Tom Brokaw rips Trump for calling Chuck Todd a 'son of a bitch': 'Really classy'

[Right_in_Virginia]

I believe any Republican would have beaten Hillary. ...

I think this explains the still fierce animosity toward Donald Trump among Republicans, both former and current. But the evidence and facts on the ground do not support your thesis.

The Republican victory in 2016 was won by punching through the Democrat blue wall.  The only other Republican candidate who had a chance of doing this was Scott Walker.  But he clearly lacked the support to advance in the campaign, and I suspect the "fire in the belly and the guts to fight Hillary and her media lapdogs.   Donald Trump had all three.

Trump would hold dozens of rallies with thousands and thousands in attendance deep in the inner sanctum of the democrat stronghold, fighting tooth and nail for every vote he received.  He would stand there speaking off teleprompter and from his heart itemizing each and every way the democrat party had failed them and how he and his administration would reverse their disastrous policies --- in the language they understood --- language straight from the gut.

He would then stand back, open his arms and ask each soul in the crowd:  "What the hell do you have to lose?!"  This is how the election against the chosen daughter was won.

Can you honestly say any other of the last three Republican candidates standing could have done what Donald Trump did?

@Once-Ler

[txradioguy]

Is that possible in an Islamic country?

It can happen...but it takes a lot of work and a lot of want to by the people in that country.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Can you honestly say any other of the last three Republican candidates standing could have done what Donald Trump did?
@Once-Ler

I can honestly say I think Trump drove more voters to Hillary than he added to the GOP pool.

[edpc]

I can honestly say I think Trump drove more voters to Hillary than he added to the GOP pool.

I believe they both drove people to 3rd party.  It’s the only reason Johnson got so many votes.  Also, the amount of votes to Stein made the difference in WI and MI.  Those votes were never going Trump’s way.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

I believe any Republican would have beaten Hillary.

It's possible, but just as the contention that only Trump could have beaten Hillary is unprovable, and debatable, this contention is too. Trump, IMO, deserves credit for not only beating Hillary, but defying the polls, and delivering some "blue wall" states too.

Of course, it could just be that lightning struck once, and it won't strike again, and in 2020 Dems will wipe the floor with us. Prior to the 2016 I had a certain amount of faith in polling. Now I have none. Anything could happen.

[musiclady]

It's possible, but just as the contention that only Trump could have beaten Hillary is unprovable, and debatable, this contention is too. Trump, IMO, deserves credit for not only beating Hillary, but defying the polls, and delivering some "blue wall" states too.

Of course, it could just be that lightning struck once, and it won't strike again, and in 2020 Dems will wipe the floor with us. Prior to the 2016 I had a certain amount of faith in polling. Now I have none. Anything could happen.

No.  He doesn't deserve credit.

Hillary was the worst possible candidate, so deeply flawed, corrupt, unlikeable and downright dull, that it didn't take quality on Trump's part to beat her.

The only reason he won besides her total ineptness, was that Americans were angry enough to do something stupid.

[LauraTXNM]

I think this explains the still fierce animosity toward Donald Trump among Republicans, both former and current. But the evidence and facts on the ground do not support your thesis.

The Republican victory in 2016 was won by punching through the Democrat blue wall.  The only other Republican candidate who had a chance of doing this was Scott Walker.  But he clearly lacked the support to advance in the campaign, and I suspect the "fire in the belly and the guts to fight Hillary and her media lapdogs.   Donald Trump had all three.

Trump would hold dozens of rallies with thousands and thousands in attendance deep in the inner sanctum of the democrat stronghold, fighting tooth and nail for every vote he received.  He would stand there speaking off teleprompter and from his heart itemizing each and every way the democrat party had failed them and how he and his administration would reverse their disastrous policies --- in the language they understood --- language straight from the gut.

He would then stand back, open his arms and ask each soul in the crowd:  "What the hell do you have to lose?!"  This is how the election against the chosen daughter was won.

Can you honestly say any other of the last three Republican candidates standing could have done what Donald Trump did?

@Once-Ler

@Right_in_Virginia I think you're right, because:
1) Trump was a unique draw who created a lot of excitement and
2) I don't think some of the nastiness against Clinton would have come into play with a different Rep candidate.

[LauraTXNM]

It can happen...but it takes a lot of work and a lot of want to by the people in that country.

I'm sure it also depends of the basic level of "development" throughout the country.

[Right_in_Virginia]

@Right_in_Virginia I think you're right, because:
1) Trump was a unique draw who created a lot of excitement and
2) I don't think some of the nastiness against Clinton would have come into play with a different Rep candidate.

Yes, Donald Trump created a lot of excitement, but this excitement grew because he spoke plain truth to the voters and offered a real alternative in direction and policy.  We haven't heard "Make America Great Again" since Ronald Reagan in 1980.

As for "nastiness" against Clinton....  Seriously ... nastiness against the Clinton/Media machine?  Is such a thing even possible @LauraTXNM ?  What you call "nasty" Americans recognized as "truth".

