Shifting tone, Trump entertains the notion he could lose

[dexterm]

2 hours ago, attrayant said:

 

You really don't sound like an optimist.  You sound paranoid. 

 

Try to remember just eight years ago when conservatives were predicting the veritable implosion of the USA should Obama become president:

 

• Gas was supposed to soar to six or seven dollars a gallon.  It's averaging $1.91 per gallon at the moment.

 

• Unemployment would be through the roof at eight or ten percent.  It's half that.

 

• Economic collapse.  No less than conservative pontificator Rush Limburger assured us:

• Investor panic and a stock market crash a la 2008.  It's looking good these days:

 

• Obama is going to take your guns (sound familiar?).  According to the NRA, Barack Obama will be coming after your guns "under the radar".  But now we're swimming in guns and the funerals that usually go with them.

 

Why do people keep letting themselves get conned by doomsayers?

 

How soon people forget.

 

That rise from the trough about a quarter way along on the left of your Dow Jones chart is the very moment that Obama became President. He saved the national and the global economy!

Up until then the markets were in freefall because of Republican mismanagement of sub prime mortgages and derivatives.

The Republicans' solution at the time:  let the banks, car industry and anyone else go bust....i.e. a rout, not a fighting retreat from the precipice.

 

Everyone, including our resident Trump apologists, would have lost their savings, investments and retirement funds. We would have had a multiple years long depression like the 30s not the quick recovery from a recession, when Obama took over.
 

Edited August 12, 2016 by dexterm

[Ulysses G.]

13 minutes ago, dexterm said:

How soon people forget.

 

That rise from the trough about a quarter way along on the left of your Dow Jones chart is the very moment that Obama became President. He saved the national and the global economy!
 

 

Complete nonsense. The economy had started to recover from a major recession before Obama even  took office.  The economy would have improved, no matter who was in office. In fact, President Obama’s recovery has been the worst recovery from any recession since the Great Depression. Many economists believe his policies have slowed the recovery down.

[Publicus]

 

The right has been saying the identical thing about it for eight years.

 

As with Trump, facts and reality have nothing to do with it. Waste of time to try to argue it.

[Chicog]

Irrelevant anyway since Obama isn't in this election.

But Trump is, and he's getting his ar$e kicked all over the place. It seems people are tiring of his incessant  waffling.

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/polls-clinton-running-table-key-battlegrounds-n629136

[Publicus]

 

Yep, it's the 'L' word again. 

 

So here also are some other surveys released a few hours ago which are related to NBC that you cite but include others with NBC or separately.....

 

Texas: Trump 46%, Clinton 35% (Dixie Strategies)

 

Colorado: Clinton 41%, Trump 29%, Johnson 15%, Stein 6% (NBC/WSJ/Marist)

 

Florida: Clinton 41%, Trump 36%, Johnson 9%, Stein 4% (NBC/WSJ/Marist)

 

North Carolina: Clinton 45%, Trump 36%, Johnson 9%, Stein 2% (NBC/WSJ/Marist)

 

Virginia: Clinton 43%, Trump 31%, Johnson 12%, Stein 5% (NBC/WSJ/Marist)

 

The 'L' word. 

 

Landslide.

 

Trump needs each one of these states and all he has is of course solid red TX.

 

Landslide.

[Throatwobbler]

4 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

Or what about the last election?  Remember when they were predicting that there would be no hiring of full-time employees because of the Affordable Care Act?  Or that the stock market would collapse?  And that the economy itself would collapse?  These people either have no memory or no shame.

They have no shame whatsoever. Never look at facts, just old angry white men.

[Throatwobbler]

1 hour ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Complete nonsense. The economy had started to recover from a major recession before Obama even  took office.  The economy would have improved, no matter who was in office. In fact, President Obama’s recovery has been the worst recovery from any recession since the Great Depression. Many economists believe his policies have slowed the recovery down.

Typical BS from you. Blaming Obama for the recovery but refusing to acknowledge whose policies brought us into that mess. I will give you a clue, it wasn't Obama.

[bendejo]

He's drowning in his own vomit.  Hillary's ads use nothing but his own words, juxtaposed for him to defame himself.  He's still the military school brat he always was.  It will be interesting to see what becomes of his his life when all this is over.

 

 

[Ulysses G.]

1 hour ago, Throatwobbler said:

Typical BS from you.

 

Baloney. It is almost 8 years later and you are still blaming Bush. Obama was aware of the recession when he ran for office. However, he promised to cut the deficit in half during his first term and that did not happen. Obama’s recovery has been the worst recovery from any recession since the Great Depression. That is all on Obama.

