OT: Don't know if Trump's run is coming to an end, but it's been great so far!!

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
Goddamn this all sucks bad this year.

best political post we've had

Smart move by Trump. He needs the white supremacists and their sympathizers to support him on super Tuesday. He can denounce them on Wednesday, or even after he locks up the nomination. No need to do that today.

Earlier today, Trump retweeted somebody who tweeted out a Mussolini quote. Yes, the fascist dictator from Italy that hated democracy and palled around with Nazi Germany after Hitler assumed power.

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump 13h13 hours ago
"@ilduce2016: “It is better to live one day as a lion than 100 years as a sheep.” – @realDonaldTrump #MakeAmericaGreatAgain"

Nordic wrote:

NigelUno wrote:http://politics.blog.ajc.com/2016/02/28/donald-trump-refuses-to-condemn-kkk-and-marco-rubios-backers-pounce/

Trump was then asked specifically asked if he would disavow the KKK.

“You may have groups in there that are totally fine and it would be very unfair,” he said. “So give me a list of the groups and I’ll let you know.”

Where/when did he actually "refuse"? Was he being waterboarded, under oath? (annoying isn't it).

I have edited my original post (with quotes to reflect that was in fact the title of the article...sorry if that confused you).

Turtleneck wrote:

Earlier today, Trump retweeted somebody who tweeted out a Mussolini quote. Yes, the fascist dictator from Italy that hated democracy and palled around with Nazi Germany after Hitler assumed power.

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump 13h13 hours ago
"@ilduce2016: “It is better to live one day as a lion than 100 years as a sheep.” – @realDonaldTrump #MakeAmericaGreatAgain"

Did Trump root for fascism?

NigelUno wrote:

Nordic wrote:

Where/when did he actually "refuse"? Was he being waterboarded, under oath? (annoying isn't it).

I have edited my original post (with quotes to reflect that was in fact the title of the article...sorry if that confused you).

You didn't answer my question

Nordic wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

I have edited my original post (with quotes to reflect that was in fact the title of the article...sorry if that confused you).

You didn't answer my question

I think you actually asked 4 different questions. Not one.

The article may contain the answers you seek. I didn't write the article...sorry if that is also confusing you.

NigelUno wrote:

Nordic wrote:

You didn't answer my question

I think you actually asked 4 different questions.  Not one.

The article may contain the answers you seek.  I didn't write the article...sorry if that is also confusing you.

OK... good talk you Class M-3 General Utility Non-Theorizing Environmental Control Robot

Nordic wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

Earlier today, Trump retweeted somebody who  tweeted out a Mussolini quote. Yes, the fascist dictator from Italy that hated democracy and palled around with Nazi Germany after Hitler assumed power.

Did Trump root for fascism?

No. Several things about him are inconsistent with fascism. It's a bit much to call him a fascist (we usually equate fascism with nothing more than excessive power). But he sure has the power seeking behavior and hyper-nationalist rhetoric down that leads to people calling him a fascist, and he does not do himself any favors by retweeting Mussolini quotes.

Turtleneck wrote:

Earlier today, Trump retweeted somebody who tweeted out a Mussolini quote. Yes, the fascist dictator from Italy that hated democracy and palled around with Nazi Germany after Hitler assumed power.

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump 13h13 hours ago
"@ilduce2016: “It is better to live one day as a lion than 100 years as a sheep.” – @realDonaldTrump #MakeAmericaGreatAgain"

I live this every day

Nordic wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

I think you actually asked 4 different questions.  Not one.

The article may contain the answers you seek.  I didn't write the article...sorry if that is also confusing you.

OK... good talk you Class M-3 General Utility Non-Theorizing Environmental Control Robot

The most AWESOME robot EVAH!

Turtleneck wrote:

tGreenWay wrote:The extremists are making their move to usurp total control. I hate it. This country is better off with a healthy GOP, but the Tea Partiers have succeeded in paralyzing Washington. Next, they'll dismantle government. It's worked beautifully for them.