BTW,, if you call how candidate Trump treated Clinton during the campaign "nasty", what, out of curiosity, do you call the coordinated efforts between the Democrat candidate, the DNC, Obama's FBI and Justice Department to influence the 2016 campaign against Donald Trump... an effort continued to this day in hopes of removing the duly elected President from office?

[edpc]

I think you're right, because:
1) Trump was a unique draw who created a lot of excitement

You misspelled 'excrement.'

[Right_in_Virginia]

No.  He doesn't deserve credit.

Hillary was the worst possible candidate, so deeply flawed, corrupt, unlikeable and downright dull, that it didn't take quality on Trump's part to beat her.

The only reason he won besides her total ineptness, was that Americans were angry enough to do something stupid. 

"Dull candidate", corruption and ineptness considered .. Hillary Clinton was still measuring the Oval Office for new drapes --- and rightfully so.  Her fingers were touching the brass ring.  Until ...




The reason Donald Trump won is because he spoke from his convictions, campaigned relentlessly, punched back again the Clinton machine and her media lapdogs, and offered an alternative .. with specificity .. as to how together we would make America Great Again.  (Just as Ronald Reagan promised 26 years before)  No Republican could have reached the American in the way and magnitude as Donald Trump.

The credit for the Republican victory in 2016 is split between the right man at the right time and an electorate smart enough to recognize this in Donald Trump.

@musiclady

[WingNot]

You misspelled 'excrement.'

I do believe you are correct sir.

[edpc]

The reason Donald Trump won is because he spoke from his convictions.....

Oh, please.......


"We started off … 17 people. Now we’re down to not very many people,” he said. “And once you get to a certain level, it changes. I will be changing very rapidly.”

“I’m very capable of changing to anything I want to change to,” the real estate mogul said.

[DCPatriot]

There definitely are bullies on this thread --- but they're not insecure --- they're condescending, judgmental and to the core mean. 

Apparently this thread is now a senior chat room for the elderly with nothing else to do.   

The bullies on this thread not only give "elderly" a bad name ... add "conservative", "character"  and TBR to the list.

What a disgrace.   

@Emjay I apologize to you on their behalf.

I can't even read this horrendous sh*t.

And yet, ownership is apparently just fine with it.   Go figure.

[Emjay]

I can't even read this horrendous sh*t.

And yet, ownership is apparently just fine with it.   Go figure.

@DCPatriot   Thanks for the post.  It got old quick.

I love @mystery-ak and she walks a fine line here.  I don't know what her feelings about Trump are but she surely realizes that the NTers are the nastiest bunch on the site.

She doesn't want to be a dictator.  But I do think the mods should step in a little quicker when things get way out of hand as they did on this thread.  OMG!!

[edpc]

It's pretty funny, listening to Pandora whine about the pithos when she knows damn well who opened it.

[Suppressed]

I love @mystery-ak and she walks a fine line here.  I don't know what her feelings about Trump are but she surely realizes that the NTers are the nastiest bunch on the site.

 

[Frank Cannon]

I can't even read this horrendous sh*t.

You shouldn't be so hard on yourself. Sure people hate your posts, but one day you may say something pithy and urbane. Just keep plugging away and you will get there.

[INVAR]

I can't even read this horrendous sh*t.

And yet, ownership is apparently just fine with it.   Go figure.

Now a major motion picture from Netflix:

[Right_in_Virginia]

Oh, please....... 

Yes, @edpc  "convictions". 

! No longer available



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxf1XmVZ9qY

[corbe]

   I might reconsider my TDS if it weren't for you Trumpers constantly redefining what a Trumper actually is.  You folks lend no credibility to your cause.

[edpc]

Yes, @edpc  "convictions". 

! No longer available



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxf1XmVZ9qY

The next time you are touting his convictions and talking about Art of the Deal, why don't you mention The America We Deserve and his previous other convictions, like identifying as Democrat, multiple party affiliations, being pro-choice, favoring state-run medicine, gun control, and a wealth tax?

This man walks on some wobbly ground.  Convictions, my ass.

[Jazzhead]

The next time you are touting his convictions and talking about Art of the Deal, why don't you mention The America We Deserve and his previous other convictions, like identifying as Democrat, multiple party affiliations, being pro-choice, favoring state-run medicine, gun control, and a wealth tax?

This man walks on some wobbly ground.  Convictions, my ass.

He's a New Yorker.   In New York, even the working class is pro-choice and thinks there are too many guns.   But he's hardly ignored issues important to cultural conservatives while President.   

[edpc]

He's a New Yorker.   In New York, even the working class is pro-choice and thinks there are too many guns.   But he's hardly ignored issues important to cultural conservatives while President.   

Yes, he's changeable and plays to a crowd. I don't think that's what you were trying to convey, but that's what it means.

[INVAR]

I trust Trump as much as I trusted Obama.

And I actually listen to him speak less, preferring instead to read whatever it is he says.