Trump's incompetence

[qazplm]

Let's put aside all the things he's said, or not said, or done, or how much you hate Hillary, or anything about policy positions and focus just on the displays of political competence going on right now:

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/201...airwaves-n594676?cid=sm_twitter_feed_politics

Hillary alone has 23 million in battleground state spending on ads.
Trump has...wait for it...zero.

This does multiple things:

1. Allows Hillary unrebutted airtime to both define herself and him.
2. Allows Hillary to spend less than she might otherwise have to if she had to match him
3. Locks in current thoughts/polling more than usual because there is no counter-weight to whatever frame Hillary wants to set

We are just weeks from the RNC. Traditionally, and logically, the end of the a national convention is usually at or near the apex for a candidate. They've had a week of more or less unchallenged coverage, they've gotten to frame things just as they want to, and they have a VP pick that can get folks excited. Of course, that doesn't necessarily last, just about every loser has ended up temporarily ahead at the end of their national convention. But it's still often a strong point.

But here, Trump is losing ground, or at least certainly not gaining it, and unless he starts flooding the airwaves in the next two weeks or something else happens, the current 4-7 pt advantage for Clinton is going to lock in. Trump hasn't won a media cycle in probably 2+ weeks now, which quite frankly is surprising even to me. So that bump he gets from his convention is going to be small, and it won't be enough to close the gap, then Hillary will get the bump from her convention and even if it is likewise small, we go into the debates with her probably up 5-8 pts in the polling average give or take a point or two.

Does anyone honestly think she loses the debates to him?

Trump had a multi-week period where he was the presumptive nominee, and Hillary was battling Bernie, and he utterly squandered it.

 

[buygreekbonds]

qaz, The Donald has a lot of mud to throw in those debates. And by then Wikileaks will have released Hillary's emails.

http://nypost.com/2016/06/18/monica-lewinsky-ironically-freaked-out-that-bill-cheated-on-her/

 

[qazplm]

qaz, The Donald has a lot of mud to throw in those debates. And by then Wikileaks will have released Hillary's emails.

http://nypost.com/2016/06/18/monica-lewinsky-ironically-freaked-out-that-bill-cheated-on-her/

yes, because there is no fresher mud than Bill being a serial philanderer. I mean not only has it never been discussed repeatedly, ad nauseum, over the last 20 years, but we all know that it's totally Hillary's fault, and in no way will women sympathize with her over it.

You got me BGB. That's one for you.

What do you think is in wikileaks emails that will be as fresh and new? That she had a private server in her bathroom?

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

Well he may not have to do anything. Julian Assange (wikileaks) says he has Hillary dead to rights on the email scandal and her role in the arab spring. If I were Bernie, I wouldn't drop out. This election cycle may get weirder yet.

and I fundamentally disagree with your premise. She may run ads, but he gets more press.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...erent-number-of-media-interviews-in-2-charts/

She probably won't lose though, promising more govt cheese is more popular than a properly functioning government.

 

[qazplm]

Well he may not have to do anything. Julian Assange (wikileaks) says he has Hillary dead to rights on the email scandal and her role in the arab spring. If I were Bernie, I wouldn't drop out. This election cycle may get weirder yet.

and I fundamentally disagree with your premise. She may run ads, but he gets more press.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...erent-number-of-media-interviews-in-2-charts/

She probably won't lose though, promising more govt cheese is more popular than a properly functioning government.

yes citing something from May 6 is always relevant when discussing events as they stand on June 20th after multiple significant things have happened in the interim.

Yes, he certainly is getting more press...and I'm sure the current press he is getting Hillary is mighty happy about, I know I am...so please, let's hope he gets even more of the current press he is getting...all the way to November.

Julian Assange, you mean the accused rapist who is in hiding for said accusation from authorities? While I don't necessarily doubt that he may have some of her emails or other things, it's his thing after all, forgive me if I don't worry too much about his characterization that somehow he has the goods to sink her...if he did, it would already have been released...one would think in a more timely fashion for Bernie to have won the nomination.

 

[buygreekbonds]

yes, because there is no fresher mud than Bill being a serial philanderer. I mean not only has it never been discussed repeatedly, ad nauseum, over the last 20 years, but we all know that it's totally Hillary's fault, and in no way will women sympathize with her over it.

You got me BGB. That's one for you.

What do you think is in wikileaks emails that will be as fresh and new? That she had a private server in her bathroom?

We have never before had juicy details like semen and lipstick on the White House towels and Monica waiting outside the door for her turn. The Donald will say this stuff on national TV during a debate.