Edited August 12, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[Chicog]

58 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Baloney. It is almost 8 years later and you are still blaming Bush. Obama was aware of the recession when he ran for office. However, he promised to cut the deficit in half during his first term and that did not happen. Obama’s recovery has been the worst recovery from any recession since the Great Depression. That is all on Obama.

 

Bush without a doubt is the worst US president of my lifetime. Under his watch America repeatedly put its foot in it.
 

History will have him down as a blithering idiot that let smarter people rob the country and send it into two unwinnable wars.

 

It's not a matter of "still blaming him", it's just a matter of historical record.
 

Now, let's get back to #TREXIT eh?

 

[Neurath]

13 hours ago, Gecko123 said:

Deep down I think Trump himself has come to realize he's not fit to be President.

Not a chance. He has no deep down. There is nothing in there but a giant black hole of needy Id screaming for attention. He's not even one dimensional. 

[keemapoot]

One notion Trump entertains is that once America sees his tax returns that will probably seal the deal for Clinton. New York Times article today reckons that it's highly likely he has paid zero taxes in some years, and almost none in most others.  Romney got killed for only paying $5 million one year, and he is only worth a paltry $250 million. Trump is worth a gazillion. 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/12/business/how-much-does-donald-trump-pay-in-taxes-it-could-be-zero.html

[Scotwight]

6 hours ago, Publicus said:

 

The right has been saying the identical thing about it for eight years.

 

As with Trump, facts and reality have nothing to do with it. Waste of time to try to argue it.

Given it is a waste of time one has to wonder about the numbers.  On the first news page of Thai Visa world news right now there are 7 anti Trump threads and 0 anti Clinton threads.  Who  you guys trying to kid?

[Scott]

A few off-topic posts have been removed.   Please get back on the topic.  

[Credo]

9 minutes ago, Scotwight said:

Given it is a waste of time one has to wonder about the numbers.  On the first news page of Thai Visa world news right now there are 7 anti Trump threads and 0 anti Clinton threads.  Who  you guys trying to kid?

It's not too hard to figure out.   The Clinton strategy has been for her to keep a relatively low profile and to let Trump continue to put his foot in his mouth.   He does that quite well.   

 

He spends nothing on television advertising, so he doesn't have the ability to directly control what is said.   He wants to be in the news; he is in the news.   He has no policies and he has been outed.   

 

If he had an even remotely coherent message about the direction of the country, he would be so far ahead in the polls Clinton wouldn't even be able to see him.   He doesn't and it's pretty evident to almost everyone.   

Edited August 13, 2016 by Credo

[Publicus]

15 hours ago, Pinot said:

 

You're more up on this than I am Publicus. Can Cheeto Jesus deliver the Congress and the Senate? How close is it? 

 

In news from the hopelessly brain dead portion of wingnuttia, we get Steve King's amazing take on on HRC

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/steve-king-clinton-226915

 

 

 

Last year at this time the R two-term Senator Richard Burr of NC was considered by everyone everywhere to have a "safe" Senate seat. He had no primary challenger this year so he won R party renomination unopposed.

 

Now Sen Burr has slipped underwater...

 

Republican Sen. Richard Burr fell two points behind Democratic challenger Deborah Ross in a new NBC/WSJ/Marist poll of North Carolina released Friday.

 

Ross overtook the incumbent Burr 46 percent to 44 percent. That marks a switch from the most recent NBC/WSJ/Marist poll of North Carolina conducted in July. which showed Burr held a seven-point lead over Ross.

 

 

In the North Carolina gubernatorial race, the latest survey showed Democratic challenger Roy Cooper widening his lead over another GOP incumbent, Pat McCrory, 51 percent to 44 percent. Cooper led McCrory by four points, 49-45, in the July NBC/WSJ/Marist poll.

 

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/polltracker/burr-falls-2-points-behind-nc-senate-marist-august

 

This coincides with HRC going up in NC by 9 points. NC is a historical red state which Barack Obama won in 2008 by one percent, lost to Romney in 2012 by 3 percent.

 

Neither party had considered Sen. Burr in their calculations of majority control of the Senate in this election. Republicans lose Sen Burr the Senate will flip to the Democrats. It will flip by more than the required net four gain the Democrats need to get a 50-50 tie. It will flip by more than the 5 D net gain the Democrats need to flip the Senate to 51 D's and 49 R's. 