I don't think Trump is their guy. For as much as they desire limited government, the tea party crowd has a strong moral streak grounded in Christianity. They would be better off with Ted Cruz. If most of them are lining up behind Trump, they are backing the wrong horse. Trump will not reduce government. He will grow government. His presidency will blow up in their face in the worst way.

Yeah, I'm not a political expert, but Trump doesn't fit the Tea Party mold.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

tGreenWay wrote:The extremists are making their move to usurp total control. I hate it. This country is better off with a healthy GOP, but the Tea Partiers have succeeded in paralyzing Washington.  Next, they'll dismantle government. It's worked beautifully for them.  

I could see the normal (read, sane) republicans just not voting or even supporting Hillary and accepting that they have to go back to the drawing board for 2020. The alternative for them is 8 years of trump or 4 of trump then 4 of a democrat president and a 2024 election against an incumbent democrat. Unless they try to go after an incumbent in their own party in 2020 (if trump won in 16) which I can't imagine would be easy or helpful for them long term.

Seems that if you're a republican that really hates trump, and there are a lot, the best option is to bite the bullet for 4 years.

Maybe, but I doubt they want Hillary to win. Al Gore missed his chance.

Either way, this should be an eye opener for the Republican party... but probably not.

Blanch32 wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

Earlier today, Trump retweeted somebody who tweeted out a Mussolini quote. Yes, the fascist dictator from Italy that hated democracy and palled around with Nazi Germany after Hitler assumed power.

I live this every day

You'd be Cecil and some dentist would put an arrow in your ass.

Nordic wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

I could see the normal (read, sane) republicans just not voting or even supporting Hillary and accepting that they have to go back to the drawing board for 2020. The alternative for them is 8 years of trump or 4 of trump then 4 of a democrat president and a 2024 election against an incumbent democrat. Unless they try to go after an incumbent in their own party in 2020 (if trump won in 16) which I can't imagine would be easy or helpful for them long term.

Seems that if you're a republican that really hates trump, and there are a lot, the best option is to bite the bullet for 4 years.

Maybe, but I doubt they want Hillary to win. Al Gore missed his chance.

Either way, this should be an eye opener for the Republican party... but probably not.

It should be an eye opener for both parties and the kind of electorate they are helping create.

DWags wrote:

Blanch32 wrote:

I live this every day

You'd be Cecil and some dentist would put an arrow in your ass.

Hahaha.

Blanch, it's not very lion-like to spend your days kissing corporate ass.

Turtleneck wrote:

DWags wrote:



You'd be Cecil and some dentist would put an arrow in your ass.

Hahaha.

Blanch, it's not very lion-like to spend your days kissing corporate ass.

I think he was referring to hunting weak slow fatties

Turtleneck wrote:

Nordic wrote:

Maybe, but I doubt they want Hillary to win. Al Gore missed his chance.

Either way, this should be an eye opener for the Republican party... but probably not.

It should be an eye opener for both parties and the kind of electorate they are helping create.

If the Dems keep winning, probably not

Nordic wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

It should be an eye opener for both parties and the kind of electorate they are helping create.

If the Dems keep winning, probably not

It's not even about winning. As long as the traditional wisdom holds up - money and power within the party determine the nominee - they will move along thinking all is fine. However, you can see the D base is fractured not entirely unlike the R base. Both parties have a lot of reflecting to do, but I doubt either actually takes the time to reflect.

Turtleneck wrote:

Nordic wrote:

If the Dems keep winning, probably not

It's not even about winning. As long as the traditional wisdom holds up - money and power within the party determine the nominee - they will move along thinking all is fine. However, you can see the D base is fractured not entirely unlike the R base. Both parties have a lot of reflecting to do, but I doubt either actually takes the time to reflect.