 

[qazplm]

We have never before had juicy details like semen and lipstick on the White House towels and Monica waiting outside the door for her turn. The Donald will say this stuff on national TV during a debate.

which will be totally relevant to the person who had nothing to do with either...and will totally not turn off women who will watch Donald try to blame Hillary for her husband's infidelity (from a guy who at one point was accused of rape by his wife, and who certainly is not know for his...fidelity...in his marriages).

But sure, please proceed.

 

[pboiler18]

which will be totally relevant to the person who had nothing to do with either...and will totally not turn off women who will watch Donald try to blame Hillary for her husband's infidelity (from a guy who at one point was accused of rape by his wife, and who certainly is not know for his...fidelity...in his marriages).

But sure, please proceed.

Hahaha. how ignorant.

You literally think the only thing Trump has on Hillary Clinton is her cheating husband? You really do have your head in the sand.

You also think Trump isn't and won't run TV ads? Cmon....he will now have full access to Republican money and will certainly use it at this point. If not, I do think it puts him at a disadvantage....but as much as you might hate Trump, he's not dumb.

 

[qazplm]

Hahaha. how ignorant.

You literally think the only thing Trump has on Hillary Clinton is her cheating husband? You really do have your head in the sand.

You also think Trump isn't and won't run TV ads? Cmon....he will now have full access to Republican money and will certainly use it at this point. If not, I do think it puts him at a disadvantage....but as much as you might hate Trump, he's not dumb.

1. How this whole internet thing works is, person A says X and person B responds to X. Person A in this case being BGB who listed two specific things which I directly, as person B, responded to.

2. Let me try and hip you to my groove one more time since you didn't appear to do anything but gloss over my initial post. Thus far, Trump has spent...zero. He may have "full access" to Republican money whatever that means, but he's not actually raising money through said access, and he certainly is not spending said money, at all, not a dime. He's had the same "access" to republican money that Hillary has had to democratic money through fundraising both from small and large donors. She's raised 23 million (really more than that) that she is using, right now, as we type...he's raised not very much and is spending none of it. And we are talking primary money, you can't spend GE money until after the convention.

So Trump, despite having "full access" is raising next to nothing and spending exactly nothing while Hillary is running 23 million in ads.

Which is pretty...dumb.

 

[pboiler18]

1. How this whole internet thing works is, person A says X and person B responds to X. Person A in this case being BGB who listed two specific things which I directly, as person B, responded to.

2. Let me try and hip you to my groove one more time since you didn't appear to do anything but gloss over my initial post. Thus far, Trump has spent...zero. He may have "full access" to Republican money whatever that means, but he's not actually raising money through said access, and he certainly is not spending said money, at all, not a dime. He's had the same "access" to republican money that Hillary has had to democratic money through fundraising both from small and large donors. She's raised 23 million (really more than that) that she is using, right now, as we type...he's raised not very much and is spending none of it. And we are talking primary money, you can't spend GE money until after the convention.

So Trump, despite having "full access" is raising next to nothing and spending exactly nothing while Hillary is running 23 million in ads.

Which is pretty...dumb.

What is pre convention advertising going to accomplish for the general? Answer....nothing.

It's like the BTN spending ad money and time to tell you to vote now for the first team all big 10 football players for 2016. Aren't there games to be played? Debates to be had? Running mates to be chosen?

If Hillary wasn't....and shouldn't be worried about her competitor....why is she spending so much with the election so far away?

You might want to lie down. I think you've hurt yourself stretching here.

 

[burbo]

Let's put aside all the things he's said, or not said, or done, or how much you hate Hillary, or anything about policy positions and focus just on the displays of political competence going on right now:

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/201...airwaves-n594676?cid=sm_twitter_feed_politics

Hillary alone has 23 million in battleground state spending on ads.
Trump has...wait for it...zero.

This does multiple things:

1. Allows Hillary unrebutted airtime to both define herself and him.
2. Allows Hillary to spend less than she might otherwise have to if she had to match him
3. Locks in current thoughts/polling more than usual because there is no counter-weight to whatever frame Hillary wants to set

We are just weeks from the RNC. Traditionally, and logically, the end of the a national convention is usually at or near the apex for a candidate. They've had a week of more or less unchallenged coverage, they've gotten to frame things just as they want to, and they have a VP pick that can get folks excited. Of course, that doesn't necessarily last, just about every loser has ended up temporarily ahead at the end of their national convention. But it's still often a strong point.