 

John McCain just went underwater in Arizona, also by two points and for the first time in the campaign. HRC and Trump are tied in AZ which is historically a red state, although Bill won AZ in his 1996 successful reelection (Bill lost AZ in 1992 which was fully predictable and anticipated...the '96 flip to Bill was unexpected and a surprise to everyone).

 

Democratic former Sen. Evan Bayh in Indiana has come out of retirement to run this year and he's ahead in an historically red state OB won in 2008 (and which Romney won back in 2012). This is a Senate seat neither party had figured on as a factor in the matter of majority control in this election. 

 

Sen Burr opposes the NC bathroom law and in 2010 voted for gays in the military. The D for governor  who is Attorney General is running way ahead of the incumbent Republican governor and he too opposes the NC bathroom law. Significant about Burr however is that he is a center-right conservative who is just not a crackpot rightwhinger, yet he's beginning to get swept away in what is becoming a national blue wave election.

 

The LBW election (Landslide Blue Wave). Watching the House races now.

[dexterm]

15 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Complete nonsense. The economy had started to recover from a major recession before Obama even  took office.  The economy would have improved, no matter who was in office. In fact, President Obama’s recovery has been the worst recovery from any recession since the Great Depression. Many economists believe his policies have slowed the recovery down.

Absolute baloney. Republicans wanted the banks and car industry to go bust to absorb all the toxic debt...and probably your life savings and pension with it.

 

I'll take the opinion of billions of investors who actually put their money where their mouth is and created the present 8 year long bull run in the US stock market to your completely  hypothetical : "The economy would have improved, no matter who was in office".

 

Just watch the economy tank if it looks like Trump may win, creating a trade war and construction promises he cant keep. I'll definitely be be shorting the market if that happens

 

You are such a Trump zealot that you cannot even believe the evidence of your own eyes...the DJI chart above. Bizarro world indeed.

 

Edited August 13, 2016 by dexterm

[ilostmypassword]

12 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Baloney. It is almost 8 years later and you are still blaming Bush. Obama was aware of the recession when he ran for office. However, he promised to cut the deficit in half during his first term and that did not happen. Obama’s recovery has been the worst recovery from any recession since the Great Depression. That is all on Obama.

If, in fact, Obama had dictatorial powers, sure it would all be on him. But he had the House of Representatives against him from 2010 onwards. And those fools actually wanted to impose austerity.

15 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Complete nonsense. The economy had started to recover from a major recession before Obama even  took office.  The economy would have improved, no matter who was in office. In fact, President Obama’s recovery has been the worst recovery from any recession since the Great Depression. Many economists believe his policies have slowed the recovery down.

Really?  The economy had started to recover?  Here's what The Economist has to say about that:

THE American recession is over. In the summer of 2009 real GDP and industrial production hit bottom and resumed growth, and expansion in both measures strengthened as the year ended. Industrial production has continued to grow in early 2010 as, in all likelihood, has output. By the end of the current quarter the American economy may have returned to its pre-recession peak in real GDP.

Most economists agree about all of this. 

http://www.economist.com/node/15911334

Edited August 13, 2016 by ilostmypassword
to address first quote

[ilostmypassword]

15 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Complete nonsense. The economy had started to recover from a major recession before Obama even  took office.  The economy would have improved, no matter who was in office. In fact, President Obama’s recovery has been the worst recovery from any recession since the Great Depression. Many economists believe his policies have slowed the recovery down.

When someone uses a phrase like "many economists' you know that they're using weasel words. What does "many" mean in this context?  It can mean just about anything.  Now if you had used the phrase "most economists" or better yet "most leading economists" you would have a point. But you can't do that and you know why?  Because most leading economists don't believe it.

"The Initiative on Global Markets at the University of Chicago — hardly a hotbed of liberal or Keynesian thought — regularly surveys a number of the leading American economists about a variety of policy issues. The economists surveyed constitute a good sample of the leading economists in the nation, and the panel was chosen to be geographically diverse, to include older and younger economists, and importantly, to include Democrats, Republicans and independents. The most important qualification is that these are top-notch economists: senior faculty at the leading economics departments in the United States who are also vitally interested in public policy."

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/30/upshot/what-debate-economists-agree-the-stimulus-lifted-the-economy.html

Here's the link to the poll:

http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel/poll-results?SurveyID=SV_5bfARfqluG9VYrP

 

44 leading economists were asked. 37 responded. 36 Thought it had helped Only one economist thought Obama's program hadn't helped. And that economist is Alesandro Alesina who came up the the notion of "expansionary austerity". The EC followed his plan with disastrous results.  Subsequently his claims about "expansionary austerity" have been conclusively repudiated.

