Here's the question - how many Obama/Trump voters would have voted for a female version of Donald Trump? One who was identical in every other way except gender? Not many, I'd imagine. If someone voted for Obama and then Trump, there's a good chance that sexism played a big role (and that applies to female voters as well).
[/QUOTE] There’s the trade thing, but I suspect it’s a lot simpler than that. Neither were Hillary Clinton and neither were in the DC “power structure”. Trump will have a harder time running on that again for obvious reasons. He’ll try, but he’s the sitting President. FWIW, in the next election cycle it’s pretty common for roughly 10 percent of the other candidate’s votes to come from people who voted the other way the prior election. It happened for Obama in 2008, Bush in 2000, Trump in 2016. Even Kerry and Romney were pretty close to that mark in 2004 and 2012.
Donetta Trump would have lost. There is no female who could say the things he did, behave the way he did, or run the way that he did. White men can do things others can’t and get away with it.
John Dean was essentially expelled from the Democratic primary for whooping to loud. I don't think 99.9999% of white men could have acted in the vile way that Trump does and gotten away with it either.
Kind of like a combination of Leona Helmsley, Marge Schott, and.... as far as Trump's sexual /marital conduct goes, I can't even think of a well-known example for comparison. I mean,can you imagine the presidential campaign of an obnoxious, bigoted tycoon/heiress who trades in her husband for younger fashion models on a regular basis? Who is also on tape bragging about her attempted adultery, and her ability to grope young men without consequences (due to their lower status)? Would this imaginary person be able to "humanize" herself by bringing the children of her long-discarded first husband to the nominating convention? Would this imaginary person be depicted as sharing an emotional bond with coal miners and steelworkers? The whole idea is absurd. So I'm not surprised that there are a small percentage of people whose vision of what "presidential" is could include both Trump and Obama, but not Hillary Clinton.
1. Howard, not John. 2. He got whooped in Iowa. That’s what did him in. Now, we can discuss how that came about. But he got whooped.
A female version of Donald Trump wouldn't received 10% of the vote in any GOP primary. What a whining bitch that candidate would have been.
I saw his limo outside the local Pathmark when I was a kid. He lived in Saddle River, NJ post Watergate.
True, but Dems hold their candidates to higher standards than the GOP. If you are a white man running for a conservative position and your persona is one where you bluntly tell it like it is and you have this mirage of being self made, then you can do this. Mark Cuban could run this way on the GOP ticket. Not the Dem ticket, for example. 99.999% of white men couldn't act this way, but only a tiny fraction of those men could run for President. Outsiders with the social cache to run often have those characteristics above (like a Ross Perot). I realize that the qualifiers above limit the number of people who can employ this method, but the point is that white men can behave this way as long as the audience is sufficiently comprised of white men and their subservient female womb providers. Demographically, that is strictly a white guy within the GOP thing.
With the recent flurry of activity from Mueller, does anyone else get the sense that he could be wrapping things up now? I was thinking that the Russian indictments were going to serve as a platform on which he could build additional investigation and charges, but with today's filing of more charges against Manafort and Gates, I am beginning to suspect that the scope of his investigation is going to be much narrower than I had imagined.
I doubt it. The thirteen Russians, the initial Manafort indictment, Papadopolous...those are the groundwork-laying types. This feels like the blunt hammer of the law coming down on someone who thinks he will get pardoned. Mueller is laying a trail for state prosecutors if Trump starts pardoning, and is destroying Gates and Manafort if Trump won't.
Or Manafort & Gates were offered sweet deals initially, refused & now Mueller's gonna kick them in the nuts extra hard to show the rest of TrumpCo that this shit's for real.
I think Mueller is just cleaning out a nest of vipers and doing things as they come. The new indictments were in Virginia because that is the appropriate place for those crimes. I think his only message is he is going to get everyone for everything. And he's going to get Trump last, Sully style.
Lookey, another flipper.... https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/23/us/politics/rick-gates-guilty-plea-mueller-investigation.html
On news were laying out some deets on these two & their scams. Holy hell. They wouldn't pass background checks to coach bball or soccer in my town. Well neither would the Trump Crime Family so it kinda makes sense.