But here, Trump is losing ground, or at least certainly not gaining it, and unless he starts flooding the airwaves in the next two weeks or something else happens, the current 4-7 pt advantage for Clinton is going to lock in. Trump hasn't won a media cycle in probably 2+ weeks now, which quite frankly is surprising even to me. So that bump he gets from his convention is going to be small, and it won't be enough to close the gap, then Hillary will get the bump from her convention and even if it is likewise small, we go into the debates with her probably up 5-8 pts in the polling average give or take a point or two.

Does anyone honestly think she loses the debates to him?

Trump had a multi-week period where he was the presumptive nominee, and Hillary was battling Bernie, and he utterly squandered it.

Perhaps some of his inner circle read your post and agreed with you. They fired the campaign manager today.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/21/us/politics/corey-lewandowski-donald-trump.html?_r=0

 

[qazplm]

What is pre convention advertising going to accomplish for the general? Answer....nothing.

It's like the BTN spending ad money and time to tell you to vote now for the first team all big 10 football players for 2016. Aren't there games to be played? Debates to be had? Running mates to be chosen?

If Hillary wasn't....and shouldn't be worried about her competitor....why is she spending so much with the election so far away?

You might want to lie down. I think you've hurt yourself stretching here.

right, so Romney and Obama spent something like 80+ million dollars pre-convention in advertising last year because they just wanted to get rid of the money?

Of course it matters. Absolutely silly to argue otherwise. Obama twice used early blitzes to define his opponents prior to their conventions. Bush did the exact same thing to Kerry in 04. Worked all three times.

 

[Purdue97]

which will be totally relevant to the person who had nothing to do with either...and will totally not turn off women who will watch Donald try to blame Hillary for her husband's infidelity (from a guy who at one point was accused of rape by his wife, and who certainly is not know for his...fidelity...in his marriages).

But sure, please proceed.

Going to have to wait to see how the Hilary vote plays out with woman. Anecdotal sure, but I know more than a few far left feminists that are not voting for Hilary because they look at her as an enabler for Bill's actions/what has been alleged against him. Of course they are not voting for Trump either but at end of day this hurts her.

As for Trump not losing the debate to her? I am not impressed with Hilary as a debater. So unless the GE debates are setup like the Democratic Primary debates(easy questions, mods not pressing her, Sanders not attacking her, on when nobody was paying much attention),I think Trump does fine.

As for the early spending in battleground states, only people paying attention to this stuff right now are the people that have their minds made up IMO.

 

[Purdue97]

right, so Romney and Obama spent something like 80+ million dollars pre-convention in advertising last year because they just wanted to get rid of the money?

Of course it matters. Absolutely silly to argue otherwise. Obama twice used early blitzes to define his opponents prior to their conventions. Bush did the exact same thing to Kerry in 04. Worked all three times.

Obama won in 08 due to the 'economic collapse' and the fact that media covered him 2-1 over McCain. And it is pretty hard for a President not to get re-elected. Last time the incumbent did not get re-elected was when an Independent came down with 20% of vote.

 

[Purdue97]

Perhaps some of his inner circle read your post and agreed with you. They fired the campaign manager today.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/21/us/politics/corey-lewandowski-donald-trump.html?_r=0

Hard to say if this would help Trump. The reason being, for better or mostly worse IMO, Trump's success has been because of him and his own way of doing things. He starts toting the party line, running a conventional campaign, I think he alienates a lot of the people that voted for him in primary.

 

[Purdue97]

1. How this whole internet thing works is, person A says X and person B responds to X. Person A in this case being BGB who listed two specific things which I directly, as person B, responded to.

2. Let me try and hip you to my groove one more time since you didn't appear to do anything but gloss over my initial post. Thus far, Trump has spent...zero. He may have "full access" to Republican money whatever that means, but he's not actually raising money through said access, and he certainly is not spending said money, at all, not a dime. He's had the same "access" to republican money that Hillary has had to democratic money through fundraising both from small and large donors. She's raised 23 million (really more than that) that she is using, right now, as we type...he's raised not very much and is spending none of it. And we are talking primary money, you can't spend GE money until after the convention.

So Trump, despite having "full access" is raising next to nothing and spending exactly nothing while Hillary is running 23 million in ads.

Which is pretty...dumb.

-When does Trump have access to the RNC money? I think he got himself into a bind here because he said he would self fund his campaign til the GE in an early debate. So unless he spends his own, he will get attacked again.

 

[IlluminatiEXPOSETHEMNOW1]

Let's put aside all the things he's said, or not said, or done, or how much you hate Hillary, or anything about policy positions and focus just on the displays of political competence going on right now:

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/201...airwaves-n594676?cid=sm_twitter_feed_politics

Hillary alone has 23 million in battleground state spending on ads.
Trump has...wait for it...zero.

