Ly'in Donald

Originally posted by whodey
Actually, no it's not.

Democracy is voting for something and having your vote actually cout to promote whatever it is you want. Instead, people are voting for an issue a candidate promotes and then the candidate then "pivots"/"shifts"/"lies", whatever your word of choice is, to another position.

Democracy is then subverted with no consequences for the so called representatives.

If people who voted for or intend to vote for Trump are not aware that he has radically changed positions from his past for this campaign, then they have not paid attention - it has been extensively publicized. If they are so aware, why would they expect him to be consistent from now on? So yes it is democracy - Trump has a very public record and people are free to examine it and make judgments about the likelihood of his following through on his promises. The same is true for other candidates.

Originally posted by sh76
It's not a goof but a pivot.

Sure Trump can make breathtaking flip-flops because nobody's really been paying attention to his positions anyway.

His early staking out positions in the center so that they'll be old news by the summer and fall and sucking up to the Mexicans on Thursday are indications that Trump is a craftier politician than I've given him credit for. I still think he'll lose, but I'd caution against laughing at this strategy.

Nominees generally do subtly pivot but this is clumsy and amateurish coming so soon after his last rivals withdrew and when considerable numbers of the conservative base are still not sold on Trump. It is what you would expect out of a neophyte and less of a strategy then a mimic of an actual strategy.

Originally posted by no1marauder
If people who voted for or intend to vote for Trump are not aware that he has radically changed positions from his past for this campaign, then they have not paid attention - it has been extensively publicized. If they are so aware, why would they expect him to be consistent from now on? So yes it is democracy - Trump has a very public record and people ...[text shortened]... the likelihood of his following through on his promises. The same is true for other candidates.

Changing your position from the past is one thing, but getting up to tell people what you represent and then vote for you and then change your position after they vote for you is another thing altogether.

That is a breach of contract, something that seems to apply to pretty much everyone except those running for political office.

Can you imagine a lawsuit that would come about from signing up for health insurance when in the written contract it was promised that health premiums would not rise and your coverage would not change and then the CEO suddenly "pivots" to another contract altogether?

Originally posted by no1marauder
Nominees generally do subtly pivot but this is clumsy and amateurish coming so soon after his last rivals withdrew and when considerable numbers of the conservative base are still not sold on Trump. It is what you would expect out of a neophyte and less of a strategy then a mimic of an actual strategy.

Isn't it obvious?

Trump needed to sound conservative in order to beat the conservatives.

Now that he has the nomination he can defecate on conservatives and laugh about it.

Originally posted by whodey
Changing your position from the past is one thing, but getting up to tell people what you represent and then vote for you and then change your position after they vote for you is another thing altogether.

That is a breach of contract, something that seems to apply to pretty much everyone except those running for political office.

Can you imagine a lawsu ...[text shortened]... our coverage would not change and then the CEO suddenly "pivots" to another contract altogether?

No one who voted for Donald Trump signed a contract binding him not to change his position so your analogy is off the mark.

On Monday Trump pretty much took back everything he had said Sunday anyway. Expecting ideological consistency from the Donald is laughable and anyone who voted for him expecting such hadn't paid attention to his history.

Originally posted by whodey
Isn't it obvious?

Trump needed to sound conservative in order to beat the conservatives.

Now that he has the nomination he can defecate on conservatives and laugh about it.

His conservative rivals insisted during the campaign he wasn't a "real" conservative loudly and persistently. The voters in the Republican primaries voted for him anyway. Maybe those voters aren't as interested in what you deem unassailable "conservative" policy preferences as you are.

Originally posted by no1marauder
His conservative rivals insisted during the campaign he wasn't a "real" conservative loudly and persistently. The voters in the Republican primaries voted for him anyway. Maybe those voters aren't as interested in what you deem unassailable "conservative" policy preferences as you are.

The entire GOP has been a giant lying party. They give lip service to conservative principles but then "pivet" to big government principles.

In 2010 Republicans were elected in record numbers, as they swore to do such things as enforce a debt ceiling and stop Obamacare. All they had to show for it though was Ted Cruz standing up alone reading Green Eggs and Ham, which is why Ted did so well in the primary process and would have won had it not been for Donald. Unfortunately for Ted, he was then cast as "the establishment' as those in the establishment began endorsing Ted over Trump, and was subsequently defeated. I think the death blow was the teaming up with Kasich to defeat Trump.

People are just tired of being lied to and misrepresented, which is why they voted for an "outsider" in Trump, even though all of the establishment is on the payroll of Trump and he was good friends with the Clintons.

I see two possibilities with Trump. He loses to Hillary which will further the anger against the establishment because the GOP turned against Trump, or Trump wins. If trump wins, my guess is the wall never gets built. More than likely Trump will cry like he always does about how things are so unfair and rigged as either Congress stops him or the courts stop him. My guess is the courts will stop him because that seems to be the favorite tool for the statist.

The rest of his platform looks pretty much like a democrat. Will people then realize that there is no escaping the establishment and take another course of action? Hopefully they will turn to the Article V movement, the only way to stop the establishment.

It has been said that the weakest part of Donald's game is his foreign policy, but then, look at Hillary. She voted to go to Iraq as Donald publically was against it. Hillary also has the Libya disaster on her resume, a total buffoon to be sure. For this very reason I say Donald has slim hope of overcoming a rigged system that has rigged the delegates towards the democrat party, no matter who that candidate is or how corrupt or inept they may be.

Wait, Trump has a "platform" now?

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Wait, Trump has a "platform" now?

Does Hillary?

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
People have underestimated Trump thus far because they have overestimated voters. I still expect the question "are people really that stupid?", which was answered in the affirmative during the primaries, will receive a different answer in the general although that would require a crushing defeat for Trump.

Yes, and as we all know voters always respond postively to being called stupid. 🙄

Or maybe (just maybe) the same tactics used to scare voters away don't work any more.

Originally posted by lemon lime
Yes, and as we all know voters always respond postively to being called stupid. 🙄

Or maybe (just maybe) the same tactics used to scare voters away don't work any more.

I never said it would be a good tactic for Democrats to say Trump voters are stupid even when they obviously are. They should say something hollow like they "understand their concerns."

Originally posted by normbenign
Does Hillary?

Yes - apart from her promises on the campaign trail (higher minimum wage, etc.), the indication is that she wishes to continue along the lines of the Obama administration. We certainly know what to expect from her - a continuation of pro-business policies and moderate social policies while not tackling any structural problems of the US economy or society in general.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Yes - apart from her promises on the campaign trail (higher minimum wage, etc.), the indication is that she wishes to continue along the lines of the Obama administration. We certainly know what to expect from her - a continuation of pro-business policies and moderate social policies while not tackling any structural problems of the US economy or society in general.

Many of us in the U.S.certainly know what to expect from her. But what are the French concerned about if she becomes the next president?

Originally posted by lemon lime
Many of us in the U.S.certainly know what to expect from her. But what are the French concerned about if she becomes the next president?

I can't speak for concerns "the French" may or may not have with respect to Clinton.