ChrisWeigant.com

Cleveland, Day Four -- Trump's Big Night

[ Posted Thursday, July 21st, 2016 – 23:05 UTC ]

Donald Trump finally stopped talking, so I can now start writing. His speech went on for almost an hour and a half, which was a bit much for me -- especially after an exhausting week of listening to Republicans talk. But that's the end of the evening, so let's go back to the beginning and see how we got here.

A few overall thoughts (none very coherent, at this point) to begin with. First, they seemed to have a lot of musical interludes tonight that were mostly missing from earlier nights (or perhaps I just wasn't paying attention). It seemed like G. E. Smith and his band had the most time on stage of anyone tonight, other than Donald Trump. Their choice of songs was a little eclectic at times, as well.

Like last night, the scheduling was better than the first two nights. There were only a couple of snoozers, and the buildup to hearing Trump speak mostly was pretty smooth. Also, as Gwen Ifill of PBS put it: "The house is full for the first time this week." Everyone showed up to see the big night, instead of the upper decks being almost deserted. A bigger crowd meant a lot better response to almost all the speakers.

Tonight's theme was "Make America One Again," and the speakers did a much better job of sticking to the theme than on any other night. The Hillary-bashing was a lot more subdued than it was earlier in the week, probably in keeping with this theme.

Something I hadn't noticed until tonight was the relative scarcity of funny hats on the delegates. Now, funny hats are an American political convention tradition, so I really expected to see more of them. However, this could have been due to the fact that I watched most of the speeches straight off the R.N.C. feed app, so they probably didn't get shots like that the way the networks usually do. I mean, there were a few good hats -- one excellent one of an entire elephant's head was notable on one woman -- but it seemed like they weren't as prominent as in years gone by, which I consider a shame (I love the funny hats!).

Hey, I warned you these overall thoughts were going to be fairly incoherent. So let's just move along to the play-by-play. Roughly four hours ago, Tony Perkins kicked things off. The first portion of the program was heavy on religion, as a matter of fact. Perkins started off by trying to bury the story from last night, with a hearty "I will be voting for Donald Trump" and a call to unity. He then moved on to a riff on "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance (thanks Ike for adding it).

We then got the first of many little movies, this one full of Trump employees kissing up to the boss. I mean, seriously, what else is any employee going to say than that their boss is great to a national audience? This movie, like many more to follow, had a tinkly piano music soundtrack, which always makes me roll my eyes. Then we got the live band playing AC/DC to wake everyone back up a little.

Jerry Falwell Jr. continued the God-heavy theme of the early show. Never heard him speak, and I have to say he's a pale shadow of his more-famous dad. He was the first to bring up the "Johnson amendment" which I am definitely going to have to look up (since I had never heard it be named in such a fashion before), when L.B.J. created the I.R.S. rule that "churches" that are really nothing more than extensions of a political party are not valid non-profit religions. My guess is we'll be hearing a lot about this in the coming days. Falwell closed with a joke from his dad, where he envisioned Chelsea Clinton asking him what the three biggest dangers to the country were. Falwell Sr.'s supposed answer: "Osama, Obama, and your momma." Oh, snap -- a "your momma" joke! What is this, high school?

Next we got Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who breathed just as much fire as you'd expect on the question of immigrants. "Terrorists, coming over our borders!" Ahhh! Everybody run! He ended up with the first big "Build the wall!" chant of the night.

We then got another angry black Republican preacher. At first, he was shouty but happy, but this soon morphed into shouty and very, very angry. He browbeat the crowd into several chants, each time instructing them to (in his own words) "Shout with me...." The biggest response from the crowd was probably on: "ALL! LIVES! MATTER!"

Then it was halftime, metaphorically (it was nowhere near halftime literally, sadly enough). Fran Tarkenton came out and gave us all a locker-room pep talk. He did shout-outs to teams he'd been on, including (I assume) the Georgia Bulldogs, after which he promised "I'm not going to bark tonight" -- the best line of the evening for late-night comics to take out of context, hands down. Then he proceeded to bark the rest of his speech out in Vince Lombardi fashion. "What the hell is going on here?!?" and "A leader... gets stuff done!" The crowd, afterwards, looked a little shell-shocked. Who expects a halftime rant at a political convention, after all?

We then got the survivor of a car crash, who repeatedly thanked God for his survival. He had one of the most clever lines of the night, actually, after he told his story of the doctors telling him he had only a one percent chance of ever walking again. He beat the odds and did walk again, but then he had a seamless segue to Donald Trump and how the experts last year gave him only a one percent chance of winning the GOP nomination. After a pause, a beautifully-delivered line: "Mr. Trump, welcome to the club!"

He ended rather abruptly, introducing a very short little movie from Coach Bobby Knight, then it was time for some more music.

Marsha Blackburn was next, and she got things back on the theme of the night. She talked economics and jobs, and ended calling for greatness and the American dream. Pretty standard stuff, really.

Mary Fallon was next, the first female governor of Oklahoma. She was kind of shouty, although she did try to keep it upbeat. She tried to square a very round peg with some historical revisionism in her speech, by talking about a black woman fighting for civil rights in the 1950s or 1960s, followed immediately with how America "was united" back then, and why couldn't we get back to being so united. Um, well, the civil rights battle was waged fiercely precisely because we were not united back then -- blacks and whites certainly weren't allowed to be united, and the people for civil rights were anything but united with those who thought that Jim Crow laws and segregation were just dandy. This is what all those calling to "Make America great again" miss -- back in the hazy days they are thinking of, America was not great for everybody. Far from it.

This brings up a bigger point that I really need to address separately, in a future column. I will give Donald Trump credit for this one, too. This Republican National Convention has been as inclusive as I've ever seen the party be -- at least, on stage. The delegates are still overwhelmingly white, but the lineup of speakers had more people of color and women than ever before -- and even a prominent openly-gay speaker. You can be cynical and call it an attempt to pander, but it was still nice to see such diversity on a Republican stage. More on the gay speaker in a moment, but let's get back to the lineup for now.

Next up was another person making this point -- the head of "Korean-Americans For Trump." She got a little shouty (and arm-wavey, and pointy, and foot-stompy), but you could tell she was very excited to be there. Every once in a while during conventions you see what I'd call "real people" up on the stage, and she was definitely one of them. Of course, she ended with a rant about how Hillary Clinton was "a direct threat to the American dream" (gasp!), but even that wasn't as strident as we heard earlier in the week.

We then got a video advertisement for something called the "Republican Leadership Initiative" which heavily featured lots of minorities and immigrants (legal, one assumes). This attempt at outreach seemed a little ham-handed, though, at least to me. Then the band took the stage once again, after which was another R.N.C. ad.

This one was pretty funny, because it was basically: "Remember the 2014 election? Man, that was a good election -- we kicked some Dem ass, didn't we?"

I guess all the R.N.C. movie time was the intro for Reince Priebus, which is entirely appropriate since (as I love pointing out) his initials without the vowels are his job description: "RNC PR BS." Heh -- that one never gets old, at least to me.

Now, Reince is not a natural public speaker. His voice is kind of squeaky, and he's got a big deficit of personality working against him as well. But he did his best to rise to the occasion tonight, although he went on about twice as long as he should have. After thanking Cleveland for their hospitality, he painted the picture "Republicans good -- Democrats same old, same old" that you'd expect from the R.N.C. chair. Priebus has been in an unenviable spot for the entire campaign, since he's had to try his hardest to remain neutral in the primary battles. He tried tonight to put the best face on who won (who, obviously, never would have been his first choice), by saying things like "We (Republicans) honor what the voters say!"

He launched into an anti-Hillary rant in the middle of his speech, warning of Hillary-appointed Supreme Court justices, and what a big liar she is. He dropped a steaming load of B.S. on the Iran deal, though, claiming (without a shred of reality) that Hillary Clinton gave Iran "your money" to line their pockets. This is horse manure. Pure moose poop, in fact -- the money they got back was their money, which had been frozen decades ago in Western banks. I guess Reince was just living up to his vowelless name, or something. He did get more animated than I've ever seen him before, but then he blew his cadence and wound up on a snoozer of a story about 1937. Oh, and he tossed out a "Democrat Party" just for good measure.

This brought us to the top of the second hour, after a whole bunch more music. Peter Thiel, Silicon Valley businessman, led off. He had a good "personal connection to Cleveland" story to tell, as well as several odd lines which seemed to ignore the history of George W. Bush: "Instead of going to Mars, we invaded the Middle East" and how America has to "end the era of stupid wars." Um, guess which political party started those stupid wars?