This does multiple things:

1. Allows Hillary unrebutted airtime to both define herself and him.
2. Allows Hillary to spend less than she might otherwise have to if she had to match him
3. Locks in current thoughts/polling more than usual because there is no counter-weight to whatever frame Hillary wants to set

We are just weeks from the RNC. Traditionally, and logically, the end of the a national convention is usually at or near the apex for a candidate. They've had a week of more or less unchallenged coverage, they've gotten to frame things just as they want to, and they have a VP pick that can get folks excited. Of course, that doesn't necessarily last, just about every loser has ended up temporarily ahead at the end of their national convention. But it's still often a strong point.

But here, Trump is losing ground, or at least certainly not gaining it, and unless he starts flooding the airwaves in the next two weeks or something else happens, the current 4-7 pt advantage for Clinton is going to lock in. Trump hasn't won a media cycle in probably 2+ weeks now, which quite frankly is surprising even to me. So that bump he gets from his convention is going to be small, and it won't be enough to close the gap, then Hillary will get the bump from her convention and even if it is likewise small, we go into the debates with her probably up 5-8 pts in the polling average give or take a point or two.

Does anyone honestly think she loses the debates to him?

Trump had a multi-week period where he was the presumptive nominee, and Hillary was battling Bernie, and he utterly squandered it.

Trump makes Hillary look like an ugly pig. Trump runs businesses. He made a name for himself. Hillary is just an ugly old hag wife who got paid for selling America out. Every single policy of Bill Clinton, Obama, or Hillary especially IS AN ABSOLUTE DISASTER. She lied about the email treason, she showed pure disgraceful taste and compassion during her session with Congress on Benghazi, and her husband VIOLENTLY rapes women and even Miss Arkansas wrote a BOOK ABOUT IT. It is abhorrent to even look at that pig Hillary on TV. Her husband put NUCLEAR PLUTONIUM MACHINES IN NORTH KOREA. And I am being generous to put it this lightly. Her husband signed NAFTA which gutted this entire country pillar to post at the behest of almost every country on earth. We have a trade deficit in the billions to almost every country of industry PER YEAR. Not least to mention Obama DOUBLED the national debt OF EVERY US PRESIDENT IN HISTORY COMBINED IN A MERE 8 YEARS. Putting Hillary in power or rewarding this level of treason with continuation and apathy is a mortal sin I assure you god will never forget. To vote for Hillary is literally to join with the spirit of pure evil.

 

[lbodel]

Going to have to wait to see how the Hilary vote plays out with woman. Anecdotal sure, but I know more than a few far left feminists that are not voting for Hilary because they look at her as an enabler for Bill's actions/what has been alleged against him. Of course they are not voting for Trump either but at end of day this hurts her.

As for Trump not losing the debate to her? I am not impressed with Hilary as a debater. So unless the GE debates are setup like the Democratic Primary debates(easy questions, mods not pressing her, Sanders not attacking her, on when nobody was paying much attention),I think Trump does fine.

As for the early spending in battleground states, only people paying attention to this stuff right now are the people that have their minds made up IMO.

You have to separate from the primary now. The problem that Trump has had lately is he is still acting like he's running a primary. The Republican party primary voter base is a small fraction when you look at the general election.

As for debates, again, you have to separate primary and general election. These do not get rowdy, there's not applause, etc. They are not "politicized". I think Hillary can be a good debater and when you're laser focused as much as you are on 3 debates that are given themes - I think she has the edge. The thing is - these aren't primary "entertainment" shows - these are debates on substance. It'll be interesting to see how the debates go because Trump is not exactly well versed on specific subjects and his overall "Presidential" knowledge is not exactly there (as of now). Chances are, he won't be able to just talk his way around in circles like he usually does. And if he's not able to produce answers, it will show. Right now it's June - he has a few months until he gets to that point. He has some serious work to do to be well prepared and come across that way. Because Hillary is extremely detailed and knowledgeable, whether you agree with her or not.

And the battleground state spending in the Summer does matter. Look how much things have changed just in the last 2 weeks. Yes, people are not "in tune" with the election yet, but elections are about much more than Presidents (how many people are paying attention/talking about Senate or house races - very few). You can't be missing some of the stuff that's happened given it's all over the news, internet, etc. It's not like you have to go buy a NY Times to read something about politics. As we all know, it's hard for people to change their opinions on people. Look at Obama and how many people said he was a secret Muslim or not born here - those weren't based on anything more than Republican advertising/mouthing off.

