Quote: (07-22-2016 12:05 PM)Last Parade Wrote:  

He may just be shy. Combine the fear of the stage and the fatigue with the chance that, at this age, he could also be more of a introvert, wallflower type; on that stage, thousands of people watching and cheering... could be scared, intimidated, wanting to withdraw? Somebody touches you at that point and you'd recoil, go inward?

Agreed.

Also, no one has considered he might just be pissed off that his parents made him stay in Cleveland for a whole fucking week.

Quote: (07-22-2016 02:35 PM)Tigre Wrote:  

Quote: (07-22-2016 12:05 PM)Last Parade Wrote:  

He may just be shy. Combine the fear of the stage and the fatigue with the chance that, at this age, he could also be more of a introvert, wallflower type; on that stage, thousands of people watching and cheering... could be scared, intimidated, wanting to withdraw? Somebody touches you at that point and you'd recoil, go inward?

Agreed.

Also, no one has considered he might just be pissed off that his parents made him stay in Cleveland for a whole fucking week.

Or that it was way passed his bedtime (~1:00 AM) when the balloons came down. Looks like a sleepy child to me.

I wish I could've been there for this. Most of the supporters took his humor pretty well, even Alex Jones tolerated him to a point.

I'm a huge Eric Andre fan so I hope he's not involved in partisan politics and trolls the DNC just as hard

Some thoughts on Trump's acceptance speech:

It was not a conventionally great speech -- for that, it was too long, too lacking in rhetorical graces, and delivered in too much of a continuous yelling monotone. To many watching at home it felt like they were being relentlessly hammered and harangued by Trump's points and delivery.

But it was, in the end, a speech that worked and accomplished what Trump needed it to accomplish. All of its flaws were real -- but they were also there for a reason, and to serve what were ultimately the more important goals.

The length and relentlessness of the speech were needed because Trump had to transcend and exceed all that had preceded him in the convention. The drama surrounding Cruz's brilliance and perfidy; the star turns of each member of the Trump family; the homespun flawlessness of Mike Pence's performance; and Ivanka's slick and luxurious motherly radiance and perfection -- that was all a lot to take and in the end, Trump had to make it all go away. It had to be just him and the audience in the end, and he achieved this; not by rhetorical grace or charm -- that would not have done it -- but by sheer relentlessness. After 30, 40, 50 minutes it had all been left behind, it was just Trump and his voice, a force of nature, something that, love it or hate it, had to be reckoned with and attended to.

There was a technical reason for Trump essentially having to yell the speech from beginning to end. All his previous teleprompter speeches had been delivered in a more normal tone and they had fallen completely flat because in the course of a normal teleprompter reading he assumes a sort of steady monotone singsong rhythm and the speech loses cohesion; one can literally lose the thread and fail to follow what he is talking about. By shouting the speech out at all times, he was able to maintain cohesion and emphasis -- this was a qualitatively different and better teleprompter performance than any he had given. It was what he had to do, and so he did it.

Most importantly, Trump permanently branded himself with this speech. He hammered himself forever into the audience's conscience, by his sheer unyielding relentlessness. After this speech, he is no longer -- in anyone's mind -- a "joke", a "clown", a "buffoon", etc. He is an American presidential candidate. He is deeply identified with his ideas and lines of attack. No one who watched that speech will forget what he stands for, what he is against, what he wants and what he promises.

I don't think Trump won many converts last night -- especially among women; many must have found his yelling and his relentlessness excessive and "scary". But the deep branding is more important, because it sets the base. That base note had to be one of drive, power and strength. It did not need to be loved -- it had to be seen and remembered.

Now, as the general campaign goes on, Trump can build on that base. He can add grace notes and softer colors and shadows in more intimate settings -- interview, town halls, informal appearances etc; those grace notes are necessary to win over women in particular, but they will come as variations on top of the base that they will always come back to. And if events in the world and at home continue to be chaotic and unsettled, voters will come back and think about that base and about what they heard and saw last night.

Trump remains an underdog in the election, and while he is not trailing by a large amount, the difference will not be so easy to make up. But he has a very, very real chance and last night he did what he had to do to put himself in a position to win. Now he has to deliver his grace notes at the right places and times; have outside events work in his favor; and hope that enough American women become secretly bored and disinspired by their Hag that, in the privacy of the voting booth and alone with their fickle pussies as their sole guides, they will decide to give the riskier and more flavorful choice a chance because he'd been just enough of a gentleman at the right moments to allow them to do so. It is not the likeliest outcome, but it could happen; we shall see if it does in a few LONG months.