But the part of his speech that everyone knew was coming was the best part: "I am proud to be gay. I am proud to be a Republican. But most of all, I am proud to be an American." This could even be seen as a slap in the face to Mike Pence's favorite line ("I am proud to be a Christian, I am proud to be a conservative, and I am proud to be a Republican -- in that order"). The astonishing thing was that the Republican crowd gave Thiel's gay announcement a big cheer. He went on to warn those listening that bathroom wars ("Who cares?") and other "fake culture wars" distract the party from bigger issues, which also got a cheer (although a much smaller one).

This is a monumental shift in Republican thinking. I don't give Donald Trump credit for much, but I do have to credit him alone for yanking the GOP away from all the wedge-issue culture wars against gays it has been waging since at least the 1980s. This was an inevitability, really -- the Supreme Court ruled gay marriage is constitutional, which pretty much ended the legal fight. Gays are equals -- period. But many in the Republican Party still haven't realized that their culture-war battle is over and that they lost. Everyone knew that the smartest thing for the party to do was to get over it and stop running their campaigns on it, but they seemed destined to forever having to throw the "marriage is between a man and a woman" red meat to their socially-conservative base. If virtually any other candidate had won the nomination (with a very few exceptions), we probably would have heard quite a bit about proposing a constitutional amendment overturning the court's ruling, and all the rest of it. With Trump, almost all of that sort of talk has stopped, and an openly-gay businessman was invited to speak at a GOP convention. That is a radical sea-change for the better, and it is entirely due to Donald Trump winning the nomination, to give credit where it is entirely deserved. The party will likely never again run an anti-marriage-equality campaign on the national level, in fact. And they should really thank Trump for breaking them out of these particular chains.

Back to the program, though. Another movie-time interlude, with Trump kids saying how wonderful their dad is to (ugh!) tinkly piano music. Seriously, the only person alive who can get away with tinkly piano music is Brian Eno, and I didn't see him anywhere tonight. Sheesh. This was followed by a business partner of Trump (I think) who was incredibly boring, although to give him credit, he did pledge "I have nothing bad to say about Hillary Clinton." This went on way too long, but I was grateful because it allowed me to get something to eat. More music followed (including Rod Stewart's "Say With Me," oddly).

Movie time again, this time a straight-up bio of Donald Trump. This was about the most traditional thing we've seen from the convention, in fact, although I did notice something odd that I hadn't realized until now -- all of the "Trump's a great builder" stuff and all of the "he's a great businessman" paeans we've heard seem to gloss right over the fact that he was a reality-television star for a long while. Did the consultants tell everyone to keep this low-key (or non-existent) for some reason? I mean, it's a big part of his life story, so why not mention it? You don't have to run clips of Gary Busey or anything (shudder!), but millions of Americans enjoyed his "Apprentice" shows, so why not bring them up? Maybe they all mentioned it while I was out of the room, or something, who knows?

The bio movie ended right before the kickoff of the big primetime hour (or, as it turned out, 100 minutes). Ivanka Trump -- reportedly Donald's favorite child -- gave her speech, making her the sixth Trump to speak at the convention. It was a slick speech, obviously professionally-written (and, as a result, probably not plagiarized). She went through all the reasons her daddy is great, just like all the other Trumps, but again skipped over his television career. She did have a natural cadence and speaking style, but I have to say of all the non-Donalds from the Trump clan, Donald Junior was probably the best speaker all around. She ended her speech by introducing dad, who walked out on stage to thunderous applause.

Trump looked pretty happy, as indeed anyone would. His nomination feat was one for the ages, and the like of his candidacy will not soon be seen again (one honestly hopes, in fact). He beat the odds to stand where he did, and he knows it full well. He began by officially accepting the nomination of his party. For the first half-hour or so, Trump was obviously awkward in reading from the TelePrompTer, but he largely stuck to the script for the entire speech (was that a giant sigh of relief I heard from Reince Priebus?).

As reported, he leaned heavily on a Republican speech that few ever would have thought would be resurrected -- Richard Nixon's "I am the law-and-order candidate" speech from his election. Nixon's one of those people who most Republicans don't want much association with (for those who don't remember, his presidency didn't exactly end well), but Trump liked the theme because of all the recent cop-shooting events.

The "law-and-order" approach, however, means doubling-down on fear. So much of Trump's speech was naked fear-mongering, followed by promises to keep us all safe (by the force of his own personality, for the most part). He returned to the phrase "law and order" (and how safe we'll all be with him in charge) multiple times throughout the evening.

After the first 20 or 30 minutes, though, Trump seemed to hit his stride. Even though he was still (for the most part) reading his prepared remarks, he stopped sounding like he was reading them (or having trouble seeing the words on the screen). Instead of carefully enunciating every single word, he started sounding a lot more natural. He also got a lot better at looking straight into the camera, while reading the TelePrompTer out of the corner of his eyes (this is harder to do than you might think). This shift made him sound a whole lot more natural, and a whole lot less uncomfortable reading a prepared speech. He did get pretty shouty for the remainder of his speech, but for Trump, that's actually his natural speaking voice for rallies.

What else was notable about his speech? Well, he tried to pander to disaffected Bernie Sanders voters, although he's not likely to get many of them to vote for him (at least, the ones that care about anything other than just free trade deals).

Although the Hillary-bashing was pretty minimal for the earlier parts of the night, Trump didn't hold back. Hillary's record was one of: "Death, destruction, terrorism, weakness." The system was rigged for Hillary's personal benefit. She's bad! Crime! Lies! Corruption! Emails! Benghazi! -- and all the rest of her "terrible, terrible crimes."

Trump then got downright conventional, offering up an enormous list of promises, few of which he will ever be able to keep. He pandered to the right, he pandered to the left, he pandered to everyone he could think of, in fact. Steelworkers, miners, nobody got left out. But to be totally fair, this is par for the course at most political conventions.

He had precious little in the way of details, though. The only new thing I heard was his pledge to get rid of that pesky Johnson amendment and let churches just join political parties (again, bet we'll be hearing more of this soon). Instead, he merely presented himself as the change candidate, promising change had to happen -- "right now!"

At one point, a Code Pink protester interrupted, but Trump didn't take the bait and merely waited until she was escorted out. I have to hand it to Code Pink, they've gotten more people inside the arena than I ever would have thought possible (the security and vetting for these conventions is unbelievable). So kudos to them for inserting so many into the hall.

One rather odd slipup by Trump came in the middle of one of his Nixonian "law and order" bits -- he promised he'd hire the "best and the brightest," which harkens back to J.F.K.'s administration (and their disastrous decision to get involved with Vietnam). So we had unexpected political 1960s shoutouts for both sides of the aisle, I guess.

Trump's speech, although it went on way too long (even the people in the arena were visibly flagging by the end), did have high points even I applauded, I must in all honesty admit. Trump not only used the phrase "LGBTQ community" twice (when speaking about the Orlando massacre), he also ad-libbed his best line of the entire campaign afterwards, when he complimented the crowd on their reaction: "It is so nice to hear you cheering for what I just said." Taken out of context, that might sound narcissistic, but in fact it was the biggest "outreach" that happened during the entire convention. Trump, as I stated earlier, has singlehandedly gotten the GOP out of the swamp of gay-hating, and he is right to draw attention to the fact that it is now OK for a GOP crowd to cheer the phrase "LGBTQ." They've still got a long way to go as a party on the issue, but these are very important baby steps they are taking and deserve everyone's applause, mine included.

Social-issue-warrior Mike Pence, when the television cameras cut to him standing and applauding, looked less than thrilled, but again -- baby steps first.

Trump then devoted a whole bunch of time to promising that he's going to kill every terrorist alive on his first day in office (that's what it sounded like to me, at any rate), and trying to justify his bizarre new stance on NATO. He quickly segued into his Muslim immigrant ban ("We don't want them in our country") and how afraid we should all be about the handful of Syrian immigrants America is letting in. This, of course, led straight to "We are going to build a great border wall" and all his deport-'em-all immigration thoughts.

This was probably where he should have ended his speech, but he kept right on rolling along, resurrecting an even-older political slogan -- "America first" (see: Henry Ford, Charles Lindbergh, Nazis).

He wrapped up with a giant list obviously designed to quell fears from the GOP's conservative wing, complete with all their bedrock issues (trickle-down is wonderful, school choice too, repeal Obamacare, veterans, right-wing Supreme Court justices forever, Second Amendment, etc., etc., etc.).

OK, two last notes on his final moments, then we're done. The first was an interesting chant the crowd struck up when Trump promised to cut "fraud, waste, and abuse" (which is about as conventional as you can get in American politics) in his first 100 days, to which the crowd responded: "Yes you will!" The Obama parallel is easy to spot, no?