Agree Nigel

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/02/26/opinion/the-governing-cancer-of-our-time.html?_r=0&referer=https://www.google.com/

Nordic wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:

It's not even about winning. As long as the traditional wisdom holds up - money and power within the party determine the nominee - they will move along thinking all is fine. However, you can see the D base is fractured not entirely unlike the R base. Both parties have a lot of reflecting to do, but I doubt either actually takes the time to reflect.

Agree Nigel

Nigel is at Publix right now.

The first logical step to a real multi-party system is a fractured election like this. We'll see more than two prominent parties in 2020 and it's going to be wild. Glad I've only got about 20-25 years left frankly.

I still believe we could see a Bloomberg running this summer.

DWags wrote:The first logical step to a real multi-party system is a fractured election like this.  We'll see more than two prominent parties in 2020 and it's going to be wild.  Glad I've only got about 20-25 years left frankly.

I still believe we could see a Bloomberg running this summer.

Sorry, but too many institutional barriers to a multi-party system in this country.

1) Do you really want multi-party competition given the nature of the electoral college? No candidate would get 270 and the House would be picking the president all the time. Before you say "well then just get rid of the electoral college," remember that requires amending the Constitution. Guess what? You are not getting a proposed amendment, and even in you did, 3/4 of the states are not giving up their place in the electoral college.

2) We use a single member district with plurality electoral system to elect members of Congress. While not in the Constitution, these types of electoral systems tend to produce two party systems. They offer zero incentive for minor parties to form. Furthermore, we have been indoctrinated with the benefits of a two party system. When the UK actually offered a national referendum to ditch their SMDP electoral system, the people said no because they simply did not know better after all those years of voting the same way.

The moral of the story, a multi party system cannot really bring itself about in this country because of serious institutional impediments.

Turtleneck wrote:

DWags wrote:The first logical step to a real multi-party system is a fractured election like this.  We'll see more than two prominent parties in 2020 and it's going to be wild.  Glad I've only got about 20-25 years left frankly.

I still believe we could see a Bloomberg running this summer.

Sorry, but too many institutional barriers to a multi-party system in this country.

1) Do you really want multi-party competition given the nature of the electoral college? No candidate would get 270 and the House would be picking the president all the time. Before you say "well then just get rid of the electoral college," remember that requires amending the Constitution. Guess what? You are not getting a proposed amendment, and even in you did, 3/4 of the states are not giving up their place in the electoral college.

2) We use a single member district with plurality electoral system to elect members of Congress. While not in the Constitution, these types of electoral systems tend to produce two party systems. They offer zero incentive for minor parties to form. Furthermore, we have been indoctrinated with the benefits of a two party system. When the UK actually offered a national referendum to ditch their SMDP electoral system, the people said no because they simply did not know better after all those years of voting the same way.

The moral of the story, a minor party system cannot really bring itself about in this country because of serious institutional impediments.

It all starts from grassroots. We'll see congressional splintering before presidential upheaval but we're turning into Italy brother. Too much hate to avoid that.

Nordic wrote:

NigelUno wrote:http://politics.blog.ajc.com/2016/02/28/donald-trump-refuses-to-condemn-kkk-and-marco-rubios-backers-pounce/

Trump was then asked specifically asked if he would disavow the KKK.

“You may have groups in there that are totally fine and it would be very unfair,” he said. “So give me a list of the groups and I’ll let you know.”

Where/when did he actually "refuse"?  Was he being waterboarded, under oath?  (annoying isn't it).

He was told, point blank the David Duke, Grand Wizard Emeritus, of the KKK was supporting him and asked if he would condemn them and say he didn't want their support and showed that he was not willing to respond in the affirmative.  i.e., he refused.

Refuse: "to say or show that you are not willing to do something that someone wants you to do"

TAPPER: I want to ask you about the Anti-Defamation League, which this week called on you to publicly condemn unequivocally the racism of former KKK grand wizard David Duke, who recently said that voting against you at this point would be treason to your heritage.

Will you unequivocally condemn David Duke and say that you don't want his vote or that of other white supremacists in this election?

