also consider Trump unqualified in skills, vision, and temperament to run the country, according to the recent polls.

So, I don't think Kellyanne has many options other than to spin the past and try to push Trump to adopt her more centrist spin if he wants to win. If he effectively moves more towards the center, how much of his loyal base who agree with his extreme positions will he lose?

Hard to know whether it's better to just let Trump be Trump like Lewindowsky (and Manafort, to a lesser degree) did, or try to reset the candidate and the campaign like Kellyanne appears to be doing. Trump was trailing Clinton across the board for almost two months when Kellyanne took over the campaign, so I don't think she'll be held personally or professionally responsible if he loses and she sure is getting a lot of exposure from the gig.

[BigMark]

The people who foam at the mouth at the mention of Hillary will vote for him no matter what, for now on we will just call them Fuckity Face Foamers, or 3F for short.

[Duchess]

3F for short.

Ooooo I like it! Good job, Mocker.

Thanks, HotD, I value your opinion.

I'm hoping she resigns. I want to see more discord and turmoil. YeeHaw!