The other was perhaps the most brilliant line of the evening, and I have no idea if it was planned or ad-libbed (it sounded ad-libbed, but it was so brilliant that I could see a speechwriter coming up with it). Trump said he had enormous (of course) support from evangelical voters, and then threw in: "...and I'm not sure I totally deserve it..." which is precisely the right attitude to take with these voters. They eat up stories of "we're all sinners" and redemption and asking for forgiveness, after all -- it's a core part of who they are. So taking this tack was absolute genius, whether Trump did it himself or some speechwriter came up with it. Credit where it is due (wherever that actually is), it was a great line that most will probably not even notice.

Trump wrapped up his speech with a contrast with Hillary's slogan, which was also politically astute (but seemed a whole lot less natural than the evangelical line). Hillary wants crowds to say "I'm with her," so Trump turned it around and promised instead: "I'm with you." Then finally (finally!) he stopped talking.

One last snarky note to close my 2016 GOP convention coverage (because, as some famous deep thinker really should have said: "I snark, therefore I am"). Trump finishes his speech with a flourish! Crowd explodes with cheers and applause! Balloons don't drop. His family joins him on stage! Balloons don't drop. Mike Pence and family appear on stage as well! Balloons don't drop. Fireworks go off outside the arena! Minutes tick by, and still no balloons. Finally, someone in the catwalks starts manually dumping balloon bags, one at a time. It takes five minutes or more before they're all released.

Who was in charge of the balloon drop? Whoever it was, they blew it. Timing is everything, guys. For me, it was the perfect metaphor to end GOP convention week, since so many other things were mishandled as well. This is the guy that's supposed to magically make Washington and the country work perfectly again? And he can't even put a convention together? I mean, I've seen my fair share of balloon drops in my time (mostly at New Year's Eve rock concerts) and this was one of the worst I've ever witnessed. It didn't rise to the level of the other snafus of the week (plagiarism, scheduling idiocy on first two days, letting Cruz not endorse Trump last night), but it sure was the perfect closer for the Trumpublican National Convention.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

115 Comments on “Cleveland, Day Four -- Trump's Big Night”

  1. [1] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    A great antidote for Trump's big speech!

  2. [2] 
    Michale wrote:

    Um, guess which political party started those stupid wars?

    Both of them...

    And they should really thank Trump for breaking them out of these particular chains.

    And will anyone besides you give Trump any credit for that?? :D

    I mean, it's a big part of his life story, so why not mention it? You don't have to run clips of Gary Busey or anything (shudder!), but millions of Americans enjoyed his "Apprentice" shows, so why not bring them up?

    Probably for the same reason that Al Fraken wanted to stray from his comedy roots...

    We're not hiring Trump as our President so he can entertain us on TV.. Personally, I never watched the show.. I hate reality TV.. The only one I ever watched was the Gilligans Island one and that's only because it was... well.. Gilligans Island :D

    We're hiring Trump for POTUS so he can fix our economy and give us jobs...

    Nixon's one of those people who most Republicans don't want much association with (for those who don't remember, his presidency didn't exactly end well), but Trump liked the theme because of all the recent cop-shooting events.

    The GOP ain't worried to much about Nixon because it's all but assured that Crooked Hillary gets the Nixon comparison.. :D

    e "law-and-order" approach, however, means doubling-down on fear. So much of Trump's speech was naked fear-mongering,

    How DARE Trump take a vaunted Democrat tactic, eh?? :D

    did have high points even I applauded, I must in all honesty admit. Trump not only used the phrase "LGBTQ community" twice (when speaking about the Orlando massacre), he also ad-libbed his best line of the entire campaign afterwards, when he complimented the crowd on their reaction: "It is so nice to hear you cheering for what I just said." Taken out of context, that might sound narcissistic, but in fact it was the biggest "outreach" that happened during the entire convention. Trump, as I stated earlier, has singlehandedly gotten the GOP out of the swamp of gay-hating, and he is right to draw attention to the fact that it is now OK for a GOP crowd to cheer the phrase "LGBTQ." They've still got a long way to go as a party on the issue, but these are very important baby steps they are taking and deserve everyone's applause, mine included.

    Yes, Trump deserves credit for that.. That's why I always laugh when people here attack Trump for being hateful... Trump is the most inclusive candidate we have had in a LONG time.. The ONLY groups of people that Trump attacks are illegal immigrants, yunno.. CRIMINALS and terrorists...

    How can ANYONE have a problem with that...

    Yes, Trump is the most inclusive candidate to date..

    The only question is will he get it from Weigantians??

    This was probably where he should have ended his speech, but he kept right on rolling along, resurrecting an even-older political slogan -- "America first" (see: Henry Ford, Charles Lindbergh, Nazis).

    That simply shows how confident Trump is that he can take that slogan back...

    And that confidence is paying off.. :D

    So taking this tack was absolute genius, whether Trump did it himself or some speechwriter came up with it. Credit where it is due (wherever that actually is), it was a great line that most will probably not even notice.

    And that's why I like it here... Because you DO give credit where credit is due..

    Sadly, you and I are the only ones here who do..

    So I guess predictions of Trump's speech being a disaster and totally destroying the Trump candidacy were.... ahem... greatly exaggerated.. :D

    Michale

  3. [3] 
    Michale wrote:

    One thing I have to say.. I am somewhat surprised that we are seeing absolutely NOTHING of Crooked Hillary...

    I know, I know.. It's all about the GOP this week.. And next week, it will be all about Crooked Hillary..

    But I would have thought that Crooked Hillary would have at least TRIED to be relevant..

    Put another way.. During the Dem Convention next week, I bet that Trump is STILL featured prominently in the news...

    Bets!! PLACE YER BETS!! :D

    Michale

  4. [4] 
    Michale wrote:

    Strange.. I never knew or cared that Theil was gay..

    And *THAT* is the way it should be...

    Michale

  5. [5] 
    Michale wrote:

    One thing I have to say.. I am somewhat surprised that we are seeing absolutely NOTHING of Crooked Hillary...

    I know, I know.. It's all about the GOP this week.. And next week, it will be all about Crooked Hillary..

    But I would have thought that Crooked Hillary would have at least TRIED to be relevant..

    The extra typing is really becoming annoying...

    I'll make an effort to refrain from the name-calling if ya'all could make the same effort.. :D

    Michale

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    The ONE salient fact about Trump and the LGBQTUVWXYZ community is this..

    Trump was hiring and promoting gay people to executive positions while Hillary and Bill were pushing the DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE act...

    And, somehow, TRUMP is the bad guy on gay issues???

    On what planet??

    Michale

  7. [7] 
    Michale wrote:

    This was probably where he should have ended his speech, but he kept right on rolling along, resurrecting an even-older political slogan -- "America first" (see: Henry Ford, Charles Lindbergh, Nazis).

    That simply shows how confident Trump is that he can take that slogan back...

    And that confidence is paying off.. :D

    And, again, I have to ask.. Not really expecting an answer..

    What is WRONG with putting America and Americans first??

    Isn't that what a President is SUPPOSED to do!??

    Hillary is all about putting America and Americans LAST...

    I, for one, am ecstatic to have a President who will put America and Americans FIRST...

    Michale

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    "The most basic duty of any government is to defend its citizens. Any government that fails to do so is unfit to lead."
    -Donald Trump

    And THAT says it all...

    That is why I am voting for Trump..

    Because the President Obama and the Democrat Party have proven beyond ANY doubt, that they are unfit to lead...

    Michale

  9. [9] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    I thought I might have to congratulate the Republicans for an unusual moment of honesty as I happened upon the convention while they were chanting "All lies matter". Thanks for pointing out what they were really saying.

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    I thought I might have to congratulate the Republicans for an unusual moment of honesty as I happened upon the convention while they were chanting "All lies matter". Thanks for pointing out what they were really saying.

    "There is mimicry and there is mockery.. And THAT was definitely mockery.."
    -Dr Leonard McCoy, STAR TREK, Yesterday's Son

    :D

    Michale

  11. [11] 
    TheStig wrote:

    "Balloons don't drop" is the perfect metaphor for this speech. Especially if you expand it to:

    "Ninety minutes and the balloons don't drop."

    It was a totally conventional National Political Convention speech. It delved into selected murky statistics, that while generally misleading, can be vigorously defended. The technical term for this is "Baffle them with bullshit." Make no mistake, this is standard political practice across the political divide, Trump broke no new ground. It was Nixon '68 served up to 2016 demographics.

    The speech was competently delivered, flat by Trump standards, but better than most nearly anything Lyndon Johnson ever delivered. Trump spoke in complete sentences (mostly) and there was even paragraph structure! The speech was short, by Castro standards.