[Skywalker69]

 

Edited August 13, 2016 by Scott
Photo edited out

[Neurath]

11 hours ago, Scotwight said:

Given it is a waste of time one has to wonder about the numbers.  On the first news page of Thai Visa world news right now there are 7 anti Trump threads and 0 anti Clinton threads.  Who  you guys trying to kid?

Oh no, TV has now become MSM  Somebody get out the conspiracy handbook.  

[Scott]

1 hour ago, Neurath said:

Oh no, TV has now become MSM  Somebody get out the conspiracy handbook.  

Here is a quote from a previous post which might help explain the situation:

Quote

It's not too hard to figure out.   The Clinton strategy has been for her to keep a relatively low profile and to let Trump continue to put his foot in his mouth.   He does that quite well.   

 

He spends nothing on television advertising, so he doesn't have the ability to directly control what is said.   He wants to be in the news; he is in the news.   He has no policies and he has been outed.   

 

If he had an even remotely coherent message about the direction of the country, he would be so far ahead in the polls Clinton wouldn't even be able to see him.   He doesn't and it's pretty evident to almost everyone.   

 

[Chicog]

21 minutes ago, Scott said:

Here is a quote from a previous post which might help explain the situation:

 

 

 

In fairness, when the only news story in the headlines is Hannity claiming Hillary had a seizure, based on a heavily edited video clip, is it really worth opening a thread on such garbage?

 

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/hillary-clinton-health-conspiracy-theory-seizure-debunked

 

Edited August 13, 2016 by Chicog

[boomerangutang]

Ways in which Trump would have a slight chance of gaining back some of the votes he's been losing.

 

>>>   keep hammering the negatives toward HRC.  But don't get too outlandish (like saying; she and Obama created ISIS).  There may be enough sheeple in the US who, if they hear lies often and loud enough, they'll resign to believing them.

 

>>>   Don't keep going back and digging up old self-negatives and regurgitating them.  Trump has been doing that lately, and newscasters/commentators are aghast at how dumb that is.      

 

>>>   Try to be less loud and a bit presidential.  For Donald, it would be an act, but it's an act he needs to play in order to try and keep his thin support from evaporating further. 

[attrayant]

Now for the October Surprise: The IRS should declare his tax audit completed so that he can be free to release all his records, since that is the tissue-paper-thin excuse he's using for not releasing them now.

[Chicog]

54 minutes ago, boomerangutang said:

Ways in which Trump would have a slight chance of gaining back some of the votes he's been losing.

 

>>>   keep hammering the negatives toward HRC.  But don't get too outlandish (like saying; she and Obama created ISIS).  There may be enough sheeple in the US who, if they hear lies often and loud enough, they'll resign to believing them.

They've been doing that for 25 years; it obviously doesn't work.

[Ulysses G.]

9 hours ago, dexterm said:

You are such a Trump zealot that you cannot even believe the evidence of your own eyes...the DJI chart above. Bizarro world indeed.

 

 Do you purposely include a falsehood in each and every post? Anyone who reads my posts know that I am not a Trump supporter and I do not intend to vote for him. I merely consider him the lesser of two evils. Try to get your facts straight for a change.

[iReason]

^^^ @ Post 57 UG

Facts? 

 

 

[Linzz]

On 8/13/2016 at 9:31 AM, Chicog said:

 

Bush without a doubt is the worst US president of my lifetime. Under his watch America repeatedly put its foot in it.
 

History will have him down as a blithering idiot that let smarter people rob the country and send it into two unwinnable wars.

 

It's not a matter of "still blaming him", it's just a matter of historical record.
 

Now, let's get back to #TREXIT eh?

 

 

The worst US president of your lifetime  and his family all hate Trump. How does it feel to have so much in common with the worst blithering idiot president of your lifetime?

[Publicus]

 

Slump?!? 

 

Catastrophe....

 

“No candidate in Donald Trump’s position at this stage of the campaign has gone on to win the popular vote in November in the modern polling era,” Politico reports.

 

“That’s the sobering news confronting the Trump campaign as it seeks to rebound from his recent slump.”

 

It's proved to be accurate that the candidate for Potus leading at the Labor Day holiday the first Monday of September wins in November. That will be true this year too.

 

But the rule for this election might have to be modified a bit for this election only. That is, the candidate who descends an escalator to announced he is running for Potus always loses.

 

And that he always loses big time.