Trump Talk™

Ama's right when he says they're not all the same (Sanders and Trump, to name a few), but he's wrong if he thinks the Clintons are in a league of their own.

Ama's right when he says they're not all the same (Sanders and Trump, to name a few), but he's wrong if he thinks the Clintons are in a league of their own.

I always wonder what's going on in the minds of the average American whenever Bush or one of his surrogates comes on TV and brags about the 100m+ they've raised well over a year before the election.

Seeds of cognitive dissonance right here.

California — Aboard the USS Iowa in Southern California, 2016 GOP frontrunner billionaire Donald Trump told Breitbart News that his replacement for Obamacare—what he dubbed “DonaldCare” on Monday evening in Dallas—is going to be “absolutely great.”

“We’re not going to have the false lines,” Trump said as he grabbed this reporter’s shirt to—completely unsolicited—sign his name on this reporter’s shoulder with the black sharpie he was carrying around.

“We’re going to have privatization,” Trump continued. “It’s going to end up being absolutely great.”

When asked if his plan is the cure for Obamacare, Trump said he doesn’t want to fix Obamacare.

“We’re going to get rid of Obamacare,” Trump told Breitbart News as he was walking off the battleship after a raucous speech to Veterans for a Strong America—which just endorsed his candidacy for the White House—as a couple hundred protesters screamed “Dump The Trump” just ashore from the mighty ship.

“We’re going to something really spectacular with that [healthcare], with immigration, with the armed forces,” Trump said.

During his speech, Trump noted he has several major detailed policy plans forthcoming. He’s already published his detailed immigration reform plan—the only candidate to do so—and is working on a tax plan, healthcare plan, veterans care, and military plan. On stage, he detailed how if he’s elected president he’d ensure veterans are treated better than illegal aliens—they’re currently not, he said—and how he’d build a military so big that America’s enemies wouldn’t dare pick a fight with this country.

When asked about the protesters outside, Trump said he didn’t even notice them.

“You know, I honestly didn’t even see them,” Trump said. “I thought they were on our side.”

Trump will, along with 10 other GOP candidates, appear on the debate stage in Simi Valley, California, just north of San Pedro here on Wednesday evening. He’s currently the 2016 GOP frontrunner, as his biggest rival former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush has virtually collapsed on the campaign trail in recent polling.

Either he's outright delusional or just entirely pandering to those who are.

He's young enough, Latino, and he can present reasonably even though he's still pretty crazy with his policy positions.

So, we now have evidence that one of the qualifiers of eligibility, according to die-hard liberals, is race.

Never mind any other qualifiers such as budgets, plans, and positions. Nope, got to be the color of their skin.

And then they decry racism when that is pointed out....

So, we now have evidence that one of the qualifiers of eligibility, according to die-hard liberals, is race.

Never mind any other qualifiers such as budgets, plans, and positions. Nope, got to be the color of their skin.

And then they decry racism when that is pointed out....

So, we now have evidence that one of the qualifiers of eligibility, according to die-hard liberals, is race.

Never mind any other qualifiers such as budgets, plans, and positions. Nope, got to be the color of their skin.

And then they decry racism when that is pointed out....

To be fair, he's using that as a point of electability, not eligibility. Demographic appeal matters, whether or not one thinks it should.

Those days probably never existed.

They existed up until November 4th, 2008.

Why again, are we using the color of one's skin as a deciding factor for either eligibility or electability? Whatever happened to the good old days of electing a person based on what they would bring to the country?

They existed up until November 4th, 2008.

I don't know who that is, but ok.

I think you're unhinged. I'm trying to parse this in a way that doesn't seem totally unbalanced and failing.

Before 11-4-2008 there were only people of a certain race who were elected to be president. In fact, there were only people of a certain race who were run in the general election by the major political parties. If anything that date marks when maybe, just maybe, the diminishing of these things determine eligibility or electability.

Before Obama was nominated, candidates were elected by issue.

Then Obama came and all people could see is the color of his skin. Couldn't hear what he said, all they cared about was electing the first black president because "they aren't racist!"

In an idealized world, yes, we'd base it all purely on positions, but realistically speaking, that's not going to happen (not for a long time, anyway). It only ever looked at that way with Presidential races because demographics could not factor in.

Kennedy

No, they voted for Kennedy because he was a young white guy. Do you really not know the bit about the Kennedy/Nixon debates?

Sorry, but he was still white. Race did not play a part of people's decision. Nor his sex.

I think he is an idiot

You are missing the point entirely. Race, sex, age, appearance - these are all just different axes on the same graph. You can talk all day about what people should do, but the concept of electability is about what people will do, and that's the data point that matters, if you want to win elections.

The concept that people have used something beyond a list of policy points to pick a candidate is as old as elections themselves. I don't know why you're convinced otherwise. The only thing Obama added to the mix was race, for that specific office - it'd certainly been a factor elsewhere, for years and years and years.