Great post, TLOZ, as always, but the one thing I disagree on with you most of the time is your take on Trump's chances.

There is a poll method where only one county of a swing state is polled, because that county always predicts the statewide result. He now leads in 6 of the 7 counties surveyed, one month ago he only led in 5. Trump has also widened his lead in every one of those counties where he is winning and while is still losing in Virginia, he improved by 5 points there.



Aside from that:
- Trump statistically tied in a New Hampshire poll yesterday, with a lot of people being undecided (translation: they're afraid to express their support for Trump)
- He tied with Clinton in a statewide Virginia poll
- He has led in a Oregon poll and is only losing by 5,6 or 7 points in the ultraliberal Connecticut. Mccain and Romney lost by 20 and 18 points there!
- He has led and tied in both in Ohio and Florida, the most crucial states to win for Republicans
- He has tied in Pennsylvania
- In the last Michigan poll, he was only down by 3: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/...-5533.html

As for the women: Democrats have won the women vote consistently since 1992, but the following results clearly show the difference a masculine/alpha candidate (Reagan, Bush jr., Clinton) or beta candidate (Kerry, Dole, Bush sr., Dukakis) can make so losing the women vote is not impossible to overcome.

Backbone fires up men and makes pussies wet. Trump will prevail!

Yeah, pretty much all of the available evidence shows Trump is anything but the underdog. There is a reason liberals are pissing themselves. I see it everywhere up here in Mass as well. Liberal fear is very real.

Quote: (07-22-2016 05:27 PM)Enigma Wrote:  

She really isn't good at this.

^ That's not an epileptic fit. That's just a woman who doesn't understand normal human emotions and behaviour attempting to be funny and failing. It's exaggerated performance in the style of Youtubers like Laci Green.

It reads as off to us, because we're not her target audience.

I was reading a comment about the old lefty saying "Question Authority", saying that students nowadays should question their leftist teachers.

This made me think to see if #questionleftism exists, and it doesn't. I don't do twitter, but I'd like to see this hash tag trend

#questionleftism

David Brooks said today he thinks Trump will lose big and then Cruz will become the de facto winner and the face of the Republican Party.

David Brooks Teeth are crooked - means he is a cheap small minded bastard.

That said:

Donald Trump’s RNC address could mark the start of an American revival
http://nypost.com/2016/07/21/donald-trum...n-revival/

On paper, the speech is powerful, and it was delivered with all the might Trump could muster. Passionate and occasionally strident, then mellow and playful, he revealed a full Trump Doctrine that weaves together what has often seemed random threads and instincts into a more coherent vision.

He would unleash America’s energy production, use trade deals to help blue-collar workers and fix the broken immigration system so that cheap labor doesn’t undercut wages and overwhelm our social safety net.

He would ensure public safety, rebuild the military and destroy global terrorism. And he forcefully and repeatedly cemented the image of the GOP as the pro-police party, a strong contrast with Democrats, who are recklessly becoming the anti-police party.

Trump laid out such a huge undertaking, sweeping in its goals and potential impacts, that achieving even half of it would lead to an economic revival and end the nation’s crisis of confidence. If he focused on just what he outlined last night, and he should, Trump would be a very busy man every minute for the next four years.

In that context, he addressed the inevitable sense that little change can come in a nation so polarized and gridlocked by reminding the raucous convention that he wasn’t even supposed to be standing before them. And in a line that captured his remarkable attack on the political status quo, he said, “The politicians have talked about this for years, but I’m going to do it.”

There is, at this point, no reason to believe he doesn’t mean every word of it. Whatever his past habits and lifestyle, whatever caricature he has been reduced to, the seriousness of his purpose is no longer in doubt. He is a man on a mission.

As befits an acceptance speech, the promises flowed like water, yet the important things stand out. This one, from his prepared remarks, was especially powerful: “On January 20th of 2017, the day after I take the oath of office, Americans will finally wake up in a country where the laws of the United States are enforced.”

He was blistering on Hillary Clinton, saying her legacy as secretary of state was “death, destruction, terrorism and weakness.” Nor did he spare President Obama, accusing him of using “the pulpit of the presidency to divide us by race and color” and saying he “has made America a more dangerous environment for everyone.”

Trump then added: “This administration has failed America’s inner cities. It’s failed them on education. It’s failed them on jobs. It’s failed them on crime. It’s failed them at every level.”