    The problem with the speech, as I see it, was it's of lack of genuine boldness. Trump didn't attempt a clever pivot, he doubled down. This is a good strategy if you are the favorite, but there is abundant evidence that Trump is the underdog in this race. How much? Various lines of evidence (don't forget the electoral college) suggest his odds of being the next president are somewhere in the 25% to 35% ballpark. Trump seems content to simply accept these odds, blow on the dice and roll. Hey it worked in the primaries (15 or so contenders mind you), it will work again. This is how naive gamblers think. Gamblers sometimes win against long odds, at which point they look brilliant.

    As I see it, Trump handed Clinton an opportunity. Let's see what she makes of it at her convention.

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    It was a totally conventional National Political Convention speech.

    And yours was a totally conventional Democrat Party rebuttal.. :D

    Michale

  13. [13] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    And will anyone besides you give Trump any credit for that?? :D

    i will - it's something that struck me as momentous also. finally having a convention year where homophobic garbage gets the axe really is a big deal.

    What is WRONG with putting America and Americans first??

    did you google the lines CW wrote?

    "America first" (see: Henry Ford, Charles Lindbergh, Nazis).
    ~CW

    speaking as a history teacher, i sincerely hope you give the origin of the phrase more than a cursory glance. even though the organization so titled eventually rejected the more extreme anti-semites, "america first" was a hotbed of anti-jewish, anti-israel sentiment. in the same way that a "red herring" is neither red nor a herring, "america first" was never really about america, nor about us being first.

    http://www.pbs.org/perilousfight/social/antisemitism

    JL

  14. [14] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    well it was not technically anti-israel because israel didn't exist yet, but it was anti- allowing jews to escape the holocaust, and partially responsible for the boats of concentration camp refugees that were rejected and sent back there by the FDR administration. so, sore issue for my community. also, one of the reasons why i don't rate FDR as such a great president, new deal notwithstanding.

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    i will

    Again, complete within character.. I don't give you enough credit for that.. :D

    - it's something that struck me as momentous also. finally having a convention year where homophobic garbage gets the axe really is a big deal.

    Minor nitpick about the homophobic carp, but other than that, totally agree.... :D

    Common ground is a wonderful thing..

    Michale

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    speaking as a history teacher, i sincerely hope you give the origin of the phrase more than a cursory glance.

    As I said, it's history is bad.. No two ways about it..

    Just like, in a hundred years, it's likely that "BLACK LIVES MATTER" will seem completely racist and not a good slogan to resurrect..

    But the CONCEPT of both slogans.. The WORDS and the literal MEANINGS of those words..

    THAT's the point I am making..

    Michale

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    Sorry, my fellow Weigantians..

    Senator Tim Kaine Likely VP Pick But Liberals Balk
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/22/us/politics/tim-kaine-hillary-clinton-vice-president.html

    No VP Warren for ya'all..

    Told ya :D

    Michale

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    Donald Trump needed to give the speech of his life. He did that, and much more. He laid out an inspiring American Manifesto for our troubled times.

    And he did it his way.

    Not surprisingly, from start to finish, it is muscular and bold, leavened only by appeals to racial harmony and pledges of compassion for all. It offers a prominent nod to Bernie Sanders’ supporters in a bid to get some to jump the Democratic ship.

    Most important, it keeps faith with his campaign themes of putting forgotten Americans first. In contrasting his view with his opponent’s, the Republican nominee put it this way: “Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo.”

    And “I am your voice.”

    And then this: “There can be no prosperity without law and order.”

    Trump then added: “This administration has failed America’s inner cities. It’s failed them on education. It’s failed them on jobs. It’s failed them on crime. It’s failed them at every level.”
    http://nypost.com/2016/07/21/donald-trumps-rnc-address-could-mark-the-start-of-an-american-revival/

    That's the speech that over 70% of Americans saw and heard....

    Michale

  19. [19] 
    neilm wrote:

    Trump: You're all going to die, but only I can save you!

    For fans of "Dad's Army" it sounded like Private Frazer: "We're doomed, doomed I tell you!" (watch 13 sec clip here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7RIgs3eygo )

    And just because pesky facts like the FBI crime stats don't match up to the "end of times" unreality, we're told to ignore them because "Hillary! Benghazi!!!".

    This speech had a sell by date of 1972 when Nixon first dished it out. Fortunately I expect it to be maggot ridden by Monday.

  20. [20] 
    Michale wrote:

    or fans of "Dad's Army" it sounded like Private Frazer: "We're doomed, doomed I tell you!" (watch 13 sec clip here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7RIgs3eygo )

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsx2vdn7gpY

    heh

    This speech had a sell by date of 1972 when Nixon first dished it out. Fortunately I expect it to be maggot ridden by Monday.

    And the typical ideologue rebuttal, Part Duex..

    Ya'all's problem is that over 70% of Americans GET that speech....

    Ya'all's problem is that Hillary Clinton is Wall Street's Candidate.. The Corporatist's Candidate.. The Globalist's Candidate... The Terrorist's Candidate...

    Donald Trump??? He's the PEOPLE'S CANDIDATE>...

    "These are the facts of the case. And they are undisputed.."
    -Captain Jack Ross, A FEW GOOD MEN

    Michale..

  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    or fans of "Dad's Army" it sounded like Private Frazer: "We're doomed, doomed I tell you!"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsx2vdn7gpY

    heh

    This speech had a sell by date of 1972 when Nixon first dished it out. Fortunately I expect it to be maggot ridden by Monday.

    And the typical ideologue rebuttal, Part Duex..

    Ya'all's problem is that over 70% of Americans GET that speech....

    Ya'all's problem is that Hillary Clinton is Wall Street's Candidate.. The Corporatist's Candidate.. The Globalist's Candidate... The Terrorist's Candidate...

    Donald Trump??? He's the PEOPLE'S CANDIDATE>...

    "These are the facts of the case. And they are undisputed.."
    -Captain Jack Ross, A FEW GOOD MEN

    Michale..

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    Let's face reality, people..

    Ya'all were hoping that Trump would crash and burn...

    The reality is Trump's speech has solidified Trump as serious candidate fully and unequivocally qualified to be President...

    Ya'all have no arguments left...

    Michale

  23. [23] 
    TheStig wrote:

    NYPOET -13,14

    Have you read "Black Earth The Holocaust As History and Warning" by Timothy Snyder?

  24. [24] 
    John M wrote:

    Michale wrote:

    "Trump was hiring and promoting gay people to executive positions while Hillary and Bill were pushing the DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE act...

    And, somehow, TRUMP is the bad guy on gay issues???

    On what planet??"

    How about on the planet where Trump explicitly says that he will appoint Supreme Court Justices who will REVERSE the marriage equality ruling??? Do you have a response to that???

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    How about on the planet where Trump explicitly says that he will appoint Supreme Court Justices who will REVERSE the marriage equality ruling??? Do you have a response to that???

    If you have the quote, I'll have the response.. :D

    Michale

  26. [26] 
    Michale wrote:

    But before you do, know this..

    What Trump has actually DONE in the past has a LOT more bearing than what Trump SAYS he will do in the future...

    Ya'all don't believe that Trump will build a wall..

    Why do you believe Trump when he says he will use gay marriage as a litmus test?? If, in fact, he actually DID say that...

    Michale

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    “We cannot afford to be so politically correct anymore. So if you want to hear the corporate spin, the carefully crafted lies, and the media myths, the Democrats are holding their convention next week. Go there.”
    -Donald Trump

    OUCH....

    And the ref takes a point away!!! :D

    Michale

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    “In my father’s company, there are more female than male executives.”
    -Ivanka Trump

    Hillary Clinton cannot make that same claim..

    Barack Obama can't make the same claim...

    Once again, once ya'all get past yer spin, the facts are clear....

    Michale

  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    If ya'all aren't scared that Trump could actually win...???

    Ya'all should be....

    Michale

  30. [30] 
    AnalogKid wrote:

    1. Thanks for an EXCELLENT week of reporting.

    2. Your comments about Trump pulling the GOP out of the anti-gay swamp would be great if they were correct. Unfortunately, they are not:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-real-feelings-queer-people_us_57920f33e4b00c9876cef2bf?section=

    ak

  31. [31] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Best line of the night, hands down: "It was a dark, brutal speech. I had no idea we lived in Gotham City." - Mike Murphy, Republican Consultant

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    - Mike Murphy, Republican Consultant

    Cruz supporter...

    'nuff said...

    Michale

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    Cruz supporter...

    'nuff said...

    My bust...

    Murphy was a Jeb consultant... He was the guy who got Jeb to dish out 50 million dollars per delegate..