TRUMP: Well, just so you understand, I don't know anything about David Duke. OK? I don't know anything about what you're even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So, I don't know.

I don't know, did he endorse me or what's going on, because, you know, I know nothing about David Duke. I know nothing about white supremacists. And so you're asking me a question that I'm supposed to be talking about people that I know nothing about.

CNN told you who Duke was, and what it was he said.  I know, Don, it's tough to actually formulate a coherent response to a question like, Hey, you cool with the KKK, but this about as softball of a question as they get.

TAPPER: But I guess the question from the Anti-Defamation League is, even if you don't know about their endorsement, there are these groups and individuals endorsing you. Would you just say unequivocally you condemn them and you don't want their support?

TRUMP: Well, I have to look at the group. I mean, I don't know what group you're talking about.

You wouldn't want me to condemn a group that I know nothing about. I would have to look. If you would send me a list of the groups, I will do research on them. And, certainly, I would disavow if I thought there was something wrong.

CNN told you it was the former Grand Wizard of the KKK.

TAPPER: The Ku Klux Klan?

TRUMP: But you may have groups in there that are totally fine, and it would be very unfair. So, give me a list of the groups, and I will let you know.

It's the KKK


TAPPER: OK. I mean, I'm just talking about David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan here, but...


TRUMP: I don't know any -- honestly, I don't know David Duke. I don't believe I have ever met him. I'm pretty sure I didn't meet him. And I just don't know anything about him.


You do actually, you spoke out against him in 2012.

But did he actually use the word "refuse"? I'll wait.

Nordic wrote:But did he actually use the word "refuse"? I'll wait.

GO BLUE

NigelUno wrote:

Nordic wrote:But did he actually use the word "refuse"? I'll wait.

GO BLUE

Where id I have say GO BLUE? I'll wait.

If you do not have institutions capable of facilitating change or supporting the outcomes of change, change is unlikely or will not end well. You might see greater electoral competition - in the form of minor parties - for congressional seats, but the electoral college and presidency is the real road block.

Why did you mention Italy? It is not the only country with conflictual party relations and it is a parliamentary system. You would be better off finding a presidential system that melted down due to poor party relations both within and between parties. There are plenty of examples.

From my view, the vehicle to winning seats is still running as a R or L. This country began as two competing factions - Federalists and Anti-Federalists - and evolved into a two-party system. Even at moments of factionalization and incredible intra and inter-party tensions, when the parties divided, the two-party system eventually reasserted itself. Right now I see what is happening as a battle for control from within the parties; the fight to steer the party in one direction or another.

tGreenWay wrote:

Nordic wrote:

Did Trump root for fascism?

I have it on good authority there are photos out there showing Trump rooting for fascism. The way I understand it, he even bought shirts supporting fascism.

Walmart?

tGreenWay wrote:

Nordic wrote:

Did Trump root for fascism?

I have it on good authority there are photos out there showing Trump rooting for fascism. The way I understand it, he even bought shirts supporting fascism.  

Would you root for fascism if a fascism win meant a B10 championship for MSU?

Nordic wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

GO BLUE

Where id I have say GO BLUE? I'll wait.

Turtleneck wrote:

tGreenWay wrote:




I have it on good authority there are photos out there showing Trump rooting for fascism. The way I understand it, he even bought shirts supporting fascism.  

Would you root for fascism if a fascism win meant a B10 championship for MSU?

Greenway not answering. Clearly a yes.

Democrats love KKK leaders, they endorse them and kiss them! Former slave owners Bill and Hillary are so cozy with the KKK! Wow, they even kiss KKK leaders!! So nice of them to care about the black community! Democrats love blacks! #TRUMPTRAIN! #DemocratsAreFuckedWhenTrumpGoesAfterHillary

Nordic wrote:But did he actually use the word "refuse"? I'll wait.

Given your trouble with the subtle intricacies of the English language and lack of the ability to process the simple definition of refuse I provided you, I'd not hold your breath if I were you.