 

[Purdue97]

You have to separate from the primary now. The problem that Trump has had lately is he is still acting like he's running a primary. The Republican party primary voter base is a small fraction when you look at the general election.

As for debates, again, you have to separate primary and general election. These do not get rowdy, there's not applause, etc. They are not "politicized". I think Hillary can be a good debater and when you're laser focused as much as you are on 3 debates that are given themes - I think she has the edge. The thing is - these aren't primary "entertainment" shows - these are debates on substance. It'll be interesting to see how the debates go because Trump is not exactly well versed on specific subjects and his overall "Presidential" knowledge is not exactly there (as of now). Chances are, he won't be able to just talk his way around in circles like he usually does. And if he's not able to produce answers, it will show. Right now it's June - he has a few months until he gets to that point. He has some serious work to do to be well prepared and come across that way. Because Hillary is extremely detailed and knowledgeable, whether you agree with her or not.

And the battleground state spending in the Summer does matter. Look how much things have changed just in the last 2 weeks. Yes, people are not "in tune" with the election yet, but elections are about much more than Presidents (how many people are paying attention/talking about Senate or house races - very few). You can't be missing some of the stuff that's happened given it's all over the news, internet, etc. It's not like you have to go buy a NY Times to read something about politics. As we all know, it's hard for people to change their opinions on people. Look at Obama and how many people said he was a secret Muslim or not born here - those weren't based on anything more than Republican advertising/mouthing off.

Well, as for Trump still running his campaign as he is in a primary, I do not disagree. But I would also add that I think that this is just the way Trump is at least in the political arena. That is what hurts him most IMO. It got him early headlines and an early lead in primary, but the bombastic crap he says is now hurting him.

As for your points on debates, maybe. The one thing that struck me about Trump is that early in debates he said two things in regards to ISIS. HE would go after their finances/oil, and let Russia help with them. Well, what happened? I would not write him off. And expect Trump to do what Trump does-bring up Hilary's ties with Wall Street/Oil/Email, whether the question revolves around that or not.

As for early advertising, I just think the people in tune now are not changing their mind regardless-very few. And I think Trump is in a bit of a pickle until he gets RNC money. Largely because he said he would finance his own campaign until the GE. He has wealth, he has assets, but when it is tied in real estate one does not always have cash flow/on hand cash. So if he raises money he opens himself to attack.

Anyway, looks like htere is a strong movement to move Trump out of R nominee among delegates.

 

[qazplm]

You have to separate from the primary now. The problem that Trump has had lately is he is still acting like he's running a primary. The Republican party primary voter base is a small fraction when you look at the general election.

As for debates, again, you have to separate primary and general election. These do not get rowdy, there's not applause, etc. They are not "politicized". I think Hillary can be a good debater and when you're laser focused as much as you are on 3 debates that are given themes - I think she has the edge. The thing is - these aren't primary "entertainment" shows - these are debates on substance. It'll be interesting to see how the debates go because Trump is not exactly well versed on specific subjects and his overall "Presidential" knowledge is not exactly there (as of now). Chances are, he won't be able to just talk his way around in circles like he usually does. And if he's not able to produce answers, it will show. Right now it's June - he has a few months until he gets to that point. He has some serious work to do to be well prepared and come across that way. Because Hillary is extremely detailed and knowledgeable, whether you agree with her or not.

And the battleground state spending in the Summer does matter. Look how much things have changed just in the last 2 weeks. Yes, people are not "in tune" with the election yet, but elections are about much more than Presidents (how many people are paying attention/talking about Senate or house races - very few). You can't be missing some of the stuff that's happened given it's all over the news, internet, etc. It's not like you have to go buy a NY Times to read something about politics. As we all know, it's hard for people to change their opinions on people. Look at Obama and how many people said he was a secret Muslim or not born here - those weren't based on anything more than Republican advertising/mouthing off.

It isn't just about ads or who is or isn't paying attention. Although that's part of it. When both sides are spending on ads in similar amounts then it's probably a net wash. When one side is paying for ads and the other side is not, it probably isn't. But ignore that.

Hillary is spending on field organization, she's spending on contacts with voters, she's building databases, she's doing all of the early gruntwork you have to do to get maximum turnout. Trump is doing none of that, zero, nada. So no ads on air, and few boots on ground. A presidential election is not something you can just turn on in August after your convention. It starts the moment you are the presumptive nominee, if not earlier, and doesn't stop.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

Trump twitter 9.2M followers
Clinton twitter 7.0M followers

winning.

 

[qazplm]

Trump twitter 9.2M followers
Clinton twitter 7.0M followers

winning.