    Yea.. THERE's a credible source.. :D

    Michale

  34. [34] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://www2.pictures.zimbio.com/gi/Hillary+Clinton+Hillary+Clinton+Campaigns+-eHst-tMBNAl.jpg

    I swear to the gods... Paint her green and put a wart on her nose and she is the spittin' image of the Wicked Witch Of The West....

    :D

    Michale

  35. [35] 
    neilm wrote:

    One of the voices of reason in the Republican Party has just resigned because of Trump. Very sad when a reasonable person, such as Chris Ladd, is forced in this position.

    https://goplifer.com/2016/07/22/resignation-letter/

    It is amazing to me how many true Republicans want Trump to lose. They know it means at least four years of Hillary and a SCOTUS that may swing left for a generation, but Trump really is that crazy.

    We need an absolute landslide in November in Hillary's favor so we open a door for a responsible center right party or renaissance in the current Republican Party. We have seen the crazies take over the Republican Party, and we should not be so complacent to think that the Democratic Party could not spawn its own Tea Party insurgency.

    Trump is playing the classic populist strong man card, and you can see how it appeals to the voters with an overactive sense of entitlement, middle school intellect and weak emotional intelligence.

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    It is amazing to me how many true Republicans want Trump to lose.

    It's amazing to me how ya'all are orgasmically gushing over "true" Republicans when they say EXACTLY what ya'all want to hear.. :D

    We need an absolute landslide in November

    You WILL see an absolute landslide in November...

    For Trump....

    Michale

  37. [37] 
    Michale wrote:

    Anyone who supports Trump may not be a "true" Republican...

    But they ARE a "true" American...

    And that's good enough for me...

    Michale

  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:

    Best line of the night, hands down:

    The best line of the entire convention...

    "You're on fire!!!! You're on fire, stupid!!!"
    -Cleveland Police Officer to Democrat Protester

    :D

    Michale

  39. [39] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Why should we all be scared by a Trump victory in November?

    And, I'd like the long version, please ... :)

  40. [40] 
    BigGuy wrote:

    We will try this as a first comment. I am a left leaning centrist. I have found the comments on Chris's site a refreshing change from other sites where people seem to think if you speak "louder" and call others with conflicting opinions names they will change their beliefs. All the while they too are shouting and calling you names

    With that segue, the one troubling aspect of this site is the use of unflattering names for political leaders. This would include referring to candidate by a color or bastardizing the president's name to infer he is stupid (when he clearly is not). Doing so makes me more much likely to dismiss the accompanying opinion. As humans and as leaders of the country and our political parties thy deserve a level of respect.

    That many of these political leaders have greatly contributed to making political speech more crass with all substantive content removed is especially troubling. Governor Huckabee's corruption of Secretary Clinton's first name is particularly egregious coming from a minister, governor, and former presidential candidate. Most of all I hope the families of the candidates are spared; they do not deserve it. Perhaps Mr. Clinton could be an exception being a former president.

    Thanks for listening. I have been saving up on this and a few other subjects for a while. Guy

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    Why should we all be scared by a Trump victory in November?

    I wish I could give you a LONG version, but it's quite simple..

    Ya'all think that Trump is Hitler's and Satan's love child...

    Ya'all think that Trump is going to destroy civilization....

    If *I* believed those things, I would be VERY scared right now because Trump keeps avoiding ALL of the Left Wingery predictions..

    In short, with as much fear-mongering ya'all have put forth about Trump, the fact that he is very likely to win in November should have ya'all petrified...

    Michale

  42. [42] 
    Paula wrote:

    [29] Balthasar: my favorite tweet of the night, from Joe Biden:
    My thoughts and prayers go out to the fact checkers.

  43. [43] 
    Michale wrote:

    Credit where credit is due..

    That IS funny.. :D

    But it's also going to be doubly accurate during the Dem Convention..

    After all, over 70% of Americans believe that the best word to describe Hillary Clinton is "LIAR"... :D

    Michale

  44. [44] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Michale [38] I suppose that you won't be surprised that you and Michael Moore agree on that.

    Paula [39] Very good!

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michale [38] I suppose that you won't be surprised that you and Michael Moore agree on that.

    It was at the time I learned it.. I didn't mention it because it was so..... so..... embarrassing.. :D

    But ya gotta admit.... Moore has absolutely NO REASON to spin anything....

    Michale

  46. [46] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    You shouldn't be scared, Michale ... a President Trump will soon learn that he has to play in the same sandbox as everyone else and he simply won't be able to do all that he says he'll do even if he actually means what he says. Well, unless he dissolves your great democracy. If he's capable of that, then you should probably be scared.

  47. [47] 
    Michale wrote:

    Looks like another terrorist attack in Munich...

    Like I said.. Every attack makes Hillary's numbers go down and Trump's numbers go up...

    Michale

  48. [48] 
    Michale wrote:

    You shouldn't be scared, Michale ..

    *I* am not scared...

    I think a President Trump is going to be AWESOME!!!

    It's going to be the Reagan years all over again! :D

    a President Trump will soon learn that he has to play in the same sandbox as everyone else and he simply won't be able to do all that he says he'll do even if he actually means what he says.

    Funny... That wasn't the spin when another charismatic and inexperienced Senator from Illinois was running for POTUS.. :D

    Well, unless he dissolves your great democracy. If he's capable of that, then you should probably be scared.

    Let me put it this way.. He has as much capability in that regard as President Obama had when he was elected..

    The difference is, Obama actually TRIED to dissolve democracy...

    I don't think Trump will try that.. But if he does, ya'all only have Obama to blame...

    Michale

  49. [49] 
    neilm wrote:
  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    Expert on being a racist announced Trump is a racist:

    Person who condemns another person now accepts that person's word as gospel because said person now agrees with the person of the first part...

    In short... Nothing but Partisan Ideological Filter at work...

    Michale

  51. [51] 
    Michale wrote:

    announced Trump is a racist:

    And yet, not ONE SINGLE person here can provide ANY factual evidence that Trump is a racist..

    NOT A SINGLE ONE....

    I know, I know.. Ya'all don't need any FACTS to attack someone unfairly...

    Ya'all Partisan Ideological Filters provide all the justification ya'all need...

    That's the Democrat Party way....

    Michale

  52. [52] 
    Michale wrote:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/22/shots-fired-at-munich-shopping-centre/

    More votes for Trump...

    Less votes for Hillary....

    Michale

  53. [53] 
    Michale wrote:

    Internal emails show DNC staffers conspired to develop anti-Bernie ‘narrative’

    There’s more evidence that the Democratic National Committee rigged the election against Bernie Sanders and in favor of Hillary Clinton.

    WikiLeaks posted an email from Mark Paustenbach, the Democratic Party’s national press secretary & deputy communications director, to other staffers discussing how they could create an anti-Sanders narrative the described his campaign in disarray.
    http://www.theamericanmirror.com/wikileaks-dnc-staffers-conspire-undermine-bernie-sanders/

    That's ya'all's candidate... By hook or by crook....

    Michale

  54. [54] 
    Michale wrote:

    Grinning Obama JOKES during Munich carnage press conference as he shifts gears to talk about daughter Malia leaving the nest for college

    President Obama briefed reporters Friday afternoon on the unfolding mass-murder in Munich, Germany

    He noted how terrorism undermines people's freedoms and lifestyles in the absence of good law enforcement

    Then Obama cracked wise about daughter Malia leaving the nest for college, drawing laughter from the entire room

    Unfazed, he shifted gears back to the somber subject matter

    Obama had held a joint press conference with Mexco's president, one hour before the Munich carnage began, criticizing Donald Trump for exaggerating terrorism threats
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3703975/Grinning-Obama-JOKES-Munich-carnage-press-conference-shifts-gears-talk-daughter-Malia-leaving-nest-college.html#ixzz4FAmbev9p

    That's our POTUS.. COMPLETELY self-absorbed....

    Michale

  55. [55] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Hey, Michale! What do you think of Tim Kaine for Vice President!?

  56. [56] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    completely unrelated question: why is there no sign anywhere online of the clip from the simpsons where homer sings the do-re-mi song from the sound of music, but with beer? (dough, the stuff that buys me beer, ray, the guy who brings the beer, me, the guy who drinks the beer, far, a long long way for beer, etc.)

    simpsons forums insist that it was not a part of any episode, but myself and many others have very clear memories of homer on-screen singing it. i think it may have been pre-youtube, first five seasons or so - if not an episode per se then maybe a TV trailer? a momentous issue of our time.

    JL

  57. [57] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Josh,

    Are you drunk?

  58. [58] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Okay, Michale, I'll go first ...

    Tim Kaine is ya'all's personification of Canada's very own 'sunny ways'.

    Guess which apostrophe's are out of place!

    :-)

  59. [59] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    AnalogKid [30] -

    and

    BigGuy [40] -

    Welcome to the site! Sorry for the delay in approving your first comment, but it's a busy time of year for me...

    From now on, you will be able to post your comments and have them appear instantly, as long as you only post one link per comment. Multi-link comments get held automatically by my filter, and as you can see sometimes it takes me a while to get around to approving them. But limit it to one link per comment and you should be OK. My autofilter is kind of beefy, which also leads to comments getting held for no real reason -- I apologize in advance if it happens, and I try to get them approved as soon as possible.

    In any case, welcome again to the site. Now, as for your comments,

    AnalogKid [30] -

    Yeah, I know. Their platform also is pretty scathingly anti-gay as well. But, like I said, baby steps. Remember what they were like 4, 8, and 12+ years ago? They've lost a gigantic social issues battle, they're licking their wounds, and hopefully they'll decide to just essentially give up on the whole thing (especially if they lose this Nov -- they'll have to if they ever want a chance at the White House again).

    Oh, and thanks for the kind words! It's a lot of work transcribing all the notes, so I'm glad people get some use out of it all.

    :-)

    BigGuy [40] -

    Thanks also for the kind words. We're a (mostly) civil lot here... well... except for that one guy (hey Michale!).

    However, he pays his dues in more ways than one (see upcoming T-shirt he's about to wear because he lost a bet in these comments -- Michale, got a link?).

    But while you sometimes have to tune him out, the rest of the comment threads here are usually pretty high-level. I've always said I don't get the most comments, but I do get the best and most thoughtful...

    :-)

    OK, gotta run, lots to do...

    -CW

  60. [60] 
    Chris Weigant wrote:

    nypoet22 [56] -

    That does sound familiar, I have to admit.

    My favorite has always been Homer's take on "I Feel Pretty"... "see the pretty deer on the lawn..."

    Heh.

    OK, really, gotta go...

    -CW

  61. [61] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Big Guy[40]

    I think I'm going to like you! And, that's just after reading the first half of your first comment ...

    Welcome to the site!

  62. [62] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    AnalogKid ...aka, ak ... Heh.

    Welcome!

    So, what does that article you cite have to say about Trump getting the GOP out of the anti-gay swamp?

  63. [63] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @liz,

    not even slightly. and quit shortening my first name.

    Joshua Lynn

  64. [64] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Good.

    And, sorry. I'll try not to do it again.

  65. [65] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    plus, pence and kaine are boring.

    JL

  66. [66] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    thank you :)

    JL

  67. [67] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Kaine is a definite plus.

  68. [68] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    CW said,

    Trump, as I stated earlier, has singlehandedly gotten the GOP out of the swamp of gay-hating, and he is right to draw attention to the fact that it is now OK for a GOP crowd to cheer the phrase "LGBTQ."

    Are you freakin' kidding me?!?! Have you bothered to look at the Republican's party platform at all? It is the most anti-LGBTQ piece of horseshat imaginable! It calls for overturning a Supreme Court ruling that gave gays the same right to marry the person that they love that the straight community has benefitted from! It's one thing to deny a person of a right that they have never had, but it is entirely a different thing to strip a person of that right once they have acquired it based on nothing but pure hatred and bigotry! The Republican platform also fully supports the use of "conversion therapy" to "fix" gays -- a therapy that has been dismissed as having absolutely no beneficial qualities by every major medical board and psychiatric / psychological group in the country. Furthermore, the therapy is linked to a massive increase for the risk of suicide and severe depression by those who are subjected to it! Those who go through it are tormented with the belief that something is very wrong with them and that they can be "fixed" so that they are "normal" like everyone else. Most go willingly into the therapy, but not all. The saddest thing is that there is nothing wrong with these individuals -- there is nothing to fix! It's not that the therapy doesn't do anything....what it does accomplish is what makes it so horrible! Any person who thinks that this isn't a twisted form of torture is incorrect. The GOP has officially called for the death of homosexuals -- they just want us to kill ourselves so their hands don't get dirty.

    And I am not impressed just because Trump used "LGBTQ"! That has become much more accepted because the transgender community is not homosexual for the most part; and the Republicans definitely don't want them to be left out of their hatred! Trump is a social networking whore, "LGBTQ" is shorthand and its usage doesn't necessarily show support for or against the community. Granted, it is better than if he'd just used the term "faggots", but I am not going to ignore the Republicans declaration of war against us just because the turd it came wrapped in had a pretty bow on top of it!

  69. [69] 
    Michale wrote:

    BigGuy,

    First off...

    "Welcome to the party, pal!!!"
    -John McClane, DIE HARD

    With that segue, the one troubling aspect of this site is the use of unflattering names for political leaders. This would include referring to candidate by a color or bastardizing the president's name to infer he is stupid (when he clearly is not). Doing so makes me more much likely to dismiss the accompanying opinion. As humans and as leaders of the country and our political parties thy deserve a level of respect.

    I completely, whole-heartedly and unequivocally agree with you.. Without reservation...

    I am the same way.. When I see someone who posts attacks on Trump by calling him names or bastardizing his name or other 3rd grade playground antics, I totally treat those comments as non-serious....

    So, you and I are in complete agreement on that point...

    Michale

  70. [70] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    Hey, Michale! What do you think of Tim Kaine for Vice President!?

    Liberals hate him...

    Increases the chances of a total schism at the upcoming Democrat Convention...

    Makes the Democrat ticket a complete and utter ESTABLISHMENT ticket thru and thru...

    I love him!!! :D I think it's the best pick that Hillary could have made to insure that she loses.. :D

    Michale

  71. [71] 
    Michale wrote:

    BigGuy,

    Most of all I hope the families of the candidates are spared; they do not deserve it.

    Once again, you and I are in complete agreement??

    Given that, I am curious...

    What's your take on the senseless attacks on Trump's wife??

    Michale

  72. [72] 
    Michale wrote:

    CW,

    Thanks also for the kind words. We're a (mostly) civil lot here... well... except for that one guy (hey Michale!).

    Hay now.. I am the epitome of civil.. :D

    It just doesn't look that way because I respond to a lot of un-civil comments with un-civility as well.. :D

    But while you sometimes have to tune him out, the rest of the comment threads here are usually pretty high-level.

    Shurley, you jest... :D

    "orange one"?? Drumpf??

    'nuff said.. :D

    've always said I don't get the most comments, but I do get the best and most thoughtful...

    Why, thank you. It's nice to be noticed.. :D heh

    Michale

  73. [73] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    Kaine signed a letter recently where he urged the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to make sure that their rules regarding banks would not cause problems for these banks..

    If Hillary wanted to bring Bernie supporters into the fold, Kaine is the WORST pick imaginable...

    If Hillary wanted to drive Bernie supporters into Trump's loving embrace :D then Kaine is the BEST pick imaginable.. :D

    Michale

  74. [74] 
    Michale wrote:

    Listen,

    Are you freakin' kidding me?!?!

    And yet, you support Hillary who pushed the DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE act....

    Michale

  75. [75] 
    Michale wrote:

    (see upcoming T-shirt he's about to wear because he lost a bet in these comments -- Michale, got a link?).

    yea, yea...

    "Yer not the one who is going to have to call a press conference when this is all over!"
    -Amanda Peterson, CAN'T BUY ME LOVE

    :D heh

    I'll have a link and login for ya'all later in the morning.

    Michale

  76. [76] 
    Michale wrote:

    Joshua,

    simpsons forums insist that it was not a part of any episode, but myself and many others have very clear memories of homer on-screen singing it. i think it may have been pre-youtube, first five seasons or so - if not an episode per se then maybe a TV trailer?

    I got nuttin... :(

    Michale

  77. [77] 
    Michale wrote:

    And, in our READ 'EM AND WEEP segment..

    CNN probably regrets polling viewers after Trump’s RNC speech because, well… WOW
    http://www.bizpacreview.com/2016/07/22/cnn-probably-regrets-polling-viewers-trumps-rnc-speech-well-wow-368574

    73% of Americans liked Trump's speech and said that Trump would likely move this country in the right direction....

    56% of Americans said the speech would make them more likely to vote forTrump...

    Sorry, my fellow Weigantians....

    The facts are in.

    Everyone wants Trump... :D

    Michale

  78. [78] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Michael,

    Yes, Michael, she sure did! That was back in 1996. Of course Trump supported marriage equality until he accepted the role of Republican candidate. I guess his views regressed while Hillary's evolved.

  79. [79] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yes, Michael, she sure did! That was back in 1996. Of course Trump supported marriage equality until he accepted the role of Republican candidate. I guess his views regressed while Hillary's evolved.

    In other words, both candidates are saying what their respective supporters want to hear....

