deskthority

The old one was getting stale and long in the tooth.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politic ... %20Control

Well Cleveland's Republican National Convention will be an interesting event anyhow, I'm sure that Trumps wife will not pose like that in Cleveland.

I know that Huffington Post is openly biased, but sometimes they make some good points:

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_57743 ... 1c313d8e7e

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/10619944.html

I wish that they had waited until after the convention for this.

Greater damage could be done to the Republican Party closer to election day, the closer the better. If they have the opportunity to get Trump out of the way early, they have more time to do damage control.

I don't think there is an ideal time to discuss a person's history of misogyny. There is so much to discuss regarding Trump's treatment of females, a steady stream of articles could come out every day until the election.

The real question to me is if other people are keeping quiet because they are afraid of the consequences if they talk or cannot afford the legal fees?

vivalarevolución wrote: ↑I know that Huffington Post is openly biased, but sometimes they make some good points:

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_57743 ... 1c313d8e7e

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/10619944.html

openly bias does not even cover it.

Ball faced lying , distorting the truth . Thats there usual MO.

andrewjoy wrote: ↑

vivalarevolución wrote: ↑I know that Huffington Post is openly biased, but sometimes they make some good points:

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_57743 ... 1c313d8e7e

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/10619944.html

openly bias does not even cover it.

Ball faced lying , distorting the truth . Thats there usual MO.

Cue the typical dismissive male reaction whenever accusations of sexual assault are discussed.

There is zero chance that the Republican party can “get Trump out of the way”, early or otherwise. That idea is nothing but a fever dream among particular niche groups of neocon pseudointellectual pundits.

I'm surprised they ran with it in the first place. He's so clueless and such an obvious pathological liar that he's costing the Republicans a massive amount of credibility. A bit like Bill O'Reilly really. I'm not even sure he's aware himself of how little sense he makes and how inconsistent every single one of his statements is.

At least he's openly super evil though, he doesn't hide it or anything, I can respect that. Much better than for example George Orborne.

So apparently the vice president candidates have been narrowed down to Newt Gingrich, Chris Christie, and Mike Pence. Or maybe a surprise choice. The Trumpet is keeping us on edge, because he is crafty like that.

Either way, I am not sure how any of those choices helps his case. Pence looks okay from a distance, but I have the up close view and it is less than appealing.

vivalarevolución wrote: ↑
So apparently the vice president candidates have been narrowed down to Newt Gingrich, Chris Christie, and Mike Pence.

Newt Gingrich is the only member of the human race with a larger ego than Trump. If a Trump/Gingrich ticket was elected it would be horrific, but hopefully it will simply mean that Gingrich follows Trump into oblivion, and good riddance.

If those are the three most likely choices, that is only more proof of the obliviousness of those bouncing around at the top of our political structure truly are. Pence is in danger of not being re-elected in one of the most reliably Republican states in the country. I mean, come on, bro.

I think those three (especially Gingrich) would put a huge dent in his "outsider" appeal to his voters. I think this is one of the reasons he's so quiet about it, anyone even the slightest bit underhanded/establishment could throw that all out the window.

Invisius wrote: ↑I think those three (especially Gingrich) would put a huge dent in his "outsider" appeal to his voters. I think this is one of the reasons he's so quiet about it, anyone even the slightest bit underhanded/establishment could throw that all out the window.

What do you mean by your second sentence? I am not sure that I completely understand it.

Gingrich was, is, and will continue to be a clownish and clueless idiot. That he styles himself an “intellectual” and thinks serious people take him seriously is pathetic. He gives the same kind of vibe as an pseudointellectual hero in a novel who keeps getting into trouble because he doesn’t know anything about what is going on in his surroundings.

Trump also has grandiose ideas about his own brilliance, but it’s mostly oriented around being the most winningest winner that ever won, rather than some pretense to rationality or wisdom. So it’s not quite as Sad.

Trump’s VP pick is unlikely to have any effect on voters. The ones who thought he was great before will still think he’s great. The ones who thought he was a total dick before will still think he’s a dick.

jacobolus wrote: ↑ Gingrich was, is, and will continue to be a clownish and clueless idiot.
That he styles himself an “intellectual” and thinks serious people take him seriously is pathetic.

Trump’s VP pick is unlikely to have any effect on voters. The ones who thought he was great before will still think he’s great. The ones who thought he was a total dick before will still think he’s a dick.

Gingrich was very powerful for a few years in the mid-late-1990s and enshrined a system that is still firmly in place today:
That all Congressional Republicans *MUST* obey all the orders, however stupid or counter-productive, of the party bosses or suffer dire repercussions.

There had been some of that all along, but the "machine" that put Reagan in place recognized from the mid-late-1970s that only by focusing on political office all the way up and down from local to national, and making tactical and concerted efforts to ensure that they held onto those positions, continuously and at all costs, would they be able to put the country into a stranglehold and keep the populace relentlessly voting directly against its own interests.

Gingrich was the figurehead when this movement achieved its goal of controlling the House of Representatives, and proved that while he was utterly incompetent to accomplish anything on his own, he was a master at thwarting and short-circuiting whatever anybody else was trying to do.

It was delicious irony that while Bill Clinton was nearly brought down by a meaningless lightweight sexual indiscretion that was pounced on and amplified by rabid house right-wingers, Gingrich abruptly resigned and disappeared because he knew that he had been carrying on a much more flagrant, intense, and long-term extra-marital affair that would never stand even a fraction of the same scrutiny.

As for Trump, you are mostly right, I think, since his minions are so blind and ignorant and unable to connect dots, but I do not believe that choosing an "insider" would help him much with the "party faithful" either.

I truly hope it is Gingrich. That would be completely laughable. Pence and Christie and laughable in their own right, but Gingrich would take the cake. From my view, the whole campaign seems based on the white male patriarchy re-affirming their power. Good luck.

The ultimate chaos ticket would be Trump / Palin, but I'm pretty sure the trumpet will not have a woman as his VP and she's not up for it anyway. From my limited US political knowledge I'd say at least Gingrich has more experience than Pence or Christie but I could be wrong. So am I correct in assuming that at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland July 18 – 21, 2016 all this has to be anounced including Trump as the official republican candidate? Or is there some grace period?

seebart wrote: ↑The ultimate chaos ticket would be Trump / Palin, but I'm pretty sure the trumpet will not have a woman as his VP and she's not up for it anyway. From my limited US political knowledge I'd say at least Gingrich has more experience than Pence or Christie but I could be wrong. So am I correct in assuming that at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland July 18 – 21, 2016 all this has to be anounced including Trump as the official republican candidate? Or is there some grace period?

The purpose of the convention is to adopt a platform and nominate candidates to the ticket. Supposedly the body of delegates in attendance there is the party's governing body roughly paralleling the actual US government.

It is not uncommon for announcements of candidates and/or running mates to be made in advance, to drum up interest, but platforms are generally kept on the down-low because that is usually where the dirty laundry is. If you are falling asleep too easily at night, try reading the actual Republican Party Platform for the last several cycles.

seebart wrote: ↑The ultimate chaos ticket would be Trump / Palin, but I'm pretty sure the trumpet will not have a woman as his VP and she's not up for it anyway. From my limited US political knowledge I'd say at least Gingrich has more experience than Pence or Christie but I could be wrong. So am I correct in assuming that at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland July 18 – 21, 2016 all this has to be anounced including Trump as the official republican candidate? Or is there some grace period?

I think Trump has stated that he would never allow a woman to be his VP. Pence and Christie have more experience running things as governors of states, for what is it worth. To me, it shows you are great at navigating the political sewers, because Pence is not very good at running things and many of his people are questionable competent. I honestly do not know what Gingrich has been doing the last 20 years.

In Indiana, the governor has to declare their intent to run for a different office before July 15. Trump is coming to Indianapolis on July 12. I think we can expect an announcement within the next week. We do not know if the announcement will be Pence, but I think it will be declared before July 15 as a courtesy to Pence and the Indiana deadline.

No thanks fohat I'll pass on that Republican Party Platform reading, I'm sure you understand. Ah yes I see viva, but since the actual convention is soon we'll all find out anyway. I remember Newt Gingrich from my time in the US in the 1990's. Even back then the media would make fun of him if I recall. Strange man.

seebart wrote: ↑
I remember Newt Gingrich from my time in the US in the 1990's.
Even back then the media would make fun of him if I recall. Strange man.

He was as ugly as Bill Clinton was charming, but he knew how to make threats and enforce them.

Unlike Trump, who is purely a bag of wind, with a gossamer-thin membrane containing the nothingness.

Right, and unlike Trump he was an actual politician with some valid experience, speaker of the house if I recall.

seebart wrote: ↑
No thanks fohat I'll pass on that Republican Party Platform reading

TL;DR

So far, the Mexican Border Wall is one plank in this year's Republican Party platform.

Hearing reports that Mike Pence is the vice presidential candidate.

vivalarevolución wrote: ↑Hearing reports that Mike Pence is the vice presidential candidate.

Guess they felt the ticket was weak on LGBT hate, and didn't have a strong enough anti-freedom of speech record.

rootwyrm wrote: ↑

vivalarevolución wrote: ↑Hearing reports that Mike Pence is the vice presidential candidate.

Guess they felt the ticket was weak on LGBT hate, and didn't have a strong enough anti-freedom of speech record.

I have never felt that Pence has been anti-freedom of speech, as our local press has run him the ringer without retribution, but there might be some past offenses I am not familiar with.

But yea, this duo has all the bases of bigotry covered.

vivalarevolución wrote: ↑

rootwyrm wrote: ↑

vivalarevolución wrote: ↑Hearing reports that Mike Pence is the vice presidential candidate.

Guess they felt the ticket was weak on LGBT hate, and didn't have a strong enough anti-freedom of speech record.

I have never felt that Pence has been anti-freedom of speech, as our local press has run him the ringer without retribution, but there might be some past offenses I am not familiar with.

But yea, this duo has all the bases of bigotry covered.

That's because he succeeded in keeping it from making major headlines. In fact, he was planning and trying to set up a state-run RT-style "news" organization that would have "advocated" for his government and also been the sole source to "break" stories about him. As well as provide properly deferential pre-written articles - just change the by-line to pretend one of your "journalists" wrote it.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/P ... ndiana-Huh

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/arc ... IN/384867/

rootwyrm wrote: ↑
In fact, he was planning and trying to set up a state-run RT-style "news" organization that would have "advocated" for his government and also been the sole source to "break" stories about him. As well as provide properly deferential pre-written articles - just change the by-line to pretend one of your "journalists" wrote it.

This may have already been posted in this thread, or one of the parallels, I can't remember:

http://www.vox.com/2016/3/1/11127424/tr ... itarianism

Oh yea the state news agency thing. He was going to use that promote state policies. Basically propaganda. We were glad that got quashed.