The stirring speech saved what had been a mediocre convention, with sloppy mistakes leading to distracting controversies and fueling fears that Trump and his team still are not ready for prime time. Delegates were not so much divided as dispirited over the prospect that the party would once again lose a very winnable race.

Especially with the well-oiled and well-funded Clinton machine revving up its engines with attack ads and with her message amplified by the left-wing media echo chamber, Trumpsters suddenly faced an enthusiasm gap. Rows of empty seats in the Quicken Loans Arena seemed symbolic of sagging hopes.

A turning point might have come Wednesday night, during the booing of rival Ted Cruz for refusing to endorse Trump. What started with restlessness from the New York delegation quickly spread, and by the time he slinked off the stage, Cruz suffered a stunning and unanimous rebuke.

That rare moment of genuine unity, followed by Mike Pence’s workmanlike acceptance speech as the VP nominee, set the stage for the finale. Indeed, no matter what had come before, it was always going to be up to Trump himself. He’s the nominee and the whole venture rises or falls on his performance.

It now rises. He delivered a stemwinder for the ages.

If he wins, and can deliver on his vision, remember this speech. Like Ronald Reagan’s in 1976, Trump’s 2016 address could mark the start of a desperately needed American revival. As he said near the end, “America is back.”

Imagine that — and pray he is right.

Raccoon, one quibble: Dole wasn't beta, he was undercut by the Rep. establishment in favor of Bush Sr. in '88, and the media portrayed him as too aggressive back then, and they were heavily pro-Clinton in 96.

He was one of the best candidates the Republicans have fielded in recent times. His presence at the convention and support for Trump was big, it made up for the absence of the Bushes and the other big name party cucks who didn't show up.

It was nice to see Dole there; he was the first presidential candidate I voted for.

Quote: (07-22-2016 07:17 PM)911 Wrote:  

Raccoon, one quibble: Dole wasn't beta, he was undercut by the Rep. establishment in favor of Bush Sr. in '88, and the media portrayed him as too aggressive back then, and they were heavily pro-Clinton in 96.

He was one of the best candidates the Republicans have fielded in recent times (disclaimer: I volunteered for his campaign while at college...) His presence at the convention and support for Trump was big, it made up for the absence of the Bushes and the other big name party cucks who didn't show up.

I believe you, but he ran against Clinton, who was a good looking alpha and the incumbent. Clinton won the women vote by +16 points, which is the largest margin shown on that comparison chart. Dole may not have been beta if you look at him alone, but compared to Clinton he was.

Not from the same election but this shows Clinton's abilities.

Quote: (07-22-2016 06:33 PM)Deepdiver Wrote:  

David Brooks Teeth are crooked - means he is a cheap small minded bastard.

Or British?

Super Male Vitality™ FTW! ^^^^

Alex would never go for Kasparian, he's already got Macadoo on tap.

MAGA

Quote: (07-22-2016 05:27 PM)Enigma Wrote:  

She is like an alien trying to learn basic humans functions.

Look how the reporter reacts, she is like WTF? this is not normal.

If she really is having seizures or strokes, that is no laughing matter, I can't really get on board making fun of someone's bad health. But if she gets sick or has to drop out at this point, what happens to her campaign? I am talking about if she gets sick after the Democrat convention? Does Kaine run? Or Bernie? Or someone else? What are the rules?

Quote: (07-23-2016 12:27 AM)eradicator Wrote:  

If she really is having seizures or strokes, that is no laughing matter, I can't really get on board making fun of someone's bad health. But if she gets sick or has to drop out at this point, what happens to her campaign? I am talking about if she gets sick after the Democrat convention? Does Kaine run? Or Bernie? Or someone else? What are the rules?

Hillary has been directly involved in the deaths, rapes, and ruined lives of thousands of Americans, while selling our government out to the higher bidder for decades.

I've probably watched that "seizure" or whatever it is a hundred times already, and it actually gets funnier every time I see it.

Quote: (07-23-2016 12:27 AM)eradicator Wrote:  

If she really is having seizures or strokes, that is no laughing matter, I can't really get on board making fun of someone's bad health. But if she gets sick or has to drop out at this point, what happens to her campaign? I am talking about if she gets sick after the Democrat convention? Does Kaine run? Or Bernie? Or someone else? What are the rules?

Based on the Shit she has done to people, Fuck Hillary and her health.