    Funny thing is, you only slam Trump for that.. :D

    Michale

  80. [80] 
    Michale wrote:

    BigGuy,

    I am the same way.. When I see someone who posts attacks on Trump by calling him names or bastardizing his name or other 3rd grade playground antics, I totally treat those comments as non-serious....

    So, you and I are in complete agreement on that point...

    I hope you stick around, as I have been wanting to have this debate/discussion for a LONG time.. :D

    Michale

  81. [81] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    I have a question for you..

    Why do you think Hillary chose Kaine??

    As I understand it, a VP pick is supposed to shore up a flaw or weak area of the presidential candidate... A hispanic pick to help with hispanics, etc etc..

    The only group that Kaine brings to the table is a group that Clinton is already strong with.. Corporatists, Big Banks, Wall Street, Globalists... Matter of fact, it's the ONLY group that Clinton is strong with..

    Hell, Clinton is super duper weak with the youth vote.. Hillary should have picked Miley Cyrus.. :D

    But seriously.. I would think that Kaine is the LAST person Hillary would pick..

    Michale

  82. [82] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    Well, Cruz has been vindicated. The Orange One is talking trash about Cruz's father again. Disgraceful!

  83. [83] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    "They've still got a long way to go as a party on the issue, but these are very important baby steps they are taking and deserve everyone's applause, mine included."

    No thank you. They were applauding his anti-muslim sentiments. The applauders were the people who wrote that vile anti-gay GOP platform and the speaker plays footsie with anti-gay hate groups. When Republicans start talking about protecting gay people from Hocus Pocus on the Family, there'll be something to applaud.

  84. [84] 
    Michale wrote:

    See what I mean, CW??

    No one (except you, me and Joshua) wants to give the GOP credit for ANYTHING...

    PIFs are fully engaged...

    Michale

  85. [85] 
    Michale wrote:

    No one (except you, me and Joshua) wants to give the GOP credit for ANYTHING...

    Liz probably will join the ranks of the NEN on this issue. She hasn't weighed in yet, I don't think...

    Michale

  86. [86] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Michale,

    In other words, both candidates are saying what their respective supporters want to hear....

    Funny thing is, you only slam Trump for that.. :D

    No, the funny thing is that you defend Trump for doing that!

    As long as their actions are for equal rights and non-discriminatory legislation, they can say whatever the hell they want to.

    Trump's an insecure little man whose biggest desire for what this convention was going to convey to those that viewed it was how "liked" he was by everyone. I can just see him standing in front of a mirror after the convention doing his best Sally Fields' impersonation, "They liked me! They really, really liked me!"

  87. [87] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Michale,

    Hillary's team see Virginia as a must win state, and Kaine helps make sure that happens. He's a solid choice. He's got far more government experience than some of the other names that were being thrown around. While Warren would have made for an awesome ticket, I think Warren could be better used in other places than as VP. There are a few big Cabinet positions that she could really cause some much needed change to how things have been done for far too long!

  88. [88] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Michale,

    Hillary's team see Virginia as a must win state, and Kaine helps make sure that happens. He's a solid choice. He's got far more government experience than some of the other names that were being thrown around. While Warren would have made for an awesome ticket, I think Warren could be better used in other places than as VP. There are a few big Cabinet positions that she could really cause some much needed change to how things have been done for far too long!

  89. [89] 
    Michale wrote:

    No, the funny thing is that you defend Trump for doing that!

    No, I don't..

    "I said I understand. I didn't say I approve."
    -Spock, STAR TREK, A Taste Of Armageddon

    :D

    As long as their actions are for equal rights and non-discriminatory legislation, they can say whatever the hell they want to.

    Exactly..

    And TRUMP's actions prove he is for equal rights and non-discriminatory legislation..

    Hillary's actions prove that she is not...

    Hillary's team see Virginia as a must win state, and Kaine helps make sure that happens. He's a solid choice. He's got far more government experience than some of the other names that were being thrown around

    Yea, like I said. He is an ESTABLISHMENT pick..

    In an election that the ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT candidate will win...

    Michale

  90. [90] 
    Michale wrote:

    Like I said...

    The Kaine pick only helps Hillary with the ONE group that she is strongest with..

    ESTABLISHMENT..

    Virginia is likely in the Clinton Camp even without Kaine...

    Michale

  91. [91] 
    John M wrote:

    Michale wrote:

    "It's going to be the Reagan years all over again! :D"

    So, I guess that means that you and the Republicans don't care about the national debt or deficit anymore??? What about the tea party? Since Reagan increased both more than any other modern President in recent history, and since Trump's economic and budget proposals will do exactly the same thing, since he has promised both big tax cuts and big increase in defense spending.

  92. [92] 
    John M wrote:

    Michale wrote:

    "Virginia is likely in the Clinton Camp even without Kaine..."

    Nice of you to make that concession. But he does help make Virginia solid for Clinton. Though I agree he is an uninspired choice, he is fluent in Spanish, which helps. And with both Sanders and Warren campaigning for Hillary, I doubt she will need help in those areas VP wise. Most important of all was that she run with someone who she is very comfortable with, and who is also very qualified to fill the role of President if needed.

    Also, Michale, have you really looked at the Electoral map? Assuming Clinton lost, and Trump carried ALL of the following states: Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Iowa, Clinton would still win the election with a majority of the electoral college! Just by carrying the rest of the remaining states that Obama did in 2012.

  93. [93] 
    John M wrote:

    Michale wrote:

    "If you have the quote, I'll have the response.. :D"

    Yes, here is just the most RECENT one that I could find. There is also another one from 2013 that I can post as well if you need it.

    “WALLACE: But -- but just to button this up very quickly, sir, are you saying that if you become president, you might try to appoint justices to overrule the decision on same-sex marriage?” TRUMP: “I would strongly consider that, yes.” [Fox News Sunday, 1/31/2016; VIDEO]

  94. [94] 
    Paula wrote:

    The more Iearn about Tim Kaine the more I like him. I think he's going to turn out to be a very good choice. He's got a 100 from Planned Parenthood and and "F" from the NRA. He's a Catholic with Jesuit training -- those guys are smart. He grasps and fully supports choice even while personally opposed to abortion. That's what choice is. I read that he lives in a predominately black neighborhood and attends a predominately black church. His kids went through the public school system.

    I read several comment threads on FB and in different blogs last night. There were several comments on the variation of "I'm from Virginia and I love him!" Also many accounts of how his peers -- fellow Senators, people in Virginia govt etc. all like him. He's apparently a genuinely nice guy (like Biden).

    The meme about him trying to "help the banks" is incorrect. He was, with several Democrats, working to make sure smaller banks and Credit Unions were protected from rules intended to reign in the big banks; rules that would be too onerous for smaller institutions.

    He's reportedly a good debater.

    He has more broad experience than any of the others who were vetted. In that way he's a "resume" choice. But, as some folks put it, there's campaigning, and then there's governing. He's a governing choice -- someone who could take over if that was needed.

    He's never lost an election. He and Hillary get along well.

    TPP? We'll see. Other than that the main objection I've read is he won't make Bernie-holdouts happy. OTOH I've also read polls indicating 85% of Bernie's folks have already come on board for Hillary. In the end she'll probably get a chunk of the last 15% anyway; the rest will vote Stein or do write-ins or whatever.

    I think it's going to work out well.

  95. [95] 
    neilm wrote:

    Michael Moore is "predicting" a Trump victory in November (see Bill Maher's Real Time on Wednesday night). I think he might just be trying to remove any complacency (a la Brexit referendum), however Maher took the bait and double-clicked.

    Moore's reasoning was that this would be the election when "10,000 years of white male supremacy was lost" and that there would be a huge turnout of white males, particularly non-college educated white males, that would say "not on our watch".

    I've tried to stress test this using fivethirtyeight's "What would it take to flip" tool (http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-swing-the-election/).

    I'm not moving any of the dots except the non-college educated white vote, which I moved from 57% turnout to a totally unrealistic 100% turnout. I left the horizontal vote value at 62%.

    Trump still loses 272-266 to Hillary.

    If we move it to a more believable 80%, you have to increase the vote axis to 66% to get a Trump presidency - and this also means Trump has to hold on to the 29% Latino vote that Romney got. Move that to a more likely 15% and Trump needs 68% of the non-college educated white vote.

    This also assumes he doesn't lose any of the white college-educated white vote. I live in white college-educated land, and many of the Romney voters from 2012 want nothing to do with Trump (they tend to as difficult questions of Trump, like "How are you going to .... ?".

    So Donald, please keep insulting people's race, orientation, and intelligence, you are only making it easier for Hillary.

    JFK conspiracy theories anyone?

  96. [96] 
    Michale wrote:

    So Donald, please keep insulting people's race, orientation, and intelligence, you are only making it easier for Hillary.

    Of course, if Trump WAS insulting people's race, orientation or intelligence, you would have a point.

    But he doesn't so you don't...

    You can spin all you want, Neal... But the facts are clear...

    Hillary is going to lose and lose big..

    Once you see the HUGE debacle that the Democrat Convention is, you'll understand.. I don't expect you to concede the facts, but the facts WILL be clear..

    Michale

  97. [97] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    if we're going to blow smoke out our collective rectums, let's at least be specific about it. which states does michael moore think donald and hillary will win, for how many electoral votes each? which states does he believe are still up for grabs? i've always maintained that both candidates have a chance, but what is each candidate's best chance?

    JL

  98. [98] 
    nypoet22 wrote:
  99. [99] 
    John From Censornati wrote:

    JL [96],

    Moore was not specific at all. He simply asserted that every white man will vote. Joy Reid tried to talk demographics with him, but Maher just egged him on. Maher stated clearly that his own goal was complacency avoidance and the whole thing seemed like a bit.

  100. [100] 
    Michale wrote:

    Joshua,

    Your problem is you are looking at the Electoral Map as if this was a normal election..

    It's not...

    All safe generic assumptions are out the window...

    Michale

  101. [101] 
    Michale wrote:

    in other words, there are a dozen states that ya'all are claiming are "safe states" and they really ain't...

    When Trump starts bringing over to his side a Dem mainstay like UNIONS, ya'all just HAVE to know yer in trouble..

    Plus, the FACT that every terrorist attack and every attack on LEOs means more votes for Trump and less votes for Hillary...

    Ya'all are relying on conventional wisdom and this election has defied that wisdom at every turn...

    Michale

  102. [102] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    The electoral college doesn't depend on an election being typical or atypical. All I'm saying is if you want to speculate, regardless of who you are guessing will win, be specific about what states and how many electoral votes.

  103. [103] 
    Michale wrote:

    The electoral college doesn't depend on an election being typical or atypical.

    No, but who WINS those states IS dependent on a typical/atypical election..

    All I'm saying is if you want to speculate, regardless of who you are guessing will win, be specific about what states and how many electoral votes.

    I have...

    States that were "sure things" for Democrats are now battleground states...

    You are assuming that any state that Obama won is a safe state for Hillary...

    In this atypical election, that's not a good assumption to make..

    Michale

  104. [104] 
    Michale wrote:

    In this atypical election, that's not a good assumption to make..

    And you know what happens when you make an assumption..

    You make an ass out of u and umption.. :D

    Michale

  105. [105] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    As I've indicated repeatedly, i am not assuming anything. My suggestion was simply that anyone who chooses to shoot smoke at this question, be it Neil, Michale or nate silver, be specific about which states they are predicting to go which way, and why.

    @michale,

    You say you have done this, but i don't see the name of a single state. Let's start easy with Florida and its 29 electoral votes - what evidence do you have that Florida will not be its typical razor thin swing state self?

    Once that is done, then move on to "sure thing" states like new York

    JL

  106. [106] 
    Michale wrote:

    Sure, you can tie me all up with specifics and we can discuss the definition of IS all day long..

    If one examines the minutia and cherry picks the details they want to address they can convince anyone that Clinton is going to win..

    I am looking at the big pictures..

    Big pictures like Union members flocking to Trump...

    Big pictures like Progressives don't like Clinton's VP pick...

    Big pictures like 70% of Americans don't want an Obama 3rd Term...

    Big pictures like the ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT candidate will win this election...

    All those factual big pictures point to one inescapable conclusion...

    The "Blue Wall" that the Left Wingery is counting on won't mean squat... The Electoral College advantage, while warm and fuzzy and comforting in theory, won't mean diddley squat..

    The gut that told me that the Democrats were going to get nuclear shellacked in 2014 is the same gut that's telling me that the Left Wingery's complacency re: Trump is going to lead to a Dem massacre in 2016....

    My suggestion was simply that anyone who chooses to shoot smoke at this question, be it Neil, Michale or nate silver, be specific about which states they are predicting to go which way, and why.

    Fair enough.. When Neil and Nate start speaking specifics, I will surely follow suit...

    But for now, the big pictures make the case ever so nicely.. :D

    Michale

  107. [107] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    If the big picture mattered more than the electoral college then bush wouldn't have won in y2k. Specifics matter. Individual states matter. If Donald hopes to be the potus he'd best pay attention to Florida, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina and other swing states,as well as vulnerable blue states like Pennsylvania.

  108. [108] 
    Michale wrote:

    Specifics matter. Individual states matter.

    In the weeks immediately prior to the election.. Yes...

    In the here and now, the big picture rules...

    The betting markets are a perfect example. Nate Silver is a perfect example..

    They went SPECIFICs-city and "proved" that Donald Trump would NEVER be the GOP nominee...

    But those of us who looked at the big picture knew better...

    Michale

  109. [109] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    individual states always matter in presidential elections, no matter when you're trying to anticipate their outcome. as i've said, i think it's ridiculous to try to predict at all this early. but failure to at least attempt to figure out how the electoral math will work means your prediction is worth even less than nate silver's.

  110. [110] 
    Michale wrote:

    individual states always matter in presidential elections, no matter when you're trying to anticipate their outcome. as i've said, i think it's ridiculous to try to predict at all this early. b

    But you *ONLY* say it's ridiculous when I say that Trump is going to win...

    You DON'T say it when Neal or Paula or anyone else predicts that Hillary will win and/or Trump will lose..

    THAT is why I take your statements with a grain of salt...

    If it's ridiculous to predict a winner in the here and now, then it SHOULD be ridiculous regardless of who is predicting whom...

    If it's not equal, then it's just the PIFs at work...

    Michale

  111. [111] 
    Michale wrote:

    but failure to at least attempt to figure out how the electoral math will work means your prediction is worth even less than nate silver's.

    The *FACT* that I was dead on ballz right on Trump and Nate (and ya'all incidentally) were dead on WRONG on Trump, gives me a bit more credibility... :D

    Michale

  112. [112] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    You DON'T say it when Neal[sic] or Paula or anyone else predicts that Hillary will win

    that's not accurate. the first time i saw neil pull out the prediction, i said i wouldn't bet on it. i haven't been there all the time, but that's simply because i'm not on-line all the time.

    JL

  113. [113] 
    Michale wrote:

    that's not accurate. the first time i saw neil pull out the prediction, i said i wouldn't bet on it. i haven't been there all the time, but that's simply because i'm not on-line all the time.

    Touche' :D

    I don't recall that, but won't dispute it.. :D

    Michale

  114. [114] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    The *FACT* that I was dead on ballz right on Trump and Nate (and ya'all incidentally) were dead on WRONG on Trump, gives me a bit more credibility... :D

    you WERE right about the nomination, and i was wrong, along with neil, nate silver and pretty much everyone else in the intelligentsia. you were also right about the 2014 midterms.

    make a note of these please, next time you say nobody admits when you're right.

    IF you turn out to be right about this year's general election, i promise to give credit where it's due. there's no way i'm betting a t-shirt (or anything else) on this one.

    that said, there are a number of factors in the general election that didn't apply to the midterms or GOP primaries, as well as some factors that applied to the GOP primaries and midterms that don't apply to the general election. on the whole, black people really like and identify with hillary, and really despise donald. the hispanic vote is a wild card, with polling all over the map. the turn-out for presidential general elections is generally higher and more diverse than all other elections. if you pushed me to guess i'd say that trend may be even more pronounced this time than typical presidential general elections.

    whether any of those things will matter, who the hell knows? yet another thing i think you're right about (TAKE NOTE!) is that this election is NOT typical. there are many dimensions influencing voter behavior, and i don't think anyone on ANY side ought to be counting their chickens.

    JL

  115. [115] 
    Michale wrote:

    you WERE right about the nomination, and i was wrong, along with neil, nate silver and pretty much everyone else in the intelligentsia. you were also right about the 2014 midterms.

    make a note of these please, next time you say nobody admits when you're right.

    I tattooed it on my forehead.. :D

    IF you turn out to be right about this year's general election, i promise to give credit where it's due. there's no way i'm betting a t-shirt (or anything else) on this one.

    That's one of the best concession I could ever desire.. :D

    whether any of those things will matter, who the hell knows? yet another thing i think you're right about (TAKE NOTE!) is that this election is NOT typical. there are many dimensions influencing voter behavior, and i don't think anyone on ANY side ought to be counting their chickens.

    It's like we're practically twins!!! hehehehehehe :D

    Note taken.. :D

    Michale

Comments